University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Personnel resource allocation strategies in a time of fiscal stress: a gap analysis of five southern California elementary schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Personnel resource allocation strategies in a time of fiscal stress: a gap analysis of five southern California elementary schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES 1

PERSONNEL RESOURCE ALLOCATION STRATEGIES IN A TIME OF FISCAL
STRESS: A GAP ANALYSIS OF FIVE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ELEMENTARY
SCHOOLS

by

Saba Q. Araya

____________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCAITON
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2013

Copyright 2013 Saba Q. Araya
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
2

Acknowledgments
This dissertation is dedicated to my son, DeVante Amari Scovell, the love of my
life, and my grandmother, Mary Mc Adams, the strongest woman I have ever known. My
son’s compassion for others and passion for life has been my saving grace for the past
fifteen years while my grandmother’s guidance has steered me in the path that I have
been destined to go. Both different in age and sex, they have provided me with a
happiness that cannot be labeled any other way. My grandmother’s wisdom matched with
my son’s compassionate spirit makes me the person that I have become: a mother,
daughter, granddaughter, sister, aunt, friend, confidant, and teacher.
For the past three years, I have met several people at the University of Southern
California that have been inspirational in my journey in pursuing higher education. With
guidance from my chair, Dr. L. Picus, I have formed a deeper understanding of the
“resources” in the educational setting. Resources are not always fixed; they can be
reallocated! Likewise, I would like to acknowledge the nine phenomenal members of the
Dream Team (DT) who ventured off to China and Hong Kong with APRISE in 2012.
I would also like to acknowledge the people who have been instrumental in my
life’s journey thus far: Vivian and Ammanuel Mezgebe (parents); Aman, Christina, and
Aaron Mezgebe (siblings); The Araya family; The Mc Adams family; Mrs. Ruth Guest
(4
th
grade teacher); Ms. Kirby (6
th
grade teacher); my AP English students (2010-2013);
my colleagues at Crozier Middle School, City Honors College Preparatory Charter
School, Los Angeles Southwest College, and Los Angeles Harbor College; life-long
friends (K.L, C.E.W., and C.E.); and, those that participated in this study.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
3

Table of Contents
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 9
Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 12
Statement of the Problem 20
Purpose of the Study 23
Research Questions 23
Importance of the Study 24
Summary of Methodology 24
Limitations 25
Delimitations 25
Definition of Terms 26
Organization of the Study 30
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 31
School Improvement Strategies 32
Evidence-based Practices & Strategies 35
Allocation & Use of Human Resources 51
Changes in the Level of Resources 52
Educational Expenditures Over Times 54
Changes in the Use of Resources 56
Educational Adequacy 58
Evidence-based Approach as Preferred Model 62
Recommendations of the Evidence-based Model 65
Limited Resources & Fiscal Constraints in California 72
Limited Resources 73
California’s Tax Initiative: Refunding Education 81
Performance Gap Analysis 82
Summary of the Literature 83
Chapter Three: Research Methodology 85
Research Questions 87
Purposeful Sample & Population 87
Identifying Schools 88
Overview of the District 91
Instrumentation & Data Collection 93
Data Analysis 95
Summary 96
Chapter Four: Findings 97
Introduction 97
Overview of Schools 99
Academic Performance Index 101
Annual Yearly Progress 102

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
4

Discussion of the Findings 107
Data for Research Question One 107
Data for Research Question Two & Three 121
Data for Research Question Four 133
Data for Research Question Five 138
Chapter Five: Summary, Implications, and Future Research 139
Background 139
Summary of the Study 141
Sampling Plan 141
Data Sources and Data Collection Procedures 142
Process of Study Analysis 144
Summary of the Findings 145
Strategies for Doubling Student Performance & Levels of Implementation 145
High Levels of Implementation 146
Moderate Levels of Implementation 147
Low Levels of Implementation 152
Conclusions 153
The Evidence-based Approach to Increasing Academic Student Success 154
Reallocating Resources in Practice 155
Gap Analysis Model: Closing the Gap 155
Ideal Situation 156
The Current State 156
Closing the Gap 157
Implications for Researchers, Policymakers and Practitioners 161
Recommendations for Future Research 162
References 164
Appendix A 169
Appendix B 174
Appendix C 176
Appendix D 177
Appendix E 201
Appendix F 223
Appendix G 244
Appendix H 266

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
5

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Recommendations for Adequate Resources 68
Table 3.1 Sample Schools: Enrollment, Demographic Information, Percent 89
Proficient

Table 3.2 Sample Schools API Scores (2009-2012) 90
Table 3.3 Sample Schools – 2011 Growth Academic Performance Index 91
Report

Table 4.1 Summary of Case Studies Demographics, 2011-2012 100
Table 4.2 Summary of Case Studies API Studies API Status & Growth 101
Table 4.3 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress Criteria of Case Study Schools 103
Table 4.4 3-year Trend – Annual Measurable Objective (Percent Proficient) 104
ELA

Table 4.5 3-year Trend – Annual Measurable Objective (Percent Proficient) 106
Math

Table 4.6 Case Study Characteristics & Average Characteristics 122

Table 4.7 Resource Allocation at Study Schools vs. EBM (1-12) 125

Table 4.7a Resource Allocation at Study Schools vs. EBM (13-16) 126

Table 5.1 Recommendations for Closing Organizational Gaps 160

Table D.1 Bird of Paradise Demographic Data, 2011-2012 178

Table D.2 Bird of Paradise API Growth Targets, 2011-2012 180

Table D.3 Bird of Paradise AYP Trend, 2008-2012 185

Table D.4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement 191

Table D.5 Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Bird of Paradise 194

Table D.6 Level of Resources at Bird of Paradise with EBM (BOPEBM) 198

Table E.1 Calla Lily Demographic Data, 2011-2012 202

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
6

Table E.2 Calla Lily API Growth Targets, 2011-2012 204

Table E.3 Calla Lily AYP Trend, 2008-2012 208

Table E.4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement 213

Table E.5 Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Calla Lily 216

Table E.6 Level of Resources at Calla Lily with EBM (BOPEBM) 220

Table F.1 Hyacinth Demographic Data, 2011-2012 224

Table F.2 Hyacinth API Growth Targets, 2011-2012 226

Table F.3 Hyacinth AYP Trend, 2008-2012 230

Table F.4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement 234

Table F.5 Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Hyacinth 237

Table F.6 Level of Resources at Hyacinth with EBM (HEBM) 241

Table G.1 Kangaroo Paw Demographic Data, 2011-2012 245

Table G.2 Kangaroo Paw API Growth Targets, 2011-2012 247

Table G.3 Kangaroo Paw AYP Trend, 2008-2012 251

Table G.4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement 256

Table G.5 Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Kangaroo Paw 259

Table G.6 Level of Resources at Kangaroo Paw with EBM (KPEBM) 263

Table H.1 Orchid Demographic Data, 2011-2012 267

Table H.2 Orchid API Growth Targets, 2011-2012 268

Table H.3 Orchid AYP Trend, 2008-2012 273

Table H.4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement 277

Table H.5 Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Orchid 280

Table H.6 Level of Resources at Orchid with EBM (OEBM) 284

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
7

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Revenue Limit vs. Basic Aid District Funding 54
Figure 3.1 Iris Unified School District Student Enrollment (2011-2012) 92
Figure 4.2 AMOs: ELA Targets, 2001-2014 – Elementary Schools 104
Figure 4.3 AMOs: Math Targets, 2001-2014 – Elementary Schools 106
Figure 4.4 Response to Intervention Essential Components 114
Figure D.1 AYP Percent Proficient, Schoolwide & Student Groups 182
Figure D.2 Identification for Program Improvement 184
Figure D.3 Safe Harbor Students, 2011-2012 188
Figure E.1 AYP Percent Proficient, Schoolwide & Student Groups 205
Figure E.2 Identification for Program Improvement 207
Figure F.1 AYP Percent Proficient, Schoolwide & Student Groups 227
Figure F.2 Identification for Program Improvement 229
Figure G.1 AYP Percent Proficient, Schoolwide & Student Groups 248
Figure G.2 Identification for Program Improvement 250
Figure H.1 AYP Percent Proficient, Schoolwide & Student Groups 270
Figure H.2 Identification for Program Improvement 272

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
8

Abstract
As pressure increases to ensure that limited resources are utilized as effectively as
possible, funding adequacy remains a priority for all California public schools. The
research was conducted through a multi-methods approach of principal interviews, site
level resource allocation data, and overall student achievement on state assessments. The
study compares school-level resource allocations with the Evidence-based adequacy
model and instructional improvement strategies of the five case studies are compared to
research based strategies proven to double student performance to generate five case
studies. An analysis of each school applied the Ten Strategies for Doubling Student
Performance (Odden, 2009) and the Evidence-based model (EBM)(Odden & Picus,
2008). A complete review of the literature included 1) research-based school
improvement strategies, 2) allocation and the use of human resources, 3) limited
resources and fiscal constraints in California, and 4) performance gap analysis. The
findings indicate fewer site level resources than recommended by the EBM as well as
applications of Odden’s (2009) strategies. Several insights emerged from this research to
support high implementations of: a) grade-level collaboration, b) data-based decision
making, and c) additional support for struggling students despite budgetary changes in
order to improve student learning. Thus, the other seven strategies were at the moderate
or low levels of implementation across schools in the study. The majority of schools were
found to retain fewer resources than recommended by the EBM; organizational gaps
existed across study schools. To close gaps, the researcher recommended that the schools
hire specialist teachers and support personnel, share upper-elementary materials, hire
more core teachers to reduce class sizes, and implement technology specialist to support
technology infrastructure for impending Common Core standards and curriculum. This
study contributes to the body of research on personnel resource allocation strategies in
urban California districts and schools. The researcher hopes to provide proven examples
of success that can inform similar districts and schools, practitioners, stakeholders, and
other researchers.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
9

Chapter One

OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

Introduction

Education reform has been the subject of public education debates and reform
efforts for the past two decades. In the 1990s, states shifted their focus from educational
inputs to educational outcomes. This shift brought about a new conversation of
educational policies that sought to improve student academic achievement in America.
The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, the
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) of 1965, was the federal
government’s response to improving the educational lot of disadvantaged students and
required all schools receiving federal funding to reach 100% proficiency by 2014
(California Department of Education, 2009). NCLB supports standards-based education
reform, which is based on the premise that setting high standards and establishing
measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. With the passing of the
Act in 2002, the federal government moved accountability for student performance to the
forefront of the nation’s consciousness, with an accountability system driven by high
expectations, ambitious deadlines, public reporting, and the threat of serious
consequences for schools that fail to comply with policy mandates.
At the core of the No Child Left Behind Act were a number of measures designed
to drive broad gains in student achievement and to hold states and schools more
accountable for student progress. They represented significant changes to the education
landscape (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Standards, assessment and
accountability became the emphasis of education reform during the last decade of the 20
th

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
10

century. The federal government supported states’ efforts to create ambitious content
standards. Thus, academic standards formed the foundation of education reform in the
1990s.
Many states undertook some type of reform effort that centered on setting content
and performance standards. Content standards attempt to provide the answer to the over-
arching question in the one piece of the standards puzzle: What should all students know
and be able to do? Districts and schools are expected to use these goals to guide their
choices of curriculum, professional development (PD), and other school activities.
Teachers also use the standards as learning goals when they plan instruction. The other
piece of the puzzle, fundamental to academic achievement, is performance standards.
While content standards specify what students should know and be able to do at a
particular point in school, performance standards define how students can demonstrate
their proficiency in the skills and knowledge framed by states’ content standards (U.S.
Department of Education, 1996b). Performance standards indicate how well students
must perform to be considered proficient in a given subject area.
Assessing student learning based on states’ content and performance standards
became an integral piece to the standards reform movement. Assessments measure
student progress toward attaining the goals set by the state content standards. Typically,
educators assess the academic performance of students for a variety of purposes. In the
classroom, teachers may use assessments to monitor the progress of individual students,
to diagnose and place students, and to evaluate and improve instructional practices.
States, on the other hand, administer assessments to all or nearly all students to monitor
academic achievement at the school, district, and state levels in specific grades and
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
11

content areas. In California, standardized assessments, such as the California Standards
Test (CST) and California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), are ways in which the
state administers and scores student learning based on state content standards in particular
subject areas such as English and mathematics.
Standards-based accountability systems evaluate the performance of students in
schools against the expectations of student learning defined by content and performance
standards. School accountability – the process of evaluation of school performance on
the basis of student performance measures – is increasingly prevalent. (Hanushek,
Machin, and Woessman, 2011). Schools and school districts are held accountable for
standardized student assessments that are based on state content standards. Therefore,
standards-based accountability systems are prone to focus on outcomes rather than inputs.
What should all students know and be able to do? is the quintessential question to
monitoring and publicly reporting the progress of all or nearly all students.
As the standards-based education reform movement and the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001 require high student performance from students enrolled in K-12 schools, the
issue of whether schools have sufficient resources to meet those demands has taken
center-stage. Over the past decade, states have implemented a number of reforms that
affect the way they raise revenues, allocate funds among districts, and allow funds to be
used. The shift of school finance reform, from equity to adequacy, partners with the
notion that education policies affect school financial resources to support efforts to
achieve high standards.
This shift to adequacy has prodded states to define and provide a high-quality
education for all students. School finance adequacy requires states to provide each school
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
12

and school district an adequate level of resources that would allow them to deploy
educational programs and strategies that provide all students an equal educational
opportunity to achieve to the performance standards (Odden, Goetz and Picus, 2007). In
this plight, states have been challenged with defining adequacy, determining the cost of
obtaining adequacy, and adjusting cost differences for student variability.
Background of the Problem
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was designed, in part, to address
the variability in state’s policies. The overarching goals of No Child Left Behind are
based in academic, instructional, and environmental goals to ultimately raise student
achievement to proficiency and above by 2014. With the enactment of this law, the
federal government expanded its role significantly, requiring states to test more and set
ambitious improvement goals for their schools.
Studies of standards-based reform conducted over the last ten to fifteen years
show that standards and accountability systems are driving educational change (Goetz,
2007). The influence of this change has trickled down to education finance policy and the
result has been a shift in response to the emphasis on standards-based education reform
toward fiscal adequacy. This shift represents a fundamental change with ties to student
achievement, educational programs and resources, and educator wages (teacher salary).
Odden (2003) points out that as funding formulas are revised to ensure adequacy,
there will also be an improvement in fiscal equity. Adequacy is based on the principle
that states should provide enough funding for all students to be able to meet academic
expectations. Simply put, adequate resources equals sufficient resources. Under
standards-based education reform, the yardstick of school finance policy is whether it
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
13

provides adequate per pupil revenues for schools and districts to establish successful
instructional strategies for educating students to the desired level of student performance.
Defining what constitutes an adequate education is a challenging concept. The
costs of education can vary considerably across districts—even within a state (Fowler and
Monk 2001). Expenditures per pupil vary significantly by state based on an array of
revenue arrangements and capacities. Per pupil spending – which includes funding from
federal, state, and local sources – ranged from as little as $6,162 in Utah to as much as
$19,698 in the District of Columbia in the 2008-09 school year (New America
Foundation, 2009). The California Federation of Teachers & Education Week (2012)
reports that California is currently ranked 47
th
in per pupil funding in the country. The
state’s mid-year cuts have further compounded the problems resulting from California's
abysmal school funding rankings.
Over the past decade, states have implemented a number of reforms that affect the
way they raise revenues, allocate funds among districts, and allow funds to be used.
Given a state’s critical role in education finance, these changes have had important
implications for the adequacy in education finance and accountability systems. Some of
these changes have been in response to court orders to overhaul the state financing
system (Ladd and Hansen, 1999). Likewise, Ladd and Hansen assert that many school
finance cases have focused on adequacy, seeking to compel states to define and provide a
high-quality education for all children, rather than focusing solely on reducing financial
inequities across school districts.
History of the Federal Impact on Educational Achievement
The United States federal government has long considered education a national
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
14

concern. Through federal action, education has been encouraged and financially
supported from the first Northwest Ordinance in 1787 to the present. The 10
th
amendment
which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”,
played an integral role in public education (United States Constitution, 1791). This
amendment sought to delegate powers to local and state governments. Accordingly, the
gradual release of power was deemed fundamental to solving the federal government’s
position in education.
In 1954, the United States Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision with
Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. This decision declared state laws that established
separate public schools based solely on race to be unconstitutional. Four years later,
Congress passed the National Defense Education Act (NDEA), which included
educational support to teachers through graduate fellowships in the areas of mathematics,
science and foreign languages.
Over the next two decades, the federal government’s role in public education
increased drastically. Civil rights laws such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964
was passed to prohibit discrimination based on race. Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 followed and was
passed into legislation prohibiting discrimination based on sex and disability. Anti-
poverty laws such as The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 passed to
attempt to rid the country of poverty and emphasize equal access to education through
high standards and accountability (US Department of Education, 2008).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
15

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 launched a
comprehensive set of programs to aid the disadvantaged including the Title 1 program.
Title 1 funds, as mandated in ESEA, were to further professional development,
instructional materials and resources to support educational programs and parental
involvement at the school level. The purpose of this title was to ensure that all children
have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and
reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards
and state academic assessments (US Department of Education, 2008).
In 1991, President George H.W. Bush formed the National Education Goals Panel
to create a national assessment system to measure progress toward the national education
goals for 2000. During the same year, Congress passed a bill to create a national council
on education standards and testing, the purpose of which would be to study the feasibility
and desirability of creating national standards and a national assessment system for
students. Yet, Goals 2000, established in President Clinton’s administration, focused on
academic achievement through competitive grants.
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 is a landmark education reform
designed to improve student achievement and change the culture of America’s schools
(No Child Left Behind: A Desktop Reference, 2002). NCLB is the most recent
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) of 1965 that moved
accountability for student performance to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness. The
act embodies four key principles: 1) stronger accountability for results; 2) greater
flexibility for states, school districts and schools in the use of federal funds; 3) more
choices for parents of children from disadvantaged backgrounds; 4) and, an emphasis on
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
16

teaching methods that have been demonstrated to work, and affects virtually every
program authorized under ESEA from Title 1 to improving teacher quality initiatives.
NCLB holds states and school districts and schools accountable for student
performance; and it does so according to standards that considerably exceed the
requirements of earlier federal legislation. With the increased role of the federal
government in education resulting from the implementation of NCLB, the standards-
based reform movement has catapulted into an outputs-focused educational system.
Standards-based Reform Movement
The standards-based reform movement, which emerged in the late 1980’s and
early 1990’s, was designed to address the weaknesses of input-driven reforms in
education. Standards-based reform seeks to establish clear goals for student achievement
through the establishment of standards and correlated assessments. Under this type of
reform, states establish challenging content and performance standards for all students
and align key state policies affecting teaching and learning to these standards. Then,
states give schools and school districts greater flexibility to design appropriate
instructional programs in exchange for holding schools accountable for student
performance (Smith and O’Day, 1991).
During the late 1990s, states and school districts began to move in the direction of
standards-based reform but state policy responses were disproportionate. While all states
developed assessments, standards, performance reporting, and in most cases,
consequences for performance, states found different ways to define what it meant for
schools to succeed, what indicators to include in their definition of success, and what the
consequences would be (Goetz and Duffy, 2001).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
17

Adequate School Finance Systems
Designing an adequate school finance system requires the state to identify both an
adequate expenditure level for the typical school district and sufficient adjustments for
varying student needs. It also requires districts and schools to manage those resources so
that students learn the [content and] performance standards required by the state (Odden,
2003). Four varying approaches have been used to establish adequate expenditure levels
to maximize student performance: 1) the successful schools or district approach, 2) the
cost function approach, 3) the professional judgment approach, 4) and the evidence-based
approach.
The successful district and cost function approaches provide an estimate of the
adequate expenditure per pupil level including adjustments for various pupil needs but do
not suggest how those dollars should be used. The professional judgment and the
evidence-based approaches require a set of programs and strategies for prototypical or
hypothetical schools with specified characteristics and resources at the elementary,
middle, and high school levels.
The evidence-based approach, also referred to as the evidenced-based model,
developed by Odden and Picus (2008), is intended to outline the resources necessary for
all schools and school districts to implement academic strategies and school-based
programs that have been proven to increase student achievement. The model begins with
a set of core recommendations. It also employs teams of policymakers, practitioners, and
education leaders to review the recommendations. After the review, the teams modify and
tailor them to the distinctive characteristics of schools and requirements of states.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
18

As one of four ways in which the cost of education can be determined, the
evidenced-based model uses academic research to identify the resources and educational
programs which its authors believe are necessary for a dramatic improvement in student
success (School Funding Advisory Council, 2010). The final set of strategies and their
resource needs are the basis of the cost estimates derived for schools and districts in the
state. The adjusted costs are then totaled across schools and districts to a final cost.
Although Odden (2003) confutes that in the 21
st
century no single approach to
determining an adequacy spending level is dominant across the country, he suggests that
the evidenced-based model may be one of most efficient approaches to education finance
that relies on sound empirical research of best educational practices. With improvement
over time, the pool of research on the evidence-based model has increased significantly to
support educational quality and academic improvement.
California: Standards, Assessment and Accountability
The purpose of NCLB, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush in
January 2002, is to use federal funding as leverage to make sure that all the nation's
children are able to read, to write, and to understand math well by the time they graduate
from high school (Ed Source, 1996). California, which had a preexisting accountability
system that used a school-level measure of growth, chose to incorporate indicators from
that system into AYP calculations, unlike the other states.
California developed one set of annual measurable objectives (AMOs) for schools
serving grades 2–8 and another set for 9-12 schools. For grades 2–8, AMOs are statewide
targets for the percent of students scoring proficient or advanced on California Standards
Tests (CSTs) in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics (Ed Source, 1996).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
19

Students with mild disabilities who are assessed on the California modified Assessment
(CMA) typically make up only 2% of a district’s total. Students with severe cognitive
disabilities typically comprise of 1% of a district’s total number of students counted as
proficient.
All public schools must test at least 95% of all students and subgroups while
reaching their English and math annual measurable objectives. Beginning in 2002–03, all
schools (elementary, middle, and high) and all districts had to grow by at least one point
or have achieved a minimum of 560 for the school as a whole only (not significant
subgroups). In 2008–09, the minimum acceptable API score is 650 or one point of
growth. As with AMOs, the minimum API score increases over time, until it reaches 800
in 2013–14. (Ed Source, 1996). Annual yearly progress is made when primary and
middle schools perform well. High schools, however, must include graduation rates as
one of the determining factors for measuring annual objectives.
California’s Finance System(s)
In 1972, California’s finance system was based in legislation that established
revenue limits at an approximation of each district’s expenditures on general education
programs. Subsequent years adjusted expenditures for inflation. The Serrano v. Priest
court case, decided in 1976, had the net effect of making districts’ general purpose money
more nearly equal per pupil in each type of district (elementary, unified, high school) (Ed
Source, 1996).
California’s property taxes are not directly imbedded in its educational system. A
California school district’s revenue limit can only be determined by legislation and no
other entity. Property taxes usually do not directly assist schools; they go to the revenue
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
20

limit wherein the state’s share is reduced proportionately. In about 60 of the almost 1,000
school districts, however, property taxes fill up or exceed the revenue limit. These
districts are allowed to keep their excess property tax revenues (Ed Source, 1996).
The government, state and federal, distribute categorical aid for the needs of
enrolled students. Some districts receive substantial aid while others, minimal. Thus,
there is a wealth of categorical programs such as Title I, Title II, and Title IIII. These
programs receive funding to provide specific services and/or to serve the needs of
specific students, usually underrepresented. Funds for students who receive services
under Special Education are deemed extra services needed to educate students with
various disabilities. Other programs are voluntary or provide funds to assists districts
with paying for particular services that they must provide as required by law (Ed Source,
1996).
Statement of the Problem
Federal policy has had a significant impact on schools and children ever since the
enactment of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965. Yet, American students still lag
behind many of their fellow foreign students and the academic achievement gap in this
country between rich and poor, white and minority students, remains wide, despite
hundreds of programs and hundreds of billions of dollars invested during the last
generation. Indeed, President Bush expressed concern that “too many of our neediest
children are being left behind” (No Child Left Behind: A Desktop Reference, 2002).
During a time of increasing accountability, unfunded mandates, budget shortages,
and high expectations, personnel resource allocation is becoming an important part of the
educational landscape. In the era of reform, restructuring resources is a viable path to
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
21

increasing academic achievement. Ensuring that limited resources are used as effectively
as possible is paramount, while funding adequacy remains a priority for high performing
schools. Adequacy and the neutrality of the distribution of specific educational
opportunities, as defined by resources, rather than per pupil annual revenues and
expenditures are key in successful schools. While there is no single “right answer” for
how best to organize schools and resources for student performance, the evidenced-based
model seeks to outline a set of academic and operational resources designed to allow
schools to meet the educational needs of their students, regardless of the range or
magnitude of those needs.
Though many high achieving schools share a common set of resources practices,
some utilize resources in different ways. School level best practices are indicators of
success in schools and provide a blueprint of the school’s organizational structure. The
ways in which people, time, and money are utilized is optimal and commonly aligned to
the school’s vision for its clients, the students. In this way, resources are typically
allocated to monitor and focus practice toward a school’s instructional model and student
achievement.
The criteria for identifying high-performing schools is fundamental to
understanding resources needed to produce a given set of resources. In California, a
simple definition of “success” might be schools scoring at or above 800 points on the
API, Academic Performance Index. The practices identified as associated with high
academic performance do not guarantee success; however, effective use of resources
typically does. The differences between the way average performing and high-performing
schools implement successful strategies may be the intensity, the coherence, and the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
22

willingness to stay focused over the course of the school year. High-performing schools
stand apart from other high schools in designing (or restructuring) new ways of schooling
while outperforming most high schools in their local districts.
Strategic resource decisions are indicative of the way in which high performing
schools organize and use resources. Miles (2008) notes that there are four findings of
strategic designs that each has an intricate set of characteristics. First, high performing
schools create customized strategic designs that organize resources to advance a clearly
defined instructional model. Second, high performing schools share a common set of
high-performing practices -investing in teaching quality, using student time strategically,
and creating individual attention - that advances their instructional models. Next, high
performing schools work within small school size and funding-level constraints to
prioritize core academics and professional community over program diversity. Last, high
performing schools require flexibility from traditional administrative practices and union
contracts around hiring, staffing, and time to implement their strategic designs.
Schools that utilize resources strategically take advantage of what they already
have and rethink the high school experience for students, typically in urban areas. In this
way, successful strategic resource designs align with the school’s instructional model in
the context of its specific resource level and constraints.
Difficult times present difficult choices, but also opportunities for schools to take
the sometimes dramatic steps necessary to reallocate resources and ensure that funding,
personnel, and time is focused adequately on improving the school’s instructional model
and student achievement.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
23

Purpose of the Study
This study uses one of the four varying approaches have been used to establish
adequate expenditure levels to maximize student performance, the Evidence-based Model
(EBM) created by Odden and Picus (2008) as a framework for analyzing the use of
school resources to raise student achievement at schools in one urban school district in
California.
The EBM identifies effective programs and practices to determine what works to
improve student performance, selecting only methods that are supported by solid research
evidence or best practices. Evidence-based studies have identified strategies that work.
Additionally, the developers of the evidence-based model have found that successful
schools use the following: (1) data to drive decision making; (2) engage teachers in
collaborative work centered on the instructional program; (3) establish a professional
school culture and orchestrate efforts at the school district; and (4) school and teacher
leader levels toward improving the academic achievement of every student.
Research Questions
1. What research based human resource allocation strategies improve student
achievement?
2. How are human resources allocated across The Iris Unified School District
(IUSD) and its schools?
3. Is there a gap between current human resource allocation practices and what the
research suggests is most effective?
4. How can human resources be strategically re-allocated to align with strategies that
improve student achievement?
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
24

Importance of the Study
This study will contribute to the limited body of research on personnel resource
allocation strategies at the school-site level in a time of fiscal stress. It will serve to
inform schools in one urban school district, similar schools and policy makers in the state
of California of the adequate level of resources needed in order to provide the most
effective instructional program to all students. The study will present the ways in which
human resources are allocated and present the gap between current human resource
allocation practices and what the research suggests is most effective. The utility of the
study seeks to serve as a guide employing the evidenced-based model that uses academic
research to identify the resources and educational programs necessary for a dramatic
improvement in student success. Finally, this study will present how human resources can
be strategically reallocated to align with successful strategies and best practices that
improve student achievement.
Summary of Methodology
This study will provide an in-depth analysis of resource use at the school-site
level. A purposeful sample of seven elementary schools in Southern California was
selected to participate in the study. The study design used to investigate the research
questions above is a mixed-method design; a combination of qualitative and quantitative
data will be used. Achievement data for this study was collected from the California
Department of Education and Ed-Data, which was used to identify schools within one
school district that had a similar AYP Language and Math Percent Proficiency,
percentage of English Learners (ELs), and Free or Reduced meal populations. At least
seventy-five percent of each school’s population qualified for free or reduced lunch
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
25

(FRL) and at least thirty percent were identified as English Learners (EL). Due to the
study’s mixed methods approach, and the use of interviews as a primary source of
information, it seeks to rely on the knowledge, insight, and honesty of study participants
to provide accurate details about resource allocation and improvement strategies
implemented at each school site.
Quantitative data collected from each school in the study will be compared to the
level of resources the Evidence-based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) will generate for
each school and be used to identify gaps in resource use across all schools. Qualitative
data will generate descriptive case studies for each school in the study to provide the best
insight into successful culture in each school and the ways in which best practices are
aligned to those detailed in the Evidence-based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) and the ten
strategies for doubling student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). A gap analysis
paired with the latest evidence-based teaching methods and strategies seek to assist one
school district increase the achievement of underperforming students.
Limitations
As with any research study, there are limitations to this study. The study will be
conducted in seven elementary schools with similar student demographic information and
AYP percent proficiency in Language arts and Math. Data collection for this study will
be limited to a four-month period at seven selected elementary school sites within one
district in Southern California.
Delimitations
A purposeful sample of seven schools that had similar student demographic data
and percentage of students scoring at the proficient level or above in English-language
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
26

arts and mathematics on statewide tests will be used for this study. Findings may only be
generalizable to elementary schools with similar student demographics and size.
Definition of Terms
Academic Performance Index (API): A number designated by California Department of
Education (2012) that ranges from 200 to 1000 and is calculated from student results on
statewide assessments. California has set a target score of 800 for all schools to meet, and
those that do not achieve a score of 800 are required to meet annual growth targets set
forth by the state.
Adequacy: Framed and interpreted within each individual state constitution, adequate
educational funding is defined as the level of funding that would allow each LEA to
provide a range of instructional strategies and educational programs so that each student
is afforded an equal opportunity to achieve to the state’s education performance standards
(Odden & Archibald, 2009; Odden & Picus, 2008).
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): A report required by the federal No Child Left Behind
(NCLB) Act of 2002 and is used to measure how well individual schools and districts are
doing in meeting the following requirements: (a) student participation rates on statewide
tests; (b) percentage of students scoring at the proficient level or above in English-
language arts and mathematics on statewide tests; (c) in California only, API growth; and
(d) graduation rate (California Department of Education, 2009b).
Average Daily Attendance (ADA): The number of students present on each school day
throughout the year, divided by the total number of school days in a year.
Base Revenue Limits: Is the amount of general purpose funding per ADA that a LEA
receives in state aid and local property taxes to pay for the basic cost of educating a
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
27

student regardless of special classifications or categories (EdSource, 2009a). In California
the base revenue limit equals the state aid to the LEA + local property tax collected by
the LEA (Timar, 2006).
Brown v. Board of Education (1954): A landmark legal decision by the United States
Supreme Court that declared state laws establishing separate schools based on race
unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
California Standards Tests (CSTs): A series of tests that measure student’s achievement
of California’s content standards in the areas of English-language arts, mathematics,
science, and history-social sciences (California Department of Education, 2012).
Categorical Funding: Funds that are targeted to support specific groups and/or class of
students, such as students with special needs, low-income, or English learners. There are
four types of categorically funded programs: entitlement, incentive, discretionary grants,
and mandated cost reimbursement (Timar, 2006).
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965: Passed in 1965 as a part
of the "War on Poverty." The act emphasizes equal access to education and establishes
high standards and accountability. The law authorizes federally funded education
programs that are administered by the states. In 2002, Congress amended ESEA and
reauthorized it as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
English Language Learner (ELL): Indicates a person who has a first language other than
English and is in the process of acquiring English.
Equity: Within education, the term is used to measure (1) horizontal equity, or the equal
access of education from individual to individual; and (2) vertical equity, or the
appropriate treatment of each individual based on their unique needs.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
28

Evidence Based Model: An educational funding approach based on identifying
individual, school-based programs and educational strategies that research has shown to
improve student learning (Odden & Archibald, 2009).
current expenditures, instructional expenditures, and expenditures per student.
General Fund: The fund used to finance the ordinary operations of school districts.
General funds may be used for any legally authorized purpose.
Local Education Agency (LEA): An educational agency at the local governmental level
that operates schools or contracts for educational services. LEAs can be as small as single
school districts and as large as county offices of education.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act: Also referred to as the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA), affects education from kindergarten through high school by (a)
requiring accountability for results in schools, (b) providing more choices for parents, (c)
giving greater local control and flexibility, and (c) emphasizing adoption of evidence-
based practices.
Proposition 13: Enacted in 1978 by California voters, the proposition amended the
California Constitution and resulted in a 1% cap on property tax rates as well as required
a two-thirds majority vote in both legislative houses for any future tax rates.
Proposition 98: Voted into law by California voters and also known as the Classroom
Instructional Improvement and Accountability Act, amended the California constitution
to mandate a minimum level of K-14 education spending based on a three-pronged test.
Response to Intervention (RTI): A multi-level prevention system, which includes three
levels of prevention: (1) high quality core instruction, (2) evidence-based intervention of
moderate intensity, and (3) individualized intervention.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
29

Serrano v. Priest I, II, III (1971; 1976; 1977): A series of three cases brought forth to the
California Supreme Court that challenged the state’s public education funding model
based on the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution.
Socio-economic Status (SES): A measure of an individual or family's relative economic
and social ranking (National Center for Education Statistics, 2010a).
Title I: A federal program that provides financial assistance to LEAs and schools with
high numbers and percentages of poor children in order to help all children meet state
adopted academic standards (U.S. Department of Education, 2010).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
30

Organization of the Study
Chapter One provides an overview of the relevance of the current study of
educational reform and adequacy. Chapter Two provides a synthesis of the literature aims
to review the critical points of current knowledge of school improvement strategies,
allocation of human resources, limited resources and fiscal constraints, and effective
practices for improving student performance at the school level including substantive
findings as well as theoretical and methodological contributions in school finance and
adequacy. Chapter Three outlines the study design, sample and population,
instrumentation, data collection and an analysis of the data presented. Chapter Four
discusses the findings and provides answers to the four research questions used to guide
this study. Chapter Five provides a summary of the findings, limitations of the study,
recommendations for future research and a conclusion to the study.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
31

Chapter Two

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the literature pertaining to school finance
and the resource allocation patterns associated with implementing best practices for
instructional reform. The literature has been divided into the following four topics: (1)
school improvement strategies, (2) allocation and use of human resources, (3) limited
resources and fiscal constraints, and (4) effective practices for improving performance at
the school level—ways in which performance gaps or distance between the current and
desired performance are diagnosed.
With the current economic crisis and the significant number of California school
districts that are failing to meet the goals as outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB), the efficient use of resources to drive instruction is more important than ever to
districts who may find themselves facing the threat of fiscal insolvency if their
performance does not meet expectations. The current drive for educational reform in
America has lasted for nearly twenty years, and has evolved into a nationwide standards-
based strategy. Thus, the implications of this strategy go to the heart of the school
improvement.
Over this time period, student achievement has improved modestly. Only one-
third of students are achieving at or above the proficiency standards on the nation's
education "report card" as indicated by The National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP), the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what
America's students know and can do in various subject areas. To make greater progress
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
32

toward the goal of teaching all students to high standards, the interim goal should be to
double this result to two-thirds, with progressive increases over time (Consortium for
Policy Research in Education, 2007).
Currently, nation’s schools face the challenge of meeting the seemingly lofty
performance improvement goal as set by NCLB. By the 2013-2014 school year, NCLB
requires that all children will be at the proficient level on state testing. Implementing an
effective strategy across schools and districts to attain this goal will allow students to
have access to the necessary educational resources to produce substantial student
achievement gains. While the “what” has been identified, the “how” has to be determined
for all students to be successful. With hard-hitting annual budget cuts to education, the
question remains: How will schools and districts finance teaching all students to high
standards? With increasing educational revenues, using a school's existing education
dollars more effectively and efficiently is key in comprehensive school reform (NCREL,
2000; Walter, 2001).
School Improvement Strategies
Given the significance of accountability for outcomes in both state and federal
education policy coupled with improving low-performing schools, there is a pressing
need for further research to inform school improvement and turnaround efforts. In the last
two decades, a number of research studies on improving low-performing schools have
taken place.
The Center on Innovation & Improvement (2007) purports that there is a set of
conditions and actions to serve as a foundation for subsequent research on actual school
turnarounds. In the past decade, successful schools as determined by student academic
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
33

performance with large numbers of poor and minority students have been called
“90/90/90”. Reeves (2000) coined the term “90/90/90” in 1995 based on observations in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where schools had been identified with the following
characteristics: 90% or more of the students were eligible for free and reduced lunch,
90% of more of the students were members of ethnic minority groups, and 90% or more
of the students met the district or state academic standards in reading or another area.
The Center for Performance Assessment’s research on 90/90/90 schools includes
four years of test data from more than 130,000 students of varying populations ranging
from primary to secondary school in a variety of school settings (urban, suburban, and
rural). The research concluded that five characteristics were common to all 90/90/90
schools.
First, each school has a clear focus on academic achievement. Reeves (2003)
indicates that schools in this model typically have a laser-like focus on achievement.
Student achievement is evidenced as the school’s main priority. In model schools,
displays of continuous improvements of students are everywhere in the school along with
outstanding student work displays. Second, there is an emphasis on a prioritized
curriculum in core subject areas such as reading, writing and mathematics. The questions
constantly being addressed are: “What should students know about this subject?” and
“What should students know to be successful in subsequent years?” Next, all schools
engage in frequent assessment and multiple chances for students to improve. Single
assessment measures have been discouraged, allowing students to have multiple
opportunities for improvement. A frequent challenge to this practice, Reeves (2003)
insists, is that students should learn to “get it right the first time”. Fourth, schools place
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
34

high priority on expository writing. Informative writing helps students demonstrate
metacognitive process, the thinking about the thinking, when challenged academically.
From this, teachers obtain diagnostic as well as formative information about student’s
progress. As a matter of course, teachers utilize a single scoring rubric to evaluate student
writing. The message to students is the same: this is the standard for good writing, and
there are no compromises on these expectations for quality. Last, collaborative teams in
schools, participate in regular analysis of student work. Evidenced are teachers, principals
and whole school faculties regularly exchanging student work, using explicit scoring
guides to assess that same work, and sharing samples of student work with the entire
staff/faculty.
The focus in 90/90/90 schools place an importance on student improvement and
value of that same improvement. It is also based on a few indicators in contrast to a
comprehensive school plan with voluminous indicators of student improvement. Reeves
(2003) suggests that consistent application of 90/90/90 techniques holds promise for
improving student achievement and closing the equity gap in schools of any demographic
description – which allows schools to focus on students who come to school with low or
below grade-level academic skills.
A growing body of research on improving student performance has demonstrated
that investment in a few indicators of improvement, in contrast to a wide-ranging school
plan, allows schools to focus on strategies for doubling student performance (Reeves
2003; Odden 2009). Several studies on improving school performance have taken place
(Duke 2006) and creating strong professional communities that can leverage high-quality
instruction for students who need it most is vital (Odden 2009). Research demonstrates
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
35

that the development of a strong professional community among educators is a key
ingredient in improving schools (Fullan, 1999; Langer, 2000).
Evidenced-based Practices and Strategies to Improve Student Learning
Since the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), there has
been an increased focus on using evidence-based practices to improve student academic
achievement and learning. Evidence-based practice involves using scientifically based
research to guide educational decisions regarding teaching and learning approaches,
strategies, and interventions. More specifically, according to Fixsen, Naoom, Blase,
Friedman, & Wallace (2005), evidence-based practices are skills that can be used when a
practitioner is interacting directly with a customer—in education, a student. The basic
premise of the evidence-based practice movement is to provide transparency and to
assure the public that practices and strategies will provide the best possible strategies or
treatments.
Slavin (2005) argues that genuine reform in American education depends on a
movement toward evidenced-based practice, using the findings of rigorous research to
guide educational practices and polices. While the concept of evidenced-based practice
has been typically central to the Reading First program and others that provide financial
assistance to help low-performance schools improve reading instruction in lower
elementary grades, there are implications for incorporating evidenced-based strategies for
improving student performance in all grade levels.
What counts as evidence of success?
The No Child Left Behind Act uses the term “scientifically based research”
program, which is defined as having “reliable evidence that the program or practice
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
36

works” (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Each school or district may have different
criteria for determining whether a program is evidence-based. On the whole, educators
agree that such evidence should be as follows: (1) objective – data that any other
evaluator would identify and interpret similarly; (2) valid – data that adequately represent
the tasks that students need to accomplish to be successful; (3) reliable – data will remain
essentially unchanged if collected on a different day or by a different person; (4)
systematic – data that were collected according to a rigorous design or either
experimentation or observation; and, (5) referred – data that have been approved for
publication by a panel of independent reviewers.
Odden, Picus, Goetz, Mangan & Fermanich (2006) affirm that the Evidence-Based
approach, which identifies a set of school level-components that are required to deliver a
comprehensive and high-quality instructional program tied to an adequate expenditure
level, is based on evidence from three sources:
1. Research with randomized assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of
evidence)
2. Research with other types of controls or statistical procedures that can help
separate the impact of a treatment
3. Best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district
or school level.
The far-reaching effects of low student achievement have heightened the interest
of policymakers, administrators, educators, and parents alike. All parties seek the same
end—to provide high-quality instruction that is most likely to lead to higher rates of
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
37

academic achievement for all students. While there is no single instructional program,
method or strategy that is effective in teaching all students, successful efforts to improve
achievement emphasize identification and implementation of evidence-based practices
that promote high rates of achievement when used in classroom by teachers with diverse
instructional styles with students who have diverse instructional needs and interests
(National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform, 2001).
Similarly, Odden and Picus (2006), in efforts to identify financial resources
needed for students to meet national standards, maintain that much is known today about
how to dramatically improve America’s schools. One belief is that while America needs
more evidence on how to educate all students to achievement levels that require more
than doubling performance to attain, the current knowledge base provides a firm
foundation for moving towards that ambitious goal. In addition to deploying resources
effectively, Odden and Picus (2006) contend that schools that double performance also
engage in data-based decision making, collaborative work around the instructional
program, produce a professional school culture, and have district, school and teacher
leaders orchestrating all efforts around improving the academic achievement of every
student.
Odden and Archibald (2009) have studied schools and districts throughout the
nation that have increased student performance and found that there were a similar set of
10 strategies found in these schools. The conceptual framework for school reform
grounded in research and practice for creating strong professional communities can be
attributed to several researchers. Thus, Odden and Archibald’s (2009) work in typical
urban low-performing and minority schools outlines a comprehensive and strategic
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
38

school improvement plan for school and district leaders that can enhance student
academic performance. The development of ten strategies for schools and districts
indicate effective, research-driven ways in which to “double” student performance.
Educators can drive substantial gains in student achievement and effectively use
resources to invest in what works in education reform. Conversely, the challenge for most
urban districts involves developing an adequate funding model such as the evidence-
based model that provides all of the resources needed to deploy strategies to “double”
student performance and close the achievement gap.
Strategies for Increasing Student Performance.
Odden (2009) identifies the details of 10 key strategies that schools and districts
use to make dramatic improvements and measurable gains in student performance with
the creation of strong professional communities. With the goal of increasing student
performance, schools and districts need the ten strategies, a budget plan, and a human
capital plan for overall implementation. The primary evidence of this argument derives
from schools and districts that have restructured their school program and, in many cases,
doubled student performance while paying for the changes through strategic resource
allocation.
The first strategy, conducting a needs assessment, is identified as understanding
the performance problem and the challenges to improve performance that face a large
number of schools in America that serve low-income, minority children. The emphasis of
conducting a needs assessment is on analyzing student performance. Thus, the focus is on
helping all key staff understand the gap between the current and desired performance.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
39

The second strategy, setting higher ambitious goals, is imperative regardless of
the current student performance level or demographics. Odden (2009) notes that although
many of the schools and districts enroll large concentrations of low-income and minority
students, these schools clearly have not been influenced negatively by those
demographics due to the belief that all students can learn to very high standards. Setting
ambitious goals is vital for schools and districts that make a big difference in student
performance.
The third strategy, adopting a new curriculum and instructional program,
addresses the fundamental educational issues that schools have the power to change.
School-based issues are pieces of the educational system of which schools have control.
Odden (2009) claims that schools that produce high levels of student performance focus
on what they can impact—everything that happens in schools: recruitment and selection
of teachers; the assignment of teachers; the organization of curriculum and instruction;
academic expectations; the specific curriculum, textbook, and instructional materials
used; and instructional practice.
Committing to data-based decision making is the fourth strategy. Odden (2009)
discusses the fact that all schools and districts making large improvements in student
performance go beyond analyzing state-mandated assessments and use a variety of
additional measures of student performance. Benchmark and formative assessments are
included in these additional measures. Since there is not a perfect measurement for
student achievement, the author maintains that more data on student performance is
needed to implement a cycle of continuous instructional improvement that continuously
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
40

toggles between data on student performance and curriculum and instructional strategies
and their impacts on student achievement.
The fifth strategy, investing in on-going professional development, identifies
intensive, ongoing professional development strategies implemented by schools and
districts in Odden’s (2009) research . In analyzing schools, Odden (2009) recognizes that
professional development is required; however, in order for schools and districts to
develop a new approach to good instruction, more extensive professional development is
needed. This type of ongoing professional development seeks to help all teachers acquire
the expertise to teach newly adopted curriculum emphasizing educational best practices.
The sixth strategy, focusing class time more efficiently, describes how schools
and districts can use time more effectively and efficiently. Using time as a fixed resource
in strategic ways has helped several schools attain the goal of higher student academic
achievement. Using time strategically along with fulfilling staffing needs, allows schools
and districts adequate time during the day for “job-embedded, ongoing” professional
development.
The seventh strategy, providing multiple interventions for struggling students,
involves necessary extra-help strategies to aid these students to reach proficiency or
higher levels of achievement. Extra supports reflect a strong American value of giving
multiple opportunities for its citizens to accomplish certain goals; in this case, learning to
a rigorous performance standard. Multiple opportunities are rooted in the theory that most
students can learn to ambitious standards given sufficient time.
The eighth strategy, creating professional learning communities, describes how
schools and districts create professional and collaborative school cultures. Professional
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
41

learning communities, the outcome of creating these school cultures, are a product of
Odden’s first seven strategies and are notable characteristics of establishing professional
cultures that facilitate the development of widespread instructional leadership by the
administration, teaching staff, and central office staff. The goal of the PLC is to obtain
ambitious goals in a professional manner by developing a collaborative and professional
school culture.
The ninth strategy, empowering leaders to support instructional improvement,
describes various ways schools and districts reach out to the professional education
community to get the best and most current knowledge and practice.
The tenth strategy, taking advantage of external expertise, explains the talent and
human capital management issues that underlie school and district strategies to “double”
student performance. To improve student performance, schools and districts must execute
the first eight key strategies with sufficient teacher and principal talent. With talent
shortages, Odden (2009) discusses the ways in which schools and districts can be
launched to get the needed talent to accomplish ambitious, higher goals as set in the
second strategy.
Data-driven decision making.
The use of data to inform educational decisions has drawn attention to
accountability mandates set forth by NCLB. Data-driven decision making in education
“refers to teachers, principals, and administrators systematically collecting and analyzing
various types of data, including input, process, outcome and satisfaction data, to guide a
range of decisions to help improve the success of students and schools” (Marsh, Pane,
and Hamilton, 2006, p1). Research demonstrates that successful schools use data to make
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
42

informed decisions about policies, practices, and procedures at the school level to guide a
range of decisions to help improve the success of students and schools. (Odden & Picus,
2006; Schmoker, 2004).
Achievement test data play a prominent role in local, state and federal
accountability policies. Implicit in these policies and others is a belief that student
achievement data are important sources of information to guide improvement at all levels
of the education system. New state and local test results are adding to the data on student
performance that teachers regularly collect by means of classroom observations,
assignments and observations. As a result, data are becoming more abundant at the state,
district, and school levels—some even suggest that educators are “drowning” in too much
data (Celio and Harvey, 2005; Ingram, Louis, and Schroeder, 2004). Along with the
increased educator interest in data-based decision making has come increased attention
from the research community to understand its processes and effects.
Data-driven decision-making involves studying how well students are meeting
specific pre-identified learning objectives and goals. It facilitates collaborative work at
the school level. Accessibility and timeliness of data is imperative and can greatly
influence school-wide decisions. Typically, school faculties meet regularly about
improving educational practices while examining student work and assessment results.
Thus, Ikemoto & Marsh (2007) suggest that educators might utilize multiple types of
data, including: input data, process data, outcome data, and satisfaction data.
Today, a broad range of student data exist. No single form of student data
provides all learning information, so school data teams often triangulate student
information, using multiple forms of data to assess student learning. Common examples
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
43

of student data include: (1) summative assessments; (2) formative assessments; and, (3)
student data profiles. Summative assessments, such as state-mandated tests, are used to
document student achievement at the end of a quarter, semester or school year.
Formative assessments are given more frequently and are intended to guide planning,
instruction, and daily practice. Typically, schools give quarterly local assessments to
provide interim student assessment data before state assessments in the spring of each
year. Finally, student data profiles provide information contained in a student’s
permanent record such as demographic information, test histories, and relevant family
information.
Data-driven decision-making requires interpretation, analysis, and judgment. It
allows school faculties to conduct a review of various modes of assessment results and
analyze that data “combined with stakeholder understanding and expertise to create
actionable knowledge” (Ikemoto & Marsh, 1997, p108). Once actionable knowledge
occurs, it can be used to support different types of school-based decisions. Collaborative
teams “should identify the most pronounced patterns of student weakness, then seek
absolute clarity on the nature of these problems . . . [through] regular, professional
collaboration, teachers should focus on these areas, while monitoring progress regularly”
(Schmoker & Marzano, 1999, p21).
Collaborative work around the instructional program.
Evidenced-based strategies are anchored in current research and differentiated
instruction based on learning goals. To increase student academic achievement in low-
performing schools, common practices in instruction and leadership facilitate improved
education knowledge and practice. Thus, the engine that drives high student achievement
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
44

is teacher teams working collaboratively toward common curriculum expectations and
using interim assessments to continuously improve teaching and attend to students who
are not successful (DuFour, 2004; Marzano, 2003; Reeves, 2004; Wiggins and Mc Tighe,
2005).
Collaborative school practices tend to occur in the form of collaboration meetings
dedicated to analyzing and examining student work. Reeves (2003) purports that
constructive data analysis provide an intense focus on student data from multiple sources,
especially cohort data. Collaborative conversations that center on topics such as “What
did my students learn recently and how do I know this?” and “In what practices have I
engaged in that affect student learning?” make conversations around instructional
strategies and classroom implementation much more meaningful.
Common assessment practices are evident at high performing schools and
responsibility for evaluating student work is collaborative. Collaborative evaluating
systems in high achieving schools, according to Reeves’ findings (2000; 2001; 2003),
makes clear that no accident of geography or classroom assignment would determine
expectations of students; rather, [these] schools develop common assessment practices
and reinforce common practices through regular exchanges of student papers.
Extra-time for effective collaboration, which generally occurs through
“announcement free” faculty meetings in successful schools, promote teacher time on
task with prominence given to collaborative scoring of student work and internal
professional development. Yet, due to most public schools’ budgets, ineffective strategic
time allocation can prohibit schools from having days or workshops set-aside in the
yearly calendar. A common thread of high-performing schools make collaborative
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
45

scoring of student work a part of their regular routine(s) (Reeves 2003; Fullan 2008).
Thus, collaborative work around the instructional program seeks to coordinate efforts
among the school staff to improve the academic achievement of all students.
Professional school culture: PLCs.
One hallmark of many high-performing schools is the success its teachers have
had in creating what is known as a professional learning community (PLC). DuFour
(2004) characterizes professional learning communities as groups of educators who
“work together to analyze and improve their classroom practice . . . engaging in an
ongoing cycle of questions that promote deep team learning” (p.9). The PLC model is
based on the premise that all students benefit when placed in a challenging and
supportive environment. DuFour suggests three Big Ideas that seek to drive professional
learning communities: (1) ensuring that students learn, (2) a culture of collaboration, and
(3) a focus on results.
Clarity of purpose on ensuring that students learn what they are being taught is the
first big idea. Three crucial questions drive the work of those within a professional
learning community: (1) What is it we want students to learn?; (2) How will we respond
when a student has achieved this learning?; (3) How will we respond when a student is
not learning? Specific emphasis, as noted by DuFour (2004), is placed on the last crucial
question relevant to student learning. The ways in which a school responds to students
who are not meeting academic goals is vital to their academic success year to year. At
Accelerated Schools/PLC and the Kansas City Regional Professional Development
Center, DuFour & DuFour(2006), posed an additional fundamental question, What
systematic process is in place to provide support for students who are struggling?, in an
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
46

effort to gauge the ways in which schools attempt to assist struggling students. DuFour,
DuFour, Eaker & Karhanek (2009) examined student achievement in over 35 schools that
had committed to providing struggling students with additional time and support in a
timely, directive, and systematic way. Every one of those schools was highly successful
in moving students who had traditionally struggled to proficient status on high-stakes
assessments. Furthermore, each of the schools dramatically increased the percentage of
students able to achieve at advanced levels.
Collaborative school culture, the second Big Idea, is based in three main
premises. First, no school can help all students achieve at high levels if teachers work in
isolation. Second, schools improve when teachers are given the time and support to work
collaboratively to clarify essential student learning and assessment practices. Third,
schools should identify and implement novel practices for raising student academic
achievement.
A focus on results is the final Big Idea. DuFour (2004) purports that professional
learning communities (PLC) judge their effectiveness on the basis of results rather than
intentions. To focus on results, all school programs, policies, and practices must be
assessed on the basis of their impact on student learning. Additionally, school staff
receives relevant information on their effectiveness in achieving intended results as set
forth in the school’s goals for the year.
Leadership: District, school and teachers (principal as learning leader).
Leadership is the action of leading a group of people or an organization. It is
essential to successful implementation of any efforts for change. The notion of leadership
is continually evolving, often moving simultaneously in numerous directions. According
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
47

to Marzano, Walters, & McNulty (2005), many leadership perspectives and theories have
guided school leaders. Today’s school leaders have an exceptional role as a quality of
school leadership relates to a school’s capacity to ensure academic growth for all student
learners.
There are various models to capture information concerning leadership roles and
styles. On one hand, for example, Marzano, Walters & Mc Nulty (2005) assert that
leadership has long been perceived to be important to the effective functioning of
organizations in general, and more recently, of schools in particular. The authors iterate
that their “meta-analysis of 35 of research indicates that school leadership has a
substantial effect on student achievement and provides guidance for experienced
administrators alike…” (p12). In doing so, they identify 21 responsibilities that define the
role of a school leader. Likewise, Marzano and colleagues have organized their findings
and conclusion into a plan of actions that involve a) developing a strong school
leadership team, b) distributing some responsibilities throughout the leadership team, c)
selecting the right work, d) identifying the magnitude of change, e) and, matching the
management style to the order of magnitude of the change initiative.
On the other hand, Bolman and Deal (1994) posit that leadership is learned
through an experiential process in which the leader directly observes, or is forced by
circumstances to exhibit leadership. To be an effective leader in any organization will
require the flexibility to look at the organization from more than one vantage point.
Bolman and Deal (2003) describe this flexibility as a leader’s willingness to use multiple
lenses to reframe experiences. Thus, reframing can have a significant effect on student
achievement.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
48

A series of studies have shown that the ability to use multiple frames as a model
for principals in decision making for school change is associated with greater
effectiveness for managers and leaders (Bensimon, 1989, 1990; Birnbaum, 1992; Bolman
& Deal, 1991, 1992a, 1992b). Bolman and Deal’s position is that “effectiveness
deteriorates when managers and leaders cannot frame and reframe their perspectives.
When leaders don't know what to do, they do more of what they know. Leaders must
realize there is always more than one way to respond to any organizational problem or
dilemma" (Bolman & Deal, 1997, p5-6). In their research, the authors have consolidated
major schools of organizational thought into four frameworks.
Bolman and Deal’s (1997) Model: Four Frames for Leadership support change
agents who conceptually take different approaches on an issue(s) that require reframing.
The frames – structural, human resource, political, symbolic – can be used at various
stages of the change phase. In many instances, circumstances at the school level
determine which framework(s) is/are appropriate. “The key to accomplishing something
that requires concerted action with other people is to reframe your perception of the
situation to take into account the divergent perspectives of the various players. ‘Their
frame—not yours—determines how they will act’” (Bolman and Deal, 2007,
p270). Effective school leaders may use a number of frameworks at one time. The
“trick” to creating change in an educational organization is to figure out which frame
offers the leader the best opportunity for focusing all the actors (e.g. teachers, other
administrators, support staff) on a workable solution.
The structural frame focuses on structural elements and incorporates strategies,
implementation, and adaptations within an organization. Within this framework the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
49

“structural” leader tries to design and implement a structure suitable to the problem and
circumstances within the organization. This approach is appropriate when there is little
conflict, low uncertainty and a stable legitimate authority.
The human resource frame focuses on the people within the organization. The
human resource leader views people as the heart of any organization and attempts to be
responsive to needs and goals to gain commitment and loyalty. The leader can empower
others through participation and providing necessary resources in a supportive climate.
This approach is appropriate when employee morale is low or declining and there is little
conflict. Bolman & Deal (2003) state that in this situation, leadership may need to align
human needs with the organization’s goals.
The political frame focuses on political realities that exist within and outside of an
organization. The political leader understands the political reality of schools, districts,
and other educational organizations and can function within all of them. Political-style
leaders believe that organizational life is a competition for resources. Accordingly,
conflict is everywhere. Within this frame leaders must build networks and coalitions to
acquire power and resources. A good leader is comfortable with conflict and is capable
of negotiating within this environment. Solutions for these problems are through leaders
who have developed power bases and agendas to accomplish their goals (Bolman & Deal,
2003).
The symbolic frame focuses on the vision and aspiration of an organization. The
symbolic educational leader thrives on the notion that “people need something to believe
in”; it is their role to provide inspiration and vision. He or she is very visible and
energetic and relies heavily on organizational traditions and values. This approach tends
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
50

to work best when information and organizational goals are ambiguous and not clear,
where there is high diversity, and possible cause and effect relations are not well
understood. The role of leadership then becomes one of developing the culture once again
(Bolman & Deal, 2003). Reframing a situation can lead to better decision-making and an
organization’s success or failure.
Bolman and Deal (1994) maintain that research for the past two decades has
shown a strong link between effective leadership and effective organizations. In an
effective leadership role, the leader should be able to function in all four frameworks. He
or she should be capable of being a social architect (structural) to analyze and design, a
catalyst and servant (human relations) to support and empower, an advocate (political) to
build coalitions, and a fanatic (symbolic) to frame experiences and inspire others to
change. When exercising leadership skills, the principal or learning leader, helps
establish goals, the mission, and a shared vision for the organization itself (school) and
for the organization with the larger context (school within a district).
Owens (2004) asserts that an effective school principal demonstrates a strong
interest in promoting collegiality and shared leadership, an interest in shifting the norms
of the school’s culture from the traditional to more collaborative ways of working
together. The role of the principal should be that of one who monitors the ongoing work
of collaborative teams through collective inquiry and dialogue with members of those
teams while building capacity. DuFour and Marzano (1999) contend that time devoted to
building the capacity of teachers to work in teams is far better spent than time devoted to
observing individual teachers to ensure they are demonstrating the right moves in the
classroom. Holding teachers accountable is necessary but “there is abundant evidence
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
51

that organizing people into teams in which they work together to achieve common goals
which members are mutually accountable is a powerful structure for promoting
individual and collective accountability” (p.6).
In an effort to find ways to increase the number of high-quality schools, Miles,
Odden, Fermanich & Archibald (2004) maintain that school leaders will need to do three
things to find and justify the resources they will need to improve school performance
dramatically. Primarily, schools must be able to describe their professional development
activities and improvement activities including the ways in which they are strategically
organized. After doing so, schools must quantify the cost of these activities. Finally,
schools leaders must measure the effects of their investment in terms of changed
classroom practice and overall school performance.
The cost-effectiveness of professional development and collaborative activities can create
dramatic challenges for schools and districts. Miles, Odden, Fermanich, & Archibald
(2004) emphasize that as difficult as is it to prove a clear link between overall school
spending levels and student performance, researchers will likely discover that this is not
how much spending on professional development that matters first, but how dollars are
used.
Allocation and Use of Human Resources
During a time of increasing accountability, unfunded mandates, budget shortages,
and high expectations, resource allocation is becoming an important part of the
educational landscape. In the era of reform, restructuring resources are a viable path to
teaching and assessing each student. Ensuring that limited resources are used as
effectively as possible is paramount, while funding adequacy and equity remains a
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
52

priority for high performing schools. Adequacy and the neutrality of the distribution of
specific educational opportunities, as defined by resources, rather than per pupil annual
revenues and expenditures are key in successful schools. While there is no single “right
answer” for how best to organize schools and resources for student performance, high-
performing schools do have a strategic vision that drives resource use, and they actively
manage their resources to support their vision.
Changes in the Level of Resources
It is no secret that the United States trails behind other countries in educational
spending. In comparison to the Gross National Product (GNP), the trail is as comparable.
Hanushek & Rivkin (1997) stress that the growth in United States educational
expenditure – which by some standards exceeds that of health expenditures – receives
only passing attention in most policy discussions. Indeed, popular discussions often
suggest a perceived lack of commitment to education and concentrate simply on the need
to expand resources devoted to it.
Educational revenues over time.
Education revenues per pupil have consistently increased in the past 50-60 years
(Hanushek & Rivkin, 1997; Picus, 2008). School-based expenditures usually “reflect
changes in input costs, an expansion of school responsibilities and objectives, and
varying efficiency and resource use” (Hanushek & Rivkin,1997, p. 6). Spending in the
United States has been driven by the expansion of schools based on population growth
and increases in per-pupil resources. Prior to the Great Depression of the 1930s, most of
the funding came from local sources. Thus, over time, educational funding, especially in
California, has changed significantly.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
53

Today, California’s 978 school districts receive the majority of their funding
through a formula known as “revenue limits.” Revenue limit funding is based on a
complex series of formulas reflecting a long and complex history. They were created in
response to a lawsuit over inequities in funding per pupil based on the relative wealth of
each school district. Revenue limits stem from two events: The 1971 ruling of the
California Supreme Court in Serrano v. Priest and the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.
Prior to 1971, school districts in California levied their own property tax rates, and the
state supplemented this local revenue.
Revenue limit funds can be used by school districts for general purposes, unlike
funds received through categorical programs, which include restrictions on their use.
Under revenue limits, each district has a base revenue limit, a dollar amount per pupil. A
district’s revenue limit entitlement is its base revenue limit multiplied by the number of
students attending its schools. The number of students is measured by the district’s
average daily attendance (ADA). The revenue limit entitlement is funded by local
property taxes and state aid. A percentage of the property tax revenue generated by real
property located within a district is assigned to the district; state aid makes up the
difference between a district’s entitlement and its property tax revenue. If a district’s
property tax revenue exceeds its entitlement, it retains these “excess taxes.” The sum of
the entitlement and any excess taxes are a district’s revenue limit funds.
EdSource (2012) illustrates a bucket analogy in which state and local funds are
combined to make up a district’s revenue funding. The analogy represents individual
revenue limits as a picture of a different sized-bucket for each California school district.
“Revenues raised through local property taxes are dumped into the districts bucket, and if
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
54

the bucket is not filled all the way, the state comes by and tops it off with state tax
revenues” (Ed Source, 2012). Thus, two scenarios remain for districts. On one hand, if
the district’s bucket is filled completely by local property tax revues, the state does not
have to give it aid. On the other hand, if the bucket overflows with local property taxes,
the district gets to keep the overage. However, some districts whose buckets are filled by
local property taxes are called basic aid or excess revenue districts.
Figure 2.1

Source: EdSource (2012)
Educational Expenditures Over Time
In the last century, educational spending has endured an increase of 3.5 percent
per year, from $2 billion to over $187 billion. Educational expenditures are those costs
associated with providing educational services to children (e.g. instruction,
administration, and transportation). The most important factors that affect school costs
are the relative number and salary of teachers (Hanushek & Rivkin, 1997; Firestone,
1994). However, the increase in per student funding can be credited to increasing total
educational expenditures. For these reasons, public education spending in the United
States between 1890 and 1990 can be grouped into four areas: (1) student enrollment; (2)
instructional staff per pupil and the school year length; (3) the price of instructional staff;
and (4) other spending.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
55

The beginning of the 20
th
century brought sustained increases in enrollment rates
in the United States. Enrollment growth, at the time, was primarily driven by population
increases and continuing rises in participation rates. Increasing student enrollment
initiated a rise in spending which “explained the bulk of the change in educational
outlays” from rising per-student expenditures (Hanushek and Rivkin, 1997, p. 7).
Hanushek & Rivkin (1997) indicate that instructional staff spending, which
includes spending on instructional staff (e.g. teachers, principals, and other instructional
personnel) salaries, are affected by quantity (expenditures related to student enrollment),
intensity (factors that affect the content or quality of schooling), and input cost (changes
in the price of instructional personnel). The formulaic definition of instructional staff
spending is the population multiplied by the enrollment rate multiplied by the proportion
of public school enrollment multiplied by the number of school days in a year multiplied
by the average daily wage of teachers and staff.
The price of instructional staff provides direct estimates of the annual growth in
real spending attributable to each factor. Since teachers make up the majority of
instructional staff, “these supply and demand movements offer a(n) . . . explanation for
the instructional staff increase from $34 per day in 1890 to more than $183 per day in
1990, an increase that accounts for more than 40 percent of the increase in total
expenditure . . . over the century” (p. 53). However, variance in teacher quality has
shifted teacher salaries to accommodate shifts in supply and demand.
Lastly, other (non-instructional staff) salary expenditures have risen rapidly over
the entire century as well. This category “grew from $.04 billion in 1890 to $6.4 billion in
1940 and to over $100.0 billion in 1990” (p. 60). Significant contributions of the increase
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
56

in “other” expenditures stemmed from rising student enrollment, real wages of high-
skilled individuals including benefits, the costs of learning materials, school-level support
staff such as classroom aides and transportation costs. Furthermore, special education
spending took on a larger share of population growth by the end of the century. The
National Center of Education Studies (1995) reported that the percentage of children
classified as disabled increased from 11.6 percent in 1990 to 12.0 percent in 1993.
Educational expenditure, nonetheless, has been affected significantly from 1890-
1990 by the rising price of instructional staff, the declining pupil-teacher and pupil-staff
ratios and rising non-instructional staff costs. The disproportionate spending on special
education with the expansion of education for students with special needs has
increasingly had a direct impact on educational expenditures over time. The use of the
education dollar has transformed from financing the regular classroom to that of new
education resources (Picus, 2008).
Changes in the Use of Resources
The last decade of the 20
th
century encountered a shift in the requirements and
demands on schools that has resulted in different patterns of resource allocations. Two
movements, the standards-based and accountability reform movement, with strikingly
different educational emphasis were two policy shifts continue to affect education in the
United States. Hannaway, Mc Kay and Nakib (2002) examined whether school districts
allocated resources differently as a consequence of these movements.
The standards-based reform movement sought to tie standards to curriculum,
assessments, and professional development. Standards-based reform is one of the most
prominent features of the current educational landscape. Across the nation, states have
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
57

adopted standards that describe the content that schools are expected to teach and that
students are expected to master. The requirement for standards and aligned assessments
has been a feature of federal legislation since the Improving America's Schools Act
(IASA) of 1994, and it is the centerpiece of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB).
The accountability reform movement placed heavy emphasis on school outcomes
by means of assessment measurements and a system of rewards and punishment based on
student achievement. Individual states began adopting school accountability policies in
the 1980s and 1990s and the movement reached the federal level with the passage of the
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001. As a part of accountability, a number of
states (and NCLB itself) require that schools deemed to be chronically failing students
adopt various types of reform initiatives, from extensive restructuring to the
implementation of specific comprehensive school reform models.
Both movements represent a substantial change in educational policy in the
United States. Thus, Hannaway et al (2002) ask how recent efforts at school reform and
student outcome-based accountability have impacted state and district resource
allocation. In doing so, they examined whether school districts are allocating resources
differently as a consequence of the standards and accountability reform movements
which started to take root in the 1990s. They studied regular public school districts with
enrollments greater than 200 students from 1992-1997. They found that school districts
increased their total expenditures by 7 percent.
Hannaway et. al (2002) maintain that proportionately more (than the national
average) was spent on instruction, instructional support services, and school
administration, as well as increases on pupil personnel services, driven by special
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
58

education, demonstrated the largest proportionate increases. Additionally, the team found
that school administration increased although districts were only making marginal
increases in the area of instruction. Conclusively, they found that mandates to special
education steered pupil support service spending, rather than the standards and
accountability reform.
The increase in educational spending has not gone into the regular classroom but
to pay for specialists who provide services for noncore subjects or additional resources to
supplement student needs (Lankford and Wyckoff, 1995; Rothstein and Miles, 1995;
Odden and Picus, 2008). Thus, Odden and Picus (2008) refer to this type of spending as
the allocation of new education resources. These resources are indicative of the increase
in students with special needs who require special services during school hours. Included
in this category are students with disabilities, second-language learners, gifted and
talented students, economically disadvantaged students who struggle to achieve subject
matter content and standards, and other students who may be incorporated into categories
of student with special needs. “Although dollars [are] used to pay for specialists in the
school(s) who provided services for noncore subjects or for extra students needs outside
the regular classroom . . . this allocation of new education resources helps explain why
pupil-staff ratios have declined but class sizes have not” (p.?).
Educational Adequacy
Brown v Board of Education (1954) and the Civil Right’s Movement of the
1960’s brought about a shift in education to provide all students with equal access to a
public education (Hanushek & Linseth, 2009). Seemingly, the Elementary and Secondary
Act of 1965 and its funding sources sought to create educational equity by providing
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
59

more resources to students from impoverished, economically disadvantaged, and
challenging backgrounds. With the publication of A Nation at Risk (1983) came
additional efforts to provide an equitable education to all students. However, none of
these efforts have made a difference in improving student achievement, especially for
disadvantaged students including students with low SES, El students, and students of
color (Hanushek & Lindseth, 2009; Reeves, 2005).
With the widening of the achievement gap and increased attention on student
achievement as set forth by state’s proficiency standards, it has become critical for
educational stakeholders to take a closer look at how resources are being used to improve
student achievement (Hanushek & Linseth, 2009; Odden & Archibald, 2009). In this
country, the question of funding adequacy consistently underlies discussions about
improving public schools.
Rebell (2007) defines adequacy as the amount of funding needed to provide all
students with a meaningful opportunity for an adequate education. Thus, in years past, the
unequal access to local revenues has been linked to overall spending disparities; some
districts have a very high property tax base and others have a very lower property tax
base. Even though equalization formulas have been enacted by states, which helped to
offset funding disparities, substantial per-pupil expenditure differences are evident across
school districts. Inequities in spending differences, viewed as unfair, became the focus of
school finance discussions and policies in the latter decade of the 20
th
century.
In implementing standards-based education reform, states implemented
expectations on schools to raise the level of student achievement and educate all children
up to at least a proficiency level of performance. As a result, school finance litigation,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
60

which in past years focused on equity, began to shift to adequacy due to per pupil
differentials. The issue transitioned from marked differences in individual per pupil costs
to whether or not school districts had enough money to deploy programs to teach all
students to proficiency levels as required by individual states (Odden, 2003). In many
studies, analysis showed that districts did not have an adequate amount of funding to do
so.
Several advocacy groups, state education departments, and state legislatures have
sponsored adequacy studies in more than half of the states in America. The studies “aim
to determine objectively the amount of funding needed to provide all students a
meaningful opportunity for an adequate education” (Rebell, 2007, p.1). The overarching
question in all studies asked, Do all districts and schools have adequate resources to
teacher their students to a proficiency standard?
The New York adequacy case is one of the most well known cases for the typical
deal-making pattern based in inequitable political deals. The state’s education finance
system was exposed as being “composed of a complex set of approximately 50 separate
formulas and funding streams [that] . . . in reality . . . proved meaningless” (Rebell, 2007,
p. 2). During the case, it was noted that the formulas and funding streams were all
manipulated to yield exact percentage allocations for each region of the state as
determined by a set few. In response to this case, explosions of costing-out studies have
taken place since the latter decade of the 20
th
century.
Rebell (2007) states that over the past 16 years, courts in more than 25 states have
ruled on claims that state systems or financing public education deny many students
resources they need for a constitutionally “adequate” education. The success rate for
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
61

plaintiffs has been three quarters of all court cases due to close scrutiny of state education
finance systems. The outcomes have propelled the argument that education funding in the
United States “was based more on inequitable political deals than on any serious
assessment of actual educational needs” (p2).
Reinforcing the shift from equity to adequacy has had a direct effect on school
finance litigation. As a result, states can no longer allow districts to select their own
spending levels. Odden (2003) maintains that under an adequacy argument usually linked
to the education clause in the state constitution, the legal test is whether a state’s school
finance system provides adequate revenues for the average school to teach the average
student to state-determined performance standards and whether adequate additional
revenues are provided for the extra help student with special needs require to achieve at
those same performance levels.
Odden (2003) asserts under the adequacy framework, all districts and schools
must spend at least at an adequate level – states must use a foundation type of funding
formula. The foundation expenditure level must be enough to enable each district and
school within that district to provide a set of educational programs that have been and are
successful in educating students to the performance standards set by the state.
Odden (2003) proposes the ways in which states can determine adequacy through
the identification of both an adequate expenditure level for the typical student and
sufficient adjustments for students with different needs in addition to managing these
same resources so that students learn to the performance standards required by the state.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
62

The determination of adequate foundation expenditure levels are based in four
methods: 1) the successful district approach, 2) the cost function approach, 3) the
professional judgment approach, 4) and the evidenced-based approach.
(An overview of all four methods has been provided in Chapter 1. For the sake of
this research study, the evidence-based approach will be used and discussed in the next
section of the Literature Review.)
Evidenced-Based Approach as Preferred Model: Funding for Adequacy
The evidence-based approach (EB) identifies the costs associated with providing
research-based methods or strategies for improving student achievement. Odden & Picus
(2008) assert that it, then, determines the school, district and state resources needed to
fund this model. The evidence-based model, as Odden (2003) maintains, determines a set
of ingredients that are needed to provide all students with a high quality rigorous
education, and then determines the costs associated with each ingredient to develop or
calculate the total costs. How so? The EMB has two steps: a review of the evidence from
research and best practice on what programs work in education; and a study of schools
and districts that have dramatically increased the level of student performance over a
three to seven year time period (Odden & Picus, 2008). Additionally, this approach
provides policymakers and educational leaders with a set of educational strategies that
can be used to produce a desired outcome so that districts and schools can most
effectively use these resources to achieve their goals.
In the past decade, there have been various studies conducted using an evidence-
based approach in the Unites States including Arkansas, Arizona, California, Kentucky,
Oregon, Washington and Wyoming (Baker, Taylor & Vediltz, 2005; Odden & Picus,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
63

2008). This model provides not only the resources needed to provide an adequate
education to all students but it also provides recommendations for research-based
instructional best practices and strategies for desired outcomes of increasing student
achievement and state-based proficiency levels.
The Supreme Court of California catalyzed school finance litigation with its
ruling in the Serrano v. Priest cases. The court’s ruling required that wealth related
spending differences essentially be eliminated, the legislation required to implement that
decision, and the passage of Propositions 13’s property tax limitation has resulted in
dramatically slower increases in education spending in California compared with most
other states. In the last three decades since Serrano v. Priest, courts in various states have
moved away from the type of equity arguments presented to claims based on educational
adequacy.
However, California courts have not yet considered the merits of adequacy
arguments due to the settlement of one critical lawsuit, Williams v. State of California.
This adequacy lawsuit exposed discrepancies in such school resources as textbooks,
instructional materials, and facilities. Teachers were also included in school
shortcomings. Chambers & Levin (2006) assert that the Williams lawsuit highlighted the
imbalance between the allocation of resources and the need to ensure high levels of
learning for students. The outcome of the case posed mandates on all California schools
to provide adequate level of resources for all students, regardless of district, school, and
funding sources. The settlement made it clear that all schools must provide adequate level
of resources (i.e. access to textbooks for each student per class) for all students. Even
after the settlement of the Williams case, the adequacy situation continues to remain
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
64

bleak for schools in the state. In all likelihood, the settlement has provided cleaner, safer
schools yet the significant in the quality of education in California’s public schools
remain to be seen.
While there is no single approach to adequacy that is found to be one hundred
percent successful, Odden and Picus’ (2008) Evidence-based Model (EBM) serves as the
theoretical framework for this study. The authors argue that the EBM provides districts
and schools with the most “substantively sound methodology” in adequacy research
which seeks to identify a set of research-based instructional strategies and practices that
have had success in the past at improving student achievement in schools. It also
prescribes the resources necessary to provide the components required to meet a pre-
determined set of achievement objectives (Odden, 2003).
The core of the evidence-based approach is to give primary influence for making
programmatic recommendations to research evidence (Odden & Picus, 2008). The
developers of EBM have made programmatic recommendations supported by
randomized trials and/or meta- analyses of effects (see Table 1). However, in some cases
where there is little or no experimental research – for example on the use of guidance
counselors and nurses – the approach relies on other peer reviewed research and/or
recommendations from professional associations. At this stage of development, the
evidence-based model relies on evidence for each individual recommendation, and
provides “effect sizes” from the research on the individual programs. Odden & Picus
(2008) maintain that state policy makers to prioritize program decisions in a world of
scarce resources can use the effect sizes.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
65

Does California have the necessary resources to enforce the evidence-based
model? The actual cost of an evidence-based system varies substantially from state to
state depending on the current level of spending and the number of certificated personnel
in each district and school (Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education, 2010).
Simply finding enough money to adequately fund California’s schools does not solve the
educational finance crisis; thus, an equally challenging piece to the crisis puzzle is the
way in which the state can structure a school-based finance system to support research
and evidence-based resource allocation strategies.
Recommendations of the Evidence-Based Model
The evidence-based model includes the following recommendations (Odden &
Picus, 2008):
1. Full day kindergarten.
2. Core class sizes of 15 for grades K-3 and class sizes of 25 for all other grades 4-
12. Core is defined as the regular classroom teacher in elementary school and
teachers of mathematics, science, reading/English/writing, history, and world
language in secondary schools. With these ratios, class sizes average about 18 in
the elementary school and 25 in middle and high schools.
3. Specialist teachers to provide instruction in art, music, physical education, career
technical education, and other electives, and in numbers adequate to cover a six
period day in middle schools with teachers teaching for just five periods, and 90
minute block schedules in high schools. This resource also provides all teachers
with time during the day for collaborative planning and to work on the
instructional program.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
66

4. At least one period (usually an hour) of planning and preparation time each day
for all teachers in elementary, middle and high schools.
5. Pupil support staff including guidance counselors (1 full time equivalent (FTE)
position for every 250 students in middle and high schools) and nurses, as well as
additional pupil support to include social workers and family liaison personnel,
the latter provided on the basis of 1 FTE position for every 100 at-risk students.4
6. A full time librarian and principal in every prototypical school, as well as two
secretarial positions in the prototypical elementary (432 students) and middle
school (450 students), and three secretaries in the prototypical high school (600
students).
7. An ambitious set of professional development resources including one
instructional coach for every 200 students (e.g. 3.0 FTE positions in a 600 student
high school), at least ten pupil free days for professional development which
usually means extending the school year for teachers by five additional days, and
$100/pupil for trainers and other expenses related to professional development.
8. Supervisory aides to cover recess, lunch, hall monitoring and bus loading and
unloading.
9. Funds for instructional materials, formative assessments and supplies ($165 per
pupil for elementary and middle schools and $200 per pupil for high schools);
$250 per pupil for technology and equipment; and $250 per pupil for student
activities (sports, clubs, etc.).
10. Funding of $25 per pupil to provide extra strategies for gifted and talented
students.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
67

11. A comprehensive range of “extra help” strategies for students who need
additional instructional assistance and extra time to achieve to rigorous state
proficiency standards including:
a. Resources to provide one-to-one tutoring at the ratio of one FTE teacher tutor
position for every 100 at-risk students.
b. Extended-day resources to provide academic help for two hours of before or
after school programming , at the ratio of one FTE position for every 30 at-
risk students, assuming about 50 percent of at-risk students would participate.
c. Summer school resources to provide up to a six hour a day, and eight to nine
week summer program and academic help for two-thirds of the time, at the
ratio of one FTE position for every 30 at-risk students, assuming just about 50
percent of at-risk students would need such extra help and would attend the
program.
d. One additional FTE teacher position for every 100 English language learning
(ELL) students (the bulk of whom also are at-risk and trigger the first three
extra help resources), primarily to provide instruction in English as a second
language.
e. One teacher FTE and 0.5 aide position for every 150 students to provide
services for high incidence but lower cost students with disabilities (three
teacher and 1.5 aide positions at the prototypical elementary and middle
schools and four teacher and 2 aide positions at the prototypical high schools).
The model also advocates full state funding of the entire costs of the high cost
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
68

special need students (assuming two percent of those with disabilities are in
the “high cost” category).
12. Substitute teacher resources at 10 days for each teacher and instructional
facilitator position.
13. Central office staff covering the superintendent’s office, the business office,
curriculum and pupil support, technology personnel and an operations and
maintenance director configured on a prototypical district.
Table 2.1: Recommendations for Adequate Resources for Prototypical Schools
School Element Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools
School Characteristics
School configuration
K-5 6-8 9-12
Prototypical school size 432 450 600
Class size K-3: 15/4-5: 25 6-8: 25 9-12: 25
Full-day kindergarten Yes NA NA
Number of teacher work
days
200 with 10 day summer
training
200 with 10 day summer
training
200 with 10 day summer
training
% of students with
disabilities
12% 12% 12%
% of students with free or
reduced lunch
50% 50% 50%
% of EL students 10% 10% 10%
Personnel Resources
1. Core teachers 24 18 24
2. Specialist teachers 4.8 3.6 8
3. Instructional
Facilitators/Coaches
2.2 2.25 3
4. Tutors for struggling
students
2.16 2.25 3
5. Teachers for ELs .43 .35 .60
6. Extended Day 1.8 1.875 2.5
7. Summer School 1.8 1.875 2.5
8/9. Students with mild/
severe disabilities
3 3 4
10. Resources for
gifted/talented students
$25 per student $25 per student $25 per student
11. Substitutes 5% of budget 5% of budget 5% of budget
12. Pupil support staff 2.16 3.25 5.4
13. Non-instruct. Aides 2 2 3
14. Librarians 1 1 1 plus library tech
15. Principal 1 1 1
16. Clerical 2 2 4
Pupil Resources
17.Professional
development
See above plus $100 per
pupil
See above plus $100 per
pupil
See above plus $100 per
pupil
18. Technology $250 per pupil $250 per pupil $250 per pupil
19. Instructional materials $140 per pupil $140 per pupil $175 per pupil
20. Student Activities $200 per pupil $200 per pupil $200 per pupil
Source: Odden & Picus (2008)
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
69

Odden & Picus (2008) use the core recommendations as suggested in Table 1 to
“fit” the student numbers and student demographics of each school in a state. Evidently,
some schools will have more students than shown in the school prototypical chart and
some will have less. As a result, schools with more students would have proportionately
more resources and schools with fewer students would receive an adequate level of
resources. Additionally, schools with higher numbers of “at-risk” students would be
eligible for a greater level of resources to accommodate and meet their educational needs.
Strategic Management of Human Capital (SMHC)
Strategic Management of Human Capital in Education (SMHC) offers a
comprehensive and strategic approach to address what has become labeled as “talent and
human capital.” (Odden & Kelly, 2008). It is concerned with the acquisition,
development, performance management and retention of maximum talent in America’s
schools, especially in large, urban school districts. SMHC is grounded in extensive
research and examples of leading edge districts are offered.
Odden and Kelly (2008) depict SMHC as having one ultimate goal: To
dramatically improve student achievement in America by substantially improving
instructional practice, and the effectiveness of teachers and principals, focusing on
students in the country’s largest 100, mostly urban districts. These urban districts contain
large concentrations of students from minority and low-income families and
backgrounds. “Producing large and authentic improvements in student learning in these
districts presents the toughest educational challenges in the country . . . [they] are worthy
of the finest talent and management that can be obtained in America” (Odden and Kelly,
2008, p. 1).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
70

“The concept of the 100 largest districts is used both literally and symbolically –
the 100 largest can all improve – but so too can the next 100 and the next; indeed, all
15,000 districts can and should set their sights higher” (p. 2). Identifying strategies and
practices that can deliver, distribute, and retain top leadership, teaching and management
talent in urban schools and districts is one of the primary objectives of SMHC. Another is
identifying the highest quality human capital or talent. So, talent is needed, recruited, and
retained in the areas of teaching, principalship, and human capital management
leadership.
SMHC case studies of human capital management reform in six urban districts,
three national talent-recruiting organizations, one state, and a cross-case analysis offer
school districts examples of reform models of effective human capital management
strategies across the spectrum of recruiting, retaining, developing and rewarding top
teacher and principal talent. Future analytic materials will address how to measure
teaching practice, the principal as human capital manager at the school site, and other
district and state SMHC reforms. Success stories drawn from case studies in such states
as Massachusetts, Illinois, Minnesota, California, and New York are exemplary models
of organizational best practices.
The Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD) is one that has earned a well-
deserved reputation as a successful urban school district in Southern California. It is
clear that strategic management is at work and can be replicated in surrounding urban
school districts in California. Talent management, development and retention of qualified
teachers and administrators are at the forefront of increasing academic achievement of
students enrolled in the district. The Consortium for Policy Research in Education (2008)
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
71

reports that the LBUSD, however, devotes considerable time, attention, and resources to
providing professional development and support to teachers and administrators who are
new to the district or new to their jobs. Continued support via professional development
for teachers and administrators and coaching for novice teachers provides an air of
continuous improvement throughout the district. Continuous improvement; thus, is
embedded in professional development and are expectations for teacher and administrator
learning linking to improved student learning.
After finding top talent, organizations must be able to manage them in ways that
support the strategic decisions of the organization. In simple terms, human capital is the
people side of education reform. The Consortium for Policy Research in Education
(CPRE) (2009) maintains that the strategic management of human capital is the
systematic process of aligning school district academic goals with school district
organization and practices, from curriculum and assessment to teacher and administrator
recruitment, retention, and compensation. Too often the human capital side of education
reform is overlooked. Thus, recruiting and developing talent, building capacity,
restructuring human resource departments and tying them to school improvement plans is
the path to school reform and closing the achievement gap.
SMHC (2009) co-directors, Allan Odden and Jim Kelly, report that now is the
time to address the “people” issues; unless there are talented teachers in every classroom
and talented principles in every building policy reform will not be realized. Taking
Human Capital Seriously: Talented Teachers in Every Classroom, Talented Principals in
Every School (2009) calls for close cooperation between states and districts along with
determined commitment from all facets of the education community. Six guiding
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
72

principles of strategic management of human capital reflect the emerging understanding
of schools of the 21
st
century. Alignment is the overarching concept that joins the six
principles together. The core focus is to recruit top teacher and principal talent develops
that talent throughout careers to be ever-more effective, and link rewards, career
opportunities and sanctions to effectiveness.
The six principles include: 1) improve performance, close the gap, 2) effective
teachers in every classroom, effective leaders in every school, 3) excellent instruction,
successful, 4) strategic human capital management, system alignments, and continuous
improvement, 5) rewards and consequences, rethinking career progression and pay, and
6) core competencies: explicit, transparent, and accountable. The most noteworthy of the
six principles is the second principle. Without effective teachers in the classroom and
leadership in schools and districts, the other five principles cannot work. As a result, the
report lays out a clear blueprint for educational reform with several recommendations for
the strategic management of human capital in public education.
SMHC addresses how all aspects of the human resource system can be aligned. In order
for top talent to be acquired, a restructuring of the entire human capital system is a
necessary requisite.
Limited Resources & Fiscal Constraints in California
The state of California currently has a multi-billion dollar budget deficit (Ed
Source, 2011). In 2011, Tom Torkalson, Superintendent of Public Instruction, declared a
financial emergency for public schools in the state. “He noted that three years of cuts to
education had resulted in nearly 2 million students—roughly 30% of pupils in
California—attending a school in a district facing ‘serious financial jeopardy’” (Ed
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
73

Source, 2011). In response to California’s fiscal crisis, state policymakers have cut
funding in the past year including cuts to K-12 schools. The results of these deep cuts
have nearly crippled some districts, leaving schools with limited resources to ‘do
business as usual’.
Limited Resources
California districts and schools are expected to do more with less. They face
critical and competing pressures to improve academic achievement while remaining
fiscally solvent in a time of increase budgetary pressures. These challenging conditions
have created gaps between what is being done and what is expected. Local educational
agencies (LEA) have a limited options for “making ends meet”. A constraint exists in
these agencies’ ability to increase revenues and to reduce expenditures. Unlike other
states, California drastically limits the revenue raising and taxing ability of districts. Yet,
state allocations have kept per-pupil spending below the national average. Furthermore,
high labor costs have resulted in staffing levels that are nearly the leanest in the nation;
medical and retiree benefits continue to rise. With personnel representing over 80% of the
average district’s operating costs, the reduction of staff expenditures is almost
inescapable.
More cuts in state funding could have devastating effects on California
classrooms. The state began the 2010-2011 school year with a long-lasting disparity
between revenues and expenditures. Unrealistic assumptions—including, for example,
banking on a large increase in federal funding that has not materialized-have helped
create that ongoing gap (Ed Source, 2011). Thus, the state has several financial
challenges that infringe on public educational funding. Not to mention, the state budget
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
74

experienced the third subsequent year with a substantially reduced funding level for K-12
education. California received $64.4 billion in 2010-2011, a drastic drop from $71.4
billion in 2007-2008 (CDE, 2010). By January 2011, the state was spending $8 billion
more than it had received in 2010-2011 and the projections were expected to increase for
the following year. According to the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO),
per pupil expenditures had already been reduced by 5% between the 2007-2008 school
year and the 2010-2011 school year. The increase in reduction caused California to lag
behind the national expenditure per pupil even more. Before the state’s fiscal crisis in
2007-2008, the state ranked 43
rd
in the nation for per pupil spending (Ed Source, 2011;
National Center for Education Statistics, 2008). Dissimilarly, personnel costs, especially
teacher salaries in California, were among the highest in the nation.
The staff to student ratio in California is ranked at 49
th
in the nation (NCES, 2008;
Ed Source, 2011). According to this ranking and others, California’s modest per-pupil
spending fused with high labor costs have resulted in schools not being able to hire more
personnel (administrators, teachers, and other staff).
In 2010, the state experienced a 20% decline in Proposition 98 funding per pupil
as well as drastic lower state staffing ratios per 1,000 students as compared with the
national average. To be exact, staffing ratios in California were 48.1 per 1,000 whereas
the national average was 64.5 per 1,000 (Ed Source, 2010). In the 2010-2011 school year,
the state’s K-12 public education system was estimated to have revenues totaling
approximately $64.5 billion from federal, sate, and local sources. Of that total,
approximately $56.7 billion was allocated to school districts, county offices of education,
and charter schools. The remaining funds, approximately $7.8 billion, were applied to
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
75

bond repayments for the teacher retirement system, state agencies, and building and
modernizing schools.
California school districts typically spend about three-fourths on instruction and
instruction-related expenditures for all students. Approximately 8% is spent on pupil
services inclusive of health services, guidance and counseling, and transportation. 5% is
pent on general administration or district office and school board operations (Ed Source,
2011)
Currently, the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) recommends fundamental
restructuring of state’s K-12 funding model based on the Governor’s recommendations.
The Governor proposes major changes to the way the state allocates funding to districts.
Furthermore, he proposes that a $4.9 billion increase in Proposition 98 funding, the
equivalence of a 10% increase, to K-12 education occur between the current year and the
budget year. These funding levels assume that California voters approve the Governor’s
November 2012 ballot measure to raise sales tax and income tax rates temporarily, with a
portion of the associated revenue increase benefiting K-12 in addition to community
college education or K-14 education.
Role of federal funding.
Education is primarily a state and local responsibility in the United States. The
federal role in education is limited although its role has grown over the past century. The
Department of Education (2012) states that the mission of the Federal role in education is
to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering
educational excellence and ensuring adequacy. It maintains that the historical
development of the Federal role in education has served as a kind of “emergency
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
76

response system”, a means of filling gaps in State and local support for education when
critical national needs arise.
The Federal monetary contribution to elementary and secondary education is
about 10.8 percent, which includes funds not only from the Department of Education but
also from other Federal agencies. The Department of Health and Human Services’ Head
Start program and the Department of Agriculture’s School Lunch program are two
Federal agencies that take part in Federal funding (US Department of Education, 2012).
One of the most significant developments affecting school districts over the last
couple of years has been the infusion of one-time federal aid (Legislative Analyst’s
Office , 2011). On February 13, 2009, United States Congress passed the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 at the urging of President Obama, who
signed it into law four days later (The Recovery Act, 2009). Four principles guided the
distribution and use of ARRA Funds: 1) spend funds quickly to save and create jobs; 2)
improve student achievement through school improvement and reform; 3) ensure
transparency, reporting and accountability; and, 4) invest one-time ARRA funds
thoughtfully to minimize the “funding cliff”.
The overall goals of the ARRA are to stimulate the economy in the short term and
invest in education and other essential public services to ensure the long-term economic
health of our nation. ARRA was to provide new funding for programs under Title I, Part
A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Title 1). Specifically, the
ARRA was to provide $10 billion in additional fiscal year 2009 Title I, Part A funds to
local education agencies for schools that have high concentrations of students from
families that live in poverty in order to improve teaching and learning for students most
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
77

at risk of failing to meet state academic achievement standards (The Recovery Act,
2009).
The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) (2011) reported that the federal
government provided states with two major sources of one–time aid to mitigate
reductions in school funding. The federal government provided California with a little
over $6 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding (that could
be used in 2008–09 through 2010–11) and $1.2 billion in Federal Education Jobs and
Medicaid Act funding (that could be used in 2010–11 and 2011–12). Both allocations
were intended to allow school districts to retain school personnel, avoid teacher layoffs,
and support school operations that otherwise might be cut.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 represented federal
investment in education, with nearly $100 billion provided to states and school districts
from years 2009 to 2011. Grant recipients reported that approximately 275,000 education
jobs, such as teachers, principals, librarians, and counselors, were saved or created with
this funding during the most recent quarter (US Department of Education, 2010).
As of September 2011, states had utilized all but 4% of funds available for
expenditure. A one-year extension was given to September 2012 for the remaining funds
to utilized (Department of Education, 2011). A report released by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) offers an update on local educational agencies’ uses of
funds intended for education in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Many local educational agencies reported that were able to maintain or even
increase the level of service provided to students with the assistance of ARRA funds. But
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
78

without the continued availability of these funds, states are struggling to meet their
obligations, let alone invest in expanded capacity and innovative reforms.
Role of state funding.
The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, “The powers not delegated
to the States respectively, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people” (US Constitution, 1791). State constitutions, therefore,
assign to each state the specific responsibility and legal authority for public education.
California’s state government controls the system by which public K-12 education
receives funding. The state controls funding for public schools, but the system was
largely created in response to voter initiatives. California’s finance system changed from
local to state control in response to the voter tax initiative Proposition 13, which passed in
1978.
Proposition 13.
On June 6
th
, 1978, nearly two-thirds of California’s voters passed Proposition 13,
reducing property tax rates on businesses, homes, and farms by approximately 57%. The
proposition was passed just after the California Supreme Court decision, Serrano v.
Priest (1976), which required the state to equalize general purpose funding schools. Thus,
property tax increases on any given property were limited to no more than 2% per year as
long as the property was not sold. Proposition 13 allowed home and property owners to
be able to estimate the amount of future property taxes and determine the maximum
amount taxes could increase as long as he or she owned the property (California Tax
Data, 2002).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
79

Proposition 13 incited several changes to the California tax system besides the
one percent rate cap. It rolled back property values for tax purposes to their 1976 level. It
gave state lawmakers responsibility for allocating property tax revenues among local
jurisdiction. It replaced the practice of annually reassigning property at market value with
a system based on coast at acquisition. It required any measure enacted for the purpose of
increasing state revenues to approve by a two-thirds vote of each house of the legislature.
Additionally, Proposition 13 requires taxes raised by local governments for a designated
or special purpose to be approved by two-thirds of the voters (California Tax Credit,
2002). Proposition 13 was successful at stopping rising property taxes in California but it
has had several long-term consequences that have assisted in the development of the
state’s economic crisis.
The impact of Proposition 13 on public schools in California.
California school revenues primarily stem from property tax dollars. According to
the California Budget Project (2011), “immediately prior to the passage of Proposition
13, local revenues provided nearly half (47.1 percent) of the funding for California’s
public schools” . Today, with Proposition 13 in place, California schools are forced to
rely on the state for most of their funding. While the formulas and distributions vary from
year to year, it is estimated that 80 percent of public education money comes from the
state.
The proposition has had a direct effect on reduced education funding. Since 1981-
1982 California has consistently spent less on education than the rest of the US.
According to the US State of the Valley Index (2012), California ranked in the bottom
five states for state spending per student; in the bottom two states in number of teachers
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
80

per student; last in librarians per student; and next to last in counselors per student (2009-
2010). Because of Proposition 13 and a lack of funding, many of California’s largest
school districts have reduced the number of school days in a school year resulting in non-
paid furlough days for teachers across the state.
Categorical funding.
In addition to base revenue limit allocations, districts also receive categorical aid,
in varying amounts (EdSource, 2000). Categorically funded programs are established by
the California legislature to provide state mandated minimum standards to a targeted
group of students who are either disabled, disadvantaged, or have financial need. Thus, it
provides funding to serve students without any cost to the District’s general fund. The
goal of categorical funding is to insure access and maximize the potential for success of
otherwise at risk students.
Some categorical funds are distributed to schools and school districts based on the
number of students eligible for a program or the total number of students (Ed Source,
2012). Others are grant programs, some of which go to local schools automatically and
some for which they must qualify. Some examples of categorically funded programs in
California include: Class size reduction, instructional materials, low SES, EL, migrant
families, and special education (EdSource, 2000).
Federal funds for schools also are provided as categorical dollars. Both the state
and federal governments use these programs to earmark a large portion of school funding
for specific purposes or to serve specific groups of students. Categorical funds represent a
sizable part of the budget for most school districts and can have a major effect on local
expenditure decisions.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
81

Categorical funding is not intended to affect school districts equally. Some
districts get minimal funding and others acquire more than 40% of their revenues from
earmarked funds. California earmarks funds for more than 50 separate categorical
programs (Ed Source, 2012).
Due to California’s state budget crisis, lawmakers have made substantial changes
to state categorical programs since 2009. Now, districts have more flexibility in
determined where scare resources should be allocated and how they spend funds. In
addition to the flexing of categorical programs, California is also allowing local districts
to redirect ending fund balances from approximately 50 programs to pay for any
educational purpose (EdSource, 2010).
California’s Tax Initiative: Refunding Education
In December 2011, Jerry Brown, California’s governor, proposed a tax initiative
to help alleviate California’s educational deficits in public education and social services.
His original proposal would increase the state income tax levied on annual earnings over
$250,000 for five years; increase the state’s sales and use tax by ½ cent for four years;
and, allocate 89% of these temporary tax revenues to K-12 schools, and 11% to
community colleges. The proposed tax initiative has been backed and endorsed by
several organizations such as the California Teachers Association (CTA) and the
California Medical Association.
Currently known as the Millionaires Tax of 2012, the new initiative contains the
following provisions: 1) Of the $9 billion raised in the first year, $8 billion will be
achieved through a progressive income tax increase for individual Californians making
more than $250,000 a year or households making more than $500,000 a year; 2) No one
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
82

making less than $250,000 will see an income tax increase; 3)The wealthiest 2% of
Californians will pay more every year in higher income taxes than the governor’s initial
proposal stipulated (for seven years); 4)The new measure reduces the governor’s
proposed sales tax increase from ½ cent to ¼ cent; 5) 85% of the revenue will be from the
higher bracket income taxes, and only 15% will be from the ¼ cent sales tax.
Compared to the governor’s original proposition this represents a 50% decrease in
the sales tax, an increase in the income tax on incomes of $250,000 or more, and more
money to restore cuts – at least $2 billion more. If the new measure passes in November
2012, it will prevent draconian budget cuts from occurring and send a message to the
residents of California that funding education and services are vital.
Performance Gap Analysis
This research study will utilize a gap analysis to analyze how resource allocations of
sample schools within the Iris Unified School District compares to the level of resources
suggested in the Evidence-based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). Clark and Estes (2002)
assert that performance gaps are attributed to the following three causes: 1) lack of
knowledge or skills; 2) lack of motivation; and, 3) organizational barriers. The purpose of
applying the gap analysis model to this study is to frame Iris Unified School District’s
educational problem in a manner that identifies root causes and provides effective
solutions in order to achieve performance goals. Upon completion of this study’s
analysis, findings will based in the following areas:
• Knowledge and/or skills gaps in student achievement based on the allocation of
site-based resources
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
83

• Motivational gaps in student achievement based on the allocation of site-based
resources
• Organizational barriers (i.e. site-based resource allocations) within IUSD that
prevent some students from meeting proficiency goals
Summary of the Literature
California’s economy is only as strong as the education and skill levels of those
who live and work in the state. The better job our public schools do in educating
California’s students, the stronger our businesses and communities will be. Public
schools are important to everyone both for economic reasons and for important social
reasons. At least 90% of America’s children have one experience in common: public
school.
Chapter Two provided an overview of the literature as it pertains to public school
finance, legislation, and its relationship to student performance. For the purpose of this
study, the literature review focused on school improvement strategies, allocation and use
of the level of resources, California’s limited resources, the role of government, and the
tool to determine where schools in the Iris Unified School District are and where they
want to be.
The Evidence-based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) considers a diverse student
population and provides a comprehensive resource allocation framework for schools and
districts. As the preferred model for this study, it will help analyze and compare how the
selected schools align to the suggested resource allocations as they pertain to student
achievement. The purpose of this study was to identify research-based strategies,
suggested by Odden’s (2009), and compare those strategies with the core
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
84

recommendations in the Evidence-based Model (see for example, Odden, Picus,
Archibald, Goetz, Mangan & Aportela, 2007). Odden’s (2009) Ten Strategies for
Doubling Student Performance provided additional information regarding student
achievement for each selected schools and will be incorporated into the interviews of
each site-based principal.
The concluding section of this chapter identifies a conceptual tool, Clark & Estes’
(2008) Gap Analysis, to identify where problems with knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors cause the gaps between goals and current performance.
Information on the big three causes will be collected by interviewing principals and
district-level administrators, looking at specific study-related documents, and using the
EBM online resource (see Chapter 3). The information gained at this stage will be
utilized to decide whether additional support is needed and to identify the type of support
required to achieve goals.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
85

Chapter Three

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The “American Dream”, a distinguishing ideal of the United States of America, is
the belief that anyone who works hard can achieve happiness and prosperity. For most,
the main avenue to achieving this ideal is through a good education. Realistically, at least
90% of America’s children have one experience in common: public school. How well
students are educated has a direct impact on the quality of the world we will all live in in
the future.
States are facing more pressures to find the funds to teach all students to
proficiency and even higher standards. Our thinking about school funding is continuing
to evolve to match the standards mandate – and educational stakeholders play an
important role in deciding how much is enough and where the money goes (Odden,
2003). The better job our public schools do in educating California’s students, the
stronger our businesses and communities will be.
This chapter describes the design, sample, instrumentation, and data analysis
process of this study. The purpose of this study was to provide new knowledge to
researchers, policymakers and practitioners on how resources are allocated in the Iris
Unified School District (IUSD) that have implications for student achievement, and how
resource patterns at schools compare to the strategies outlined in the Evidence-based
Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). It will provide new knowledge to educational
stakeholders to assist them in adequately meeting the needs of their struggling students
and entire school population.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
86

This study also investigated how sample schools that are making growth in
student achievement are utilizing their resources to support their instructional program.
Using the Odden and Picus’ (2008) Evidence-Based model as a conceptual framework
and Odden’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance, this study
examines the school-level resource allocation strategies used to improve learning for all
students in a high-minority, high-poverty, urban school district that have made significant
progress in closing the achievement gap.
Odden’s (2009) ten research-based strategies are as follows:
1. Understanding the performance problem and challenge
2. Set ambitious goals
3. Change the curriculum program and create a new instructional vision
4. Formative assessments and data-based decision making
5. Ongoing, intensive professional development
6. Using time efficiently and effectively
7. Extending learning time for struggling students
8. Collaborative, professional culture
9. Widespread and distributed instructional leadership
10. Professional and best practices

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
87

Research Questions
The following four research questions address the purpose of this study:
1. What research based human resource allocation strategies improve student
achievement?
2. How are human resources allocated across the Iris Unified School District and its
schools?
3. Is there a gap between current human resource allocation practices and what the
research suggests is most effective?
4. How can human resources be strategically re-allocated to align with strategies that
improve student achievement?
Purposeful Sample and Population
This study used a purposeful sample of seven elementary schools in the Iris
Unified School District. Schools in the sample were selected with similar student
demographic data, AYP percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics,
and API score ranges. Additionally, IUSD was selected based on the large student
population of socioeconomically disadvantaged students, which contributes to the amount
of state and federal funding sources allocated to the district.
As the Evidence-based Model specifies strategies for supporting at-risk students,
this sample includes schools that serve student groups that have historically been at-risk
of not achieving proficiency on state standards and assessments: 1) students who are
English Learners (ELs); 2) students who qualify for Title I services; and, 3) students who
qualify for or receive Free or Reduced meals. To ensure that each school is serving
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
88

students who may need extra support, the following demographic criteria were used to
select the schools that will be invited to participate in the study:
1. Each school serves four hundred fifty to nine hundred students in kindergarten to
sixth grade.
2. Each school has been identified as a Title I school; seventy-five percent of the
student population qualifies or participates in the Free or Reduced meal program.
3. At least thirty percent of each school’s population is identified as English
Learners (ELs).
4. The majority population of students in each school is represented by one of
California’s four ethnic subgroups of significant size: Hispanic/Latino, white,
Asian, and Black/African-American.
5. At least forty percent of the total student enrollment were proficient in English
Language Arts (ELA); at least sixty percent of the total student enrollment were
proficient in math.
Identifying Schools
Sample schools were identified utilizing The Ed-Data: Fiscal, Demographic, and
Performance Data on California’s K-12 Schools website partnered with the California
Department of Education (CDE), EdSource, and the Fiscal Crisis & Management
Assistance Team (FCMAT) listing elementary schools that have similar demographic
data within one Southern California school district. Among the seven schools to
participate in the study, a demographic criteria list (as mentioned in the previous section)
was used in the selection. Schools that met all study criteria are displayed in Table 3.1.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
89

Table 3.1: Sample Schools: Enrollment, Demographic Information, and Percent Proficient

School

Total
Enrollment
Percent
Free/
Reduced
Meals
Largest
Ethnic
Group
Percent
English
Learner

Percent
Proficient:
ELA

Percent
Proficient:
Math
Bird of
Paradise
748 83.8
Hispanic/
Latino
34 52.5 63.1
Calla Lily

839

81.4
Hispanic/
Latino
50.4

51.0

64.6
Holly

571

90.2
Black/AA 32.2

65.7

67.5
Hyacinth

449

90.2
Hispanic/
Latino
46.8

44.1

62.4
Kangaroo
Paw

748

79.8
Hispanic/
Latino
31.8

57.3

67.1
Orchid 740 85.3
Hispanic/
Latino
47.6 53.4 68.3
Petunia 741 92
Hispanic/
Latino
59.2 53.4 74.7
Source: Ed-Data (2012)
The Academic Performance Index (API) is the cornerstone of the state’s academic
accountability requirements; thus, its purpose is to measure the academic performance
and growth of sample schools. The selection process for this study also considered
examining each school’s API using the Ed-Data website. Schoolwide API scores for
elementary schools are inclusive of the several indicators calculated from results of
statewide testing in spring of each school year.
During the selection process, seven schools were identified as having varying API
scores between 750 and 850 (see Table 3.2). API indicators for the sample schools
included in this study are as follows:
1. California Standards Test (CST): English-language arts, mathematics,
history-social science, and science (grades two through six)
2. California Modified Assessment (CMA): English-language arts,
mathematics, and science (grades two through six)
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
90

3. California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA): English-
language arts and mathematics (grades two through six)
Table 3.2: Sample Schools API Scores (2009-2012)
Sample Schools
API
2009-
2010
API
2010-
2011
API
2011-
2012
Bird of Paradise 823 814 800
Calla Lily 769 807 772
Holly 826 838 811
Hyacinth 755 790 765
Kangaroo Paw 802 832 812
Orchid 826 826 823
Petunia 836 837 817
Source: Ed-Data (2012)
State API growth targets are set for each school as a whole and for each
numerically significant student group. In 2010, schools within the IUSD sample were all
above the 800 point target, with the exception of two. In 2011, all seven elementary
schools surpassed the 800 point mark; the statewide API
goal
is
800
for
all
schools

(CDE,
2012).
(See Table 3.3).
For the purpose of this study, the annual growth target, as set by the California
Department of Education (2012), for a school or student group is defined as follows:
• If the school’s or student group’s Base API is between 691 and 795, the
growth target is a gain of five points.
• If the school’s or student group’s Base API is between 796 and 799, the
growth target is the following:
o API of 796 – a gain of four points
o API of 797 – a gain of three points
o API of 798 – a gain of two points
o API of 799 – a gain of one point
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
91

• If the school’s or student group’s Base API is 800 or more, the school
or student group must maintain an API of at least 800.
Table 3.3: Sample Schools – 2011 Growth Academic Performance Index Report
Sample
Schools
2011
Growth
2010 Base
2010-2011
Growth
Target
2010-2011
Growth
Met
Growth
Target
Schoolwide
Met
Growth
All
Subgroups
Bird of
Paradise
814 823 A* -9 Yes No
Calla Lily 807 769 5 38 Yes Yes
Holly 838 826 A* 12 Yes Yes
Hyacinth 790 755 5 35 Yes Yes
Kangaroo
Paw
832 802 A* 30 Yes Yes
Orchid 826 826 A* 0 Yes Yes
Petunia 837 836 A* 1 Yes Yes
Source: California Department of Education (2012) 2010-2011 Growth Target* A: Sample school scored at or above the statewide
performance target of 800 in 2010.

Based on school’s API scores, a Similar Schools Rank (SSR) is generated to
compare its API to the APIs of 100 other schools of the same type that have similar
opportunities and challenges. Sample schools range from a SSR between 9 and 10. In the
year 2011, six of the seven sample schools had a SSR of 10; one ranked as a 9.
Overview of the District
The Iris Unified School District is located in Los Angeles County, California. It
serves approximately 14,200 students, in kindergarten through grade twelve in the cities
of Iris and Luminary. In total, there are eleven elementary schools, two middle schools,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
92

and four high schools. Additionally, there is one preschool center with approximately 300
students and a community adult school that serves over 8,000 students.
The Iris Unified School District (IUSD) serves a diverse population of students in
an urban setting. According to the California Department of Education (CDE) for the
2010-2011 school year the enrollment by ethnicity was as follows:
1. Hispanic/Latino – 8,333 students
2. Black/African-American – 5,613 students
3. White – 66 students
4. Pacific Islander – 55 students
5. Asian – 54 students
6. American Indian – 50 students
Figure 3.1: Iris Unified School District Student Enrollment (2011-2012)

Source: California Department of Education - Educational Demographics Unit (2012)

Iris’ elementary schools are often considered to have defied statistics. Despite the
low average socioeconomic level of student’s district-wide, IUSD elementary schools
have earned national and international recognition for their outstanding academic
performance. Four IUSD schools have earned the title of “California Distinguished
School” and one, Holly Elementary, earned the Blue Ribbon award in 2010.
Enrollment

Hispanic/Latino

Black/AA

White

PaciJic
Islander

Asian

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
93

During the 2011-2012 school year, the Iris Unified School District employed 24
classified, 40 certificated management administrators personnel, 527 teachers, and 581
support staff.
Instrumentation and Data Collection
This study was one of sixteen similar studies conducted through the thematic
dissertation process at the University of Southern California. The seventeen researchers
who are participating in this thematic study will be attending a training session provided
by Dr. Lawrence O. Picus during the summer of 2012. The training will be inclusive of
data collection, data entry, and data analysis protocols utilizing a model developed by Dr.
Picus and David Knight to perform a gap analysis.
` All thematic dissertation group members/researchers will utilize this model,
designed to input personnel resources for each school included in the study sample. This
model will be used to help analyze and compare how the selected schools align to the
suggested resource allocations as they pertain to student achievement in the Evidence-
based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). It will also, enable researchers to conduct a gap-
analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) to measure the gap between the desired state and the
current reality of personnel resource allocations at each school. The process of
identifying gaps includes a deep analysis of the factors that have created the current state
and can be used to ensure that the improvement process does not jump from identification
of problem areas to proposed solutions without understanding the conditions that created
the current state. Thus, the process is designed to analyze:
• The current reality of resource allocation for IUSD compared to
IUSD’s desired allocation
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
94

• IUSD’s current allocation compared to the recommendations of the
EBM
• The researcher’s recommended allocation compared to the EBM
The likelihood that the sample district will have equivalent resource allocation as
suggested in the EBM is low. With these outcome data, the researcher will run
simulations of personnel resource allocations and offer research-based strategies,
recommendations, or alternatives to the current resource allocation of the Iris Unified
School District.
Each researcher is responsible for contacting the necessary school district
personnel and school site principals that were selected to participate in the study. Initial
contact was made with district personnel to gain approval to contact school sites within
each district. Contact with site principals will be made to obtain consent to participate in
the study, notify them of the upcoming process and to schedule an appointment to
conduct an interview(s). Principals will be notified of documents needed prior to the
person-to-person interview (i.e. Single School Plan for Student Achievement, School
Budget, Master Schedule, Staff Roster, District “People’s Book”). These documents will
assist in providing the “big picture” of each sample school.
School site visits will consist of person-to-person interviews with the principal
and any other site personnel that the principal deems appropriate. The interview protocol
(outlined at summer training), aligned with the four research study questions, will be used
to gain insight into how resources are being allocated at the school level along with
finding evidence of Odden & Archibald’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling Student
Performance. During the interview, data will be collected from each principal. An
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
95

interview-guide will be utilized so that the principal of each school site will have the
opportunity to know what will be addressed before the scheduled interview; however, the
interview will be set-up to allow each principal to respond in a conversational way. This
will allow the researcher a glimpse into each principal’s point of view as to the problem
and what it looks like in their school and the district.
In addition to school site visits, interviews with district personnel will ensue. The
researcher will schedule interviews with the Chief Operations Officer, Special
Projects/Categorical Director, and the Budget Analyst of IUSD to address the fiscal
issues of the district as it relates to personnel resource allocation (e.g. staffing, categorical
funding). Finally, all study participants will be asked to complete a survey to gauge their
perception of the allocation of resources within the school and/or district.
Data Analysis
Data will be analyzed immediately following each principal and district
administrator’s interviews and collection of data from each of the seven schools sites
within the Iris Unified School District. All data will be triangulated by analyzing: 1) the
current reality of resource allocation for IUSD compared to IUSD’s desired allocation; 2)
the current allocation of IUSD compared to the recommendations of the EBM; and, 3) the
researcher’s recommended allocation compared to the EBM. After the gap analysis is
performed, the researcher will offer recommendations based on scholarly research that
addresses the root causes of the discovered performance gaps and strategies for
improving student performance through efficient resource allocation.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
96

Summary
Information provided in this chapter described the population and sample, how
schools were identified, instrumentation and data collection tools, and a data analysis
protocol. Results of this research study will be discussed in detail in Chapter Four; final
recommendations will be offered in Chapter Five.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
97

Chapter 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
Utilizing the Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this study is to examine the school level resource allocation in five elementary
schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the state’s goal in
their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s academic
accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student demographic
data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and API score ranges
at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide comprehensive,
systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based on the single
unit of schools (Patton, 2002).
This section will present the findings that were obtained through the case studies
of five elementary schools (Appendices D-H) in Southern California. These case studies
provide cross-case descriptive comparisons that seek to enhance the understanding of the
demographics, student performance results, key elements and themes of the school
improvement process, and how the use of an evidence-based model can guide effective
resource allocation at the school level.
The frameworks used for this study were the Evidence Based-Model (Odden &
Picus, 2008), to identify the resources needed to implement the effective educational
strategies, and Ten Strategies On How to Double Student Performance (Odden &
Archibald, 2009).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
98

The process that involves the identification of gaps between the current state and
the desired state is the beginning for implementation of a school improvement process.
Clark and Estes (2002) assert that the Gap Analysis Model identifies performance gaps
attributed to the following three causes: 1) lack of knowledge or skills; 2) lack of
motivation, and 3) organizational barriers. When the process of identifying these gaps
includes a deep analysis of the factors that have created the current state, improvement
planning is the next step.
For the purpose of this study, the Gap Analysis Model will be used a tool to help
clarify objectives, current realities, and action steps. The state, district, and school goals
are transparent in that the goal is for all students to reach or exceed proficiency in
language arts and mathematics by the 2013-2014 school year. This chapter will look to
the current realities of student performance data and best practices of each school. The
following chapter will provide an analysis of existing gaps between the present state and
the desired state of each school.
The following research questions were used to guide this analysis:
1. What research based human resource allocation strategies improve student
achievement?
2. How are human resources allocated across the Iris Unified School District and
its schools?
3. Is there a gap between current human resource allocation practices and what
the research suggests is most effective?
4. How can human resources be strategically re-allocated to align with strategies
that improve student achievement
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
99

Overview of Schools
The schools serve student groups that have historically been at-risk of not achieving
proficiency on state standards: 1) students who are English Learners (ELs); 2) students
who qualify for Title I services; and, 3) students who qualify for or receive Free or
Reduced meals. To ensure that each school is serving students who may need extra
support, the following demographic criteria were used to select the schools that invited to
participate:
1. Each school serves four hundred fifty to nine hundred students in kindergarten to
sixth grade.
2. Each school has been identified as a Title I school; seventy-five percent of the
student population qualifies or participates in the Free or Reduced meal program.
3. At least thirty percent of each school’s population is identified as English
Learners (ELs).
4. The majority population of students in each school is represented by one of
California’s four ethnic subgroups of significant size: Hispanic/Latino, white,
Asian, and Black/African-American.
5. At least forty percent of the total student enrollment was proficient in English
Language Arts (ELA); at least sixty percent of the total student enrollment was
proficient in math.
All of the schools were located in Los Angeles County, California, a county with
a population of approximately 10 million persons, making it the most populous county in
the United States. Although seven schools were invited to participate in the study, only
five agreed to do so. The five elementary schools are part of one unified school district,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
100

which consists of 17 schools with a total enrollment of approximately 12, 500 students, in
kindergarten through 12
th
grade. The 17 schools include 11 elementary, 2 middle schools,
and 4 high schools.
As illustrated in Table 4.1, Bird of Paradise, Calla Lily, Kangaroo Paw and
Orchid had a significantly higher student population than the district average, and one fell
below. The African-American/Black student population at three schools fell below the
district average of 31 percent. Calla Lily and Orchid had considerably lower African-
American/Black students. These schools both shared a higher population of
Hispanic/Latino students. On average, English learners at all schools within the study
were less than the district average but Calla Lily and Hyacinth had the highest percentage
of English learners. All schools had a higher percentage of students receiving free and
reduced meals than the district average.
Table 4.1. Summary of Case Studies Demographics, 2011-2012

School

Grades
Total
Enrollment

AA
#
%

Hispanic
#
%

ELL
#
%

Free/Reduced
Meals
%
Bird Of
Paradise
K-6 735
237
32%
461
64%
201
27%
662
90%
Calla Lily K-6 766
82
11%
677
88%
319
42%
735
96%
Hyacinth K-6 426
106
25%
315
74%
175
41%
396
93%
Kangaroo
Paw
K-6 712
297
42%
394
55%
191
27%
641
90%
Orchid K-6 730
87
12%
624
85%
280
38%
672
92%

District
Average
K-6 512
160
31%
376
73%
225
44%
451
88%
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

During the initiation year of the study (2010-2011), each school was identified as
a Title I school. Seventy-five percent of the study population qualified or participated in
the Free or Reduced meal program, and at least thirty percent of each school’s population
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
101

was identified as English learners. During the focal year of the study (2011-2012), as
demonstrated in Table 4.1, ninety percent or more of students participated in the Free or
Reduced meal program, an increase of at least fifteen percent. A slight decrease in the
minimum percentage of English-language learners was evident by three percent.
Academic Performance Index
According to The California Department of Education (CDE), California assigns
each school an Academic Performance Index (API) rating from 200 to 1000, with a
statewide API goal of 800 for all schools (Academic Performance Index Reports
Information Guide, 2011-2012). Schools are assigned API growth targets, based on their
yearly API scores. These performance metrics are also available for student subgroups.
Additionally, schools receive rankings, Similar Schools Rankings (SSR), comparing
similar schools and comparing all schools in the state. Schools that do no meet this index
rating are required to demonstrate annual growth of at minimum five index points per
year. As illustrated in Table 4.2, three of five schools met the 800 requirements in the
focal year of the study.
Table 4.2 Summary of Case Studies API Status & Growth

School
2010-2011
API
Score
API
Growth
2011-2012
API
Score
API Growth
Bird Of Paradise 814 -9 800 -14
Calla Lily 807 38 772 -35
Hyacinth 790 35 765 -25
Kangaroo Paw 832 30 812 -20
Orchid 826 0 823 -3
Case Study Average 813.8 18.8 794 -19.8
Case Study Median 814 30 800 -14
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
102

At the initiation of this study, during the 2010-2011 school year, each school
scored a minimum of 790 index points on the Academic Performance Index. Four schools
out of five were over the statewide API goal of 800, while one fell short 10 index points
below 800. According to DataQuest (2012), all schools in the study indicated a negative
API growth. Table 4.2 illustrates that the study average of API growth at the initiation
was 18.8 index points. During the next school year, the API growth of all schools in the
study declined to a negative API growth of 19.8 points. During the focal year of this
study, Bird of Paradise Elementary, Kangaroo Paw Elementary and Orchid Elementary
maintained an API score of 800 or more. The same three schools met their school-wide
API growth targets. None of the schools in the study met the API growth targets for all
significant student groups.
Annual Yearly Progress (AYP)
According to the California Department of Education (2012), AYP is the
statewide accountability system mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,
which requires schools and districts to make Adequate Yearly Progress. Under
California’s criteria for adequate yearly progress, schools and districts are required to
meet or exceed requirements within four specific areas in order to make AYP annually:
1) participation rate; 2) percent proficient – AMOs (annual measurable objectives); 3)
API; and, 4) graduation rate. Elementary schools within the study are exempt from the
last requirement. If a school or district does not meet one or more requirements, it does
not make AYP and may be identified as a Program Improvement (PI) school. As
evidenced in Table 4.3, during the focal year of the study, none of the five schools made
adequate yearly progress; two of five schools within the study were in PI.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
103

Table 4.3: 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress Criteria of Case Study Schools

Met 2012 Criteria for:

Schools All Components ELA Mathematics API PI Status
Bird of
Paradise
No No No Yes Year 1
Calla Lily
No No No Yes Not in PI
Hyacinth
No No No Yes Not in PI
Kangaroo
Paw
No No No Yes Not in PI
Orchid
No Yes No Yes Year 2
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

Schools, districts, and the state must meet percent proficient and participation rate
criteria in each content area, English-language arts and mathematics. Also, each
numerically significant student group must meet requirements in order for the school,
district or state to make AYP. All schools in the study met the participation rate of 95%.
Orchid Elementary School was the only school to meet the percent proficient criteria for
English-language arts. None of the schools met the requirements for mathematics.
Percent-proficient - AMOs: English-language arts.
The standard criteria for the statewide percent proficient standard criteria for
schools with 100 or more valid test scores or for numerically significant student groups
that have 50 or more students with valid scores are minimum percentages of students who
are required to meet or exceed the proficient level on the state assessments used for
annual yearly progress. Figure 4.2 demonstrates the standard criteria for annual AMOs
have increased in the past three years from 67.6 percent (2010) to 78.4 percent (2012).
The AMOs will continue to rise every year so that by 2014, 100 percent of students in all
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
104

schools, districts, and numerically significant student groups must score at the proficient
or above level (California Department of Education, 2012).
Figure 4.2: AMOs: ELA Targets, 2001-2014 – Elementary Schools
Source: Adapted from CDE - Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs), 2001-2014.
At the initiation of the study, at least forty percent of the total student enrollment
scored proficient in English-language arts. As indicated in Table 4.4, the percent
proficient trend shows an increase in students who were proficient in English-language
arts over a three-year period. The range of the increase is .5 to 7.9 percentage points. All
schools in the study demonstrated an increase in the school wide English-language arts
proficiency. There was a total growth of 17 percentage points from the initiation year (40
percent) to the focal year (57 percent).
Table 4.4: 3-year Trend - Annual Measurable Objective (Percent Proficient) – ELA

School
2010
Percent
Proficient
2011
Percent
Proficient
2012
Percent
Proficient
3-Year Change in
Percent
Proficient
Bird Of Paradise 50.2 52.5 50.7 .5
Calla Lily 41.7 51.0 43.5 1.8
Hyacinth 36.3 44.1 44.2 7.9
Kangaroo Paw 48.3 57.3 51.1 2.8
Orchid 52.5 53.4 57.0* 4.5
Case Study Average 37.46 51.66 40.46 3.5
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2010-2012). *Safe Harbor

11.20%

22.30%

33%

44.50%

55.60%

66.70%

77.80%

88.90%

100.00%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Elementary
School

AMO
Goals

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
105

An examination of the data indicated that, three years prior to the initiation year,
Calla Lilly and Orchid met all of the proficient rate criteria for English-language arts.
During the initiation year, Hyacinth and Kangaroo Paw met the proficient rate criteria for
English-language arts; Bird of Paradise, Calla Lilly and Orchid did not. In the focal year
of the study, only one school met all proficient rate criteria. All schools did not meet the
annual measurable objective of 78.4 percent for English-language arts except for Orchid.
Hyacinth and Orchid continued to make increases over the course of three years.
Hyacinth had the most significant gain in language arts as demonstrated by the 7.9
percentage point increase between the 2010 and 2012 school year.
Percent-proficient - AMOs: mathematics.
The goal of NCLB is to have 100 percent of student proficient by 2014. The
standard criteria for annual measurable objectives has increased in the past three years
from 58.0 percent (2010) to 79.0 percent (2012) and will continue to do so in subsequent
years. Figure 4.3 illustrates the percent proficient expectation for elementary students in
the state during the focal year of the study was 79.0 percent. AMO targets are level at two
time intervals between 2002 and 2007 and then increase yearly to 2014. This pattern was
established to reflect the expectation that the strongest academic gains in schools and
districts are likely to occur in later years (CDE, AYP Report, 2012).
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
106

Figure 4.3: AMOs: Math Targets, 2001-2014 – Elementary Schools

Source: Adapted from CDE - Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs), 2001-2014.

Between the years of 2010 and 2012, all schools averaged a 3.6 percentage point
decrease in the number of students scoring proficient and above in mathematics on
statewide assessments. Data regarding student percent proficiency in mathematics over a
period of three years are summarized in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5: 3-year Trend - Annual Measurable Objective (Percent Proficient) – Math

School
2010
Percent
Proficient
2011
Percent
Proficient
2012
Percent
Proficient
3-year Change in
Percent
Proficient
Bird Of Paradise 72.5 63.1 60.8
-11.7
Calla Lily 58.3 64.6 56.7
-1.6
Hyacinth 56.3 62.4 49.8
-6.5
Kangaroo Paw 65.1 67.1 67.2
2.1
Orchid 67.0 68.3 66.4
-.6
Case Study Average 63.8 65.1 60.2
-3.6
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2010-2012).

In general, four schools declined in the percentage of students proficient in
mathematics. Bird of Paradise experienced the greatest decrease in mathematics
performance; Orchid demonstrated the slightest decrease. During the same period, of all
schools within the study, Kangaroo Paw demonstrated a slight increase in overall math
proficiency by 2.1 percentage points.
16.00%

26.50%

37%

47.50%

58.00%

68.50%

79.00%

89.50%

100.00%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Elementary
School

AMO
Goals

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
107

Possible explanations for the reasons some schools demonstrated steady growth in
student achievement and other schools declined in student achievement may be identified
in the next section of this chapter where instructional improvement strategies and school
resource will be discussed.
Discussion of the Findings
This section will provide a discussion of the study findings as they relate to each
of the four research questions. The information found in this section and the five case
studies (Appendices D-H) is a result of individual school interviews conducted with three
principals and two instructional facilitators in the fall of 2012.
Data for Research Question One
Research-based Resource Allocation Strategies That Improve Student Achievement

Odden (2009) proposes that a set of core research-based strategies are necessary
in order to implement any powerful education improvement strategy. The research-based
strategies that improve student achievement have been grouped into the following ten
areas coined by Odden and Archibald (2009): (1) under-standing the performance
problem and challenge, (2) set ambitious goals, (3) change the curriculum program and
create a new instructional vision, (4) formative assessments and data-based decision
making, (5) Ongoing, intensive professional development, (6) using time efficiently and
effectively, (7) extending learning time for struggling students, (8) collaborative,
professional culture, (9) widespread and distributed instructional leadership, and (10)
professional and best practices.
Understanding the Performance Problem and Challenge
The five schools in the study are focused on understanding the challenges and
issues that exist within their schools and district. During the initiation year, four schools
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
108

had an API over 800; one school had an API of 790. During the focal year of the study,
two schools fell below 800 on the Academic Performance Index. Principals and
instructional facilitators at each school site report that a sense of urgency was created
several years prior when the district encumbered financial insolvency (Appendix C).
Such heightened awareness of student performance and their impacts emerged once the
district spun into Program Improvement (PI). Since that time, administrators and staff
analyze student performance data together to become more informed about the academic
effectiveness of their schools and district.
Setting Ambitious Goals
All schools reported setting ambitious goals for the school year. Principals and
staff set goals to increase student performance on state tests, increase the percentage of
students scoring at proficient and advanced in language arts and math, and increase the
number of students that matriculate to the next grade reading on level. Although
Kangaroo Paw made gains in language arts and math, the principal reported that the staff
and instructional facilitator spend considerable time developing a shared vision of state
content standards to master each year in grade-level meetings twice a month. The
researcher found that Bird of Paradise, Calla Lily, Hyacinth and Orchid also meet twice a
month in grade-level meetings to discuss goals, assessment data, and prior analysis of
similar data of formative assessments.
Changing the Curriculum Program and Creating a New Instructional Vision
Odden & Archibald (2009) assert that in order to turn around a school and
increase student performance, a school must throw out the old curriculum and adopt new
textbooks, create new curriculum programs, and start to build, over time, a common
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
109

understanding of effective instruction. School districts that demonstrate a significant
increase in student performance have a systematic view of curriculum and focus intensely
on instructional practices shown to work. Thus, all teachers are required to implement
this curriculum and utilize best practices within their classrooms.
The researcher found that based on the district’s financial climate, schools could
not afford to implement a new curriculum entirely. Instead, most schools adopted support
curriculum, instructional strategies and intervention programs for its underperforming
students or made use of extended learning time. In the area of language arts, all schools
reported using Teach Like A Champion and SLANT, as extra supports to the regular
curriculum and RTI for classroom intervention. Teach Like A Champion is a collection of
instructional techniques gleaned from years of observations of outstanding teachers in
some of the highest-performing urban classrooms in the country. SLANT is a strategy that
reinforces positive behavior by using positive body language. The acronym stands for the
following: S - Sit up straight; L - Lean forward (writing position);A - Activate your
thinking; N - Note important points; and, T - Track the talker, In addition to these
instructional strategies, the principal of Orchid reported that all teachers used Explicit
Direct Instruction (EDI) as a means to effective, meaningful direct teaching. The
instructional facilitator of Bird of Paradise also indicated that teachers utilized Everybody
Writes and No Opt Out as school wide classroom instructional supports. Response to
Intervention (RTI) is the district wide elementary intervention program for struggling
students. All schools in the study reported that students who experience difficulty in the
classroom in core content areas and on state exams, use RTI to prevent academic failure
through frequent progress measurement and differentiated instruction.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
110

Formative Assessments and Data-based Decision Making
The fourth of Odden and Archibald’s (2009) ten strategies to double student
performance is to move beyond a concentration on state tests and use a battery of
assessments. These assessments include formative and diagnostic assessments as they
hone instructional strategies before each curriculum unit begins. Other assessments, such
as end of unit assessments and benchmark assessments, measures what students have
learned and compare the effects teachers have had across classrooms.
All schools reported using formative and benchmark assessments during the
school year but had varying ways of reviewing and analyzing this data with staff. The
instructional facilitator of Bird of Paradise indicated that assessments are used to
determine the level of rigor and relevance on state exams. Thus, teachers select or
develop classroom tests that parallel state exams while keeping the level of assessment
consistent with expectation for performance of all students. Under the guidance of the
principal, the entire staff then reviews benchmark assessment data, prior state assessment
data, as well as chapter and unit tests. Grade level teams then meet to conduct a thorough
analysis of these assessments. All schools within the study indicated that grade-level
teams met twice a month. Additionally, all schools indicated that data analysis resulted in
identifying at-risk students and the development of academic intervention plans for
struggling or underperforming students.
The instructional facilitator of Calla Lily disclosed the ways in which the staff
utilizes assessment data and make decisions based on that data. Under the guidance of the
principal and support of the instructional facilitator, the staff reviews ongoing benchmark
assessments in core areas such as language arts and math and annual measurable
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
111

objectives. This is done by way of weekly and monthly monitoring in professional
learning communities and grade-level teams. The data are used to review for increases in
academic growth or required RTI to assist struggling students. Teachers are held
accountable for keeping academic logs and informing parents of all interventions offered
to avoid student academic failure and possible retention.
The principal of Hyacinth indicated that his staff utilized data in similar ways. His
staff reviewed benchmark data, assessments for the K-5 and grade 6 reading series, and
identified areas of need and strengths to be reinforced throughout the school year.
Mention of the non-stable surrounding community reflected a challenge to the principal
in the staff’s analysis of formative assessments during the summer and at the beginning
of the school year. The researcher found that due to a high transient population and
incoming charter schools near the area, the school had the lowest student population in
the study.
Kangaroo Paw presents data in somewhat similar ways to Bird of Paradise, Calla
Lily and Hyacinth. Yet, the principal presents assessment data at the beginning of the
year and models the ways in which to analyze those data. Teachers are provided with
grade-level data and are referred to grade-level teams to further analyze and set yearly
goals. The researcher found that the principal considers data analysis an on-going process
for the staff and grade-level teams in which unit assessments and benchmark assessments
inform and drive instruction. In addition, the principal mentioned that data analysis was
necessary for teachers to see gaps in learning and for teachers to reflect on their own
practice.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
112

The principal of Orchid revealed that his staff reviews benchmark assessments in
much of the same way as the other schools in the study, in grade-level teams. Thus, his
teachers take analysis of data a step further by bringing that analysis to the classroom.
Hence, teachers discuss data with students with a thorough review of correct and
incorrect answers. The principal indicated that this type of assessment-related checks and
balances allows students time to look closely at questions and discern what led the
student to the wrong answer and understand why they student missed the question.
Ongoing, Intensive Professional Development
Implementing an intensive and ongoing professional development (PD) program
is an integral part of doubling student performance. Odden and Archibald (2009)
maintain that the best districts and schools form collaborative teacher teams, commonly
known as professional learning communities. These teams meet often, utilize student data
effectively, and work with school-based coaches to improve curriculum and instruction.
Likewise, schools also include intensive summer institutes in the professional
development plans to allow teachers opportunities to ascertain new knowledge.
All principals and instructional facilitators indicated that professional
development was underfunded in Iris. All individuals indicated that weekly, hour-long
staff meetings were utilized for professional development instead of the professional
development days of yesteryear. Common themes of professional development included:
(1) student engagement, (2) character building and education, (3) Marzano strategies, (4)
classroom management and discipline, (5) English language learners, and (6)
instructional strategies.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
113

Using Time Efficiently and Effectively
Time is an issue that makes it challenging for districts and schools to implement
professional development characterized by what the literature identifies as effective. In
the Iris Unified School district, teacher contracts dictate the amount of time that teachers
are available for professional development as well the length of the school day. Most
schools use creative ways to work within the confines of the bargaining agreement
without adding time to the school day.
All schools within the study indicated that they used weekly staff meetings for
professional development rather than time for ongoing announcements and other school
business. Principals used email, online bulletins, and memorandums to communicate the
information that used to take up the majority of the staff meetings. All schools indicated
that grade-level teams met bi-monthly to focus on improving instruction. The other two
weeks of the month were dedicated to meetings that focused on building the capacity of
the staff. Typically, the principal led the staff meetings and the Program and Instructional
Facilitator provided information and data to guide professional development rooted in
best practices and research.
Extending Learning Time for Struggling Students
Kati Haycock of The Education Trust (2001) identified that what works in
education to ensure all students achieve and the achievement gap is closed as: 1) clear
and rigorous standards, 2) challenging curriculum, 3) extra help, especially time, for
those students who are behind in foundational skills, and 4) excellent teachers. The
benefits of extending learning time and the gains in student achievement are found in
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
114

extending instructional time and providing intensive, engaging and challenging learning
opportunities geared to high standards.
Extending learning time encompasses several strategies that extend the
instructional time for students struggling to master content standards in language arts and
mathematics. At the primary level, some strategies include: tutoring, extended day and
summer school extra-help programs.
Due to budget limitations, summer school is not offered at the elementary school
level in Iris at all schools. Schools outside of the study, but within the district, held
summer school during the focal year. All schools within the study reported that struggling
students are offered ongoing tutoring and extended day opportunities from outside
vendors.
The district adopted Response to Intervention (RTI) as the school-based
intervention for students not achieving grade-level standards. RTI is a multi-level
prevention system, which includes three levels of prevention: (1) high quality core
instruction, (2) evidence-based intervention of moderate intensity, and (3) individualized
intervention. Figure 4.4 shows the essential components of RTI.
Figure 4.4 Response to Intervention Essential Components

Source: National Center on Response to Intervention (2012)
All principals and instructional facilitators indicated that underperforming
students were identified by individual teachers in the classroom and by data teams in
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
115

grade-level team meetings. Thus, RTI has a universal screening component that seeks to
identify or predict students who also may be at risk for poor learning outcomes. The
universal screening exams are short followed by short-term progress monitoring to
corroborate students’ risk status. Progress monitoring is used to assess students’ academic
performance, to quantify a student rate of responsiveness to instruction, and to evaluate
the effectiveness of instruction.
Principals and instructional facilitators mentioned that RTI typically happens in
small groups in the classroom. At Hyacinth, peer tutors from the local high school assist
in the classroom while the teacher works with a small group of RTI students daily. At the
other school sites, teachers strategically work with students in small groups throughout
the school day.
Data analysis and the decision-making process occur at all levels of intervention
implementation and all levels of instruction. Individual teachers and grade-level teams
use screening and progress monitoring data to make decisions about instruction,
movement within the intervention system, and identification of students who may need
special services or have disabilities.
Rigorous implementation of RTI includes a combination of high quality,
culturally and linguistically responsive instruction, assessment, and evidence-based
intervention. RTI implementation contributes to provide students with the best
opportunities to succeed in school, and assist with the identification of disabilities.
Although RTI is the district-mandated intervention for the elementary level, other
intervention programs and practices are in-place to assist struggling students in core
subjects. The instructional facilitator of Calla Lily indicated that the goal of intervention
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
116

for struggling students is to close the gaps between low proficiency sores on state exams
and capture more student to move them from Basic to Proficient and Proficient to
Advanced annually. At Calla Lily, several intervention programs exist along with RTI.
Tutoring at lunch and afterschool options exist. Classroom teachers provide lunchtime
tutoring and afterschool tutoring is offered through The After School Education and
Safety (ASES) Program, the result of the 2002 voter-approved initiative, Proposition 49.
ASES is aligned with content of regular school day and other extended learning
opportunities and consists of an educational and literacy component and an enrichment
component.
The principals of Hyacinth and Kangaroo Paw noted that some students are
referred to the Student Study Team (SST) for strategies to assist in academic or
behavioral needs. Likewise, the instructional facilitator of Bird of Paradise mentioned
that the Imagine Learning (core instructional language arts program) computer-based
program was another type of classroom intervention available to struggling students. The
principal of Orchid indicated that teachers provide tutoring in the morning, at lunch, and
afterschool without pay. In addition, Special Day Class (SDC) and grade 2 classrooms
provide Touch Math as mathematics interventions in the classroom.
Collaborative & Professional Culture
Structuring collaborative cultures is an integral part of student success. Principals,
administrators, and instructional leaders (previously known as department chairs) can
create structures that lead to a positive school culture of teamwork. They can also
facilitate the operations of professional learning communities (PLCs) and the
collaborative work of grade-level teams.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
117

A school wide leadership team is composed of the instructional leaders of all
content areas, the Program and Instructional Facilitator and the Principal. The role of the
leadership team in Iris is to review and analyze school wide achievement data, curricular
standards and alignment, and the progress of all students, and classroom walk-throughs.
Essential elements of leadership teams in Iris include goal setting, resource management,
and shared leadership. The principal and leadership collaborate to establish and
communicate instructional goals for school success. The leadership team allocates and
manages resources to support the school’s instructional program. The school staff share
leadership responsibilities and participate in decision-making that advocates the school’s
mission.
Teachers and instructional leaders share leadership responsibilities via
participation in grade-level teams and professional learning communities in the
elementary level in Iris. Grade-level teams focus on formative student assessment data
and the analysis of that data. Review of this assessment data seeks to inform instruction
and teachers of learning gaps within each grade level. The principals of Hyacinth,
Kangaroo Paw and Orchid, and the instructional facilitators of Bird of Paradise and Calla
Lily indicated that grade-level teams meet twice a month during afterschool staff
meetings.
In addition to creating collaborative grade-level teams, another key leadership
role is to create a school schedule that ensures that teachers in each team have some free
time during each week so that the team can meet during the regular school day to plan
and prepare (Odden & Archibald, 2009). Scheduling common planning and preparation
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
118

time for elementary teachers can become complicated. Elementary teachers in Iris do not
have planning periods, unlike secondary teachers.
The principals of Hyacinth and Orchid reported that there are times when teachers
do have free time to plan individually or collaborate with grade level teams. The principal
of Hyacinth indicated that discipline assemblies periodically “free up” instructional time
for teachers. The researcher found that one discipline assembly every other month for
every grade level gives teachers one hour during the instructional day to work in
classrooms or meet with other teachers. One grade level is addressed per day so grade-
level teams have time to collaborate on those days. The principal of Orchid reported that
although the school does not bank time, time in the computer lab or library provides
teachers with at least thirty minutes of non-instructional time per day to lesson plan.
Collaboration becomes more of a challenge due to the maximum number of students
allowed in the library or computer lab at one time.
Instructional Leadership
Strong instructional leadership helps to engage teachers in collaborative decision-
making activities. Chenoweth (2007) and Odden & Archibald (2009), maintain that what
is clear from the districts and schools that have doubled performance is that leadership
emerges at all levels in the system, and it is the combined effect of this distributed
leadership that helps improve instructional practice that produced the ambitiously high
student performance results. Often, at the school level, principals are usually unable to
provide all the instructional leadership needed to create change, implement a professional
development strategy, coach classroom teachers, and work with teachers on the analysis
of formative assessment data.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
119

In Iris, over the course of several years, teachers have been promoted into roles of
instructional leader (department chair), instructional coach – now Program and
Instructional Facilitator, or literacy or math coach to increase and intensify the
instructional leadership that was provided at the school. District and school leaders are
continuously working to create an environment of shared decision-making at the school
level.
The role of the instructional coach in Iris has changed drastically over time. In the
past few years, two different positions have been collapsed into one. The instructional
coach position encompasses the following: (1) instructional coach, and (2) program and
testing coordinator. This reallocation of human resources has added more paperwork and
assessment responsibilities to the instructional coach position and more time in
classrooms for the program & testing coordinator.
Odden & Archibald (2009) suggest that their findings in schools that have
doubled student performance reinforce the notion that principals in good schools are
instructional leaders; it should be noted that the principal does not always have to be the
person doing the instructional leadership activities. All principals in the study believe that
teacher capacity is a fundamental piece to creating an environment in which collaboration
and discourse are encouraged and supported. Teachers are encouraged to take on
leadership positions, which provide them with possible career advancement. It also
ensures that teachers are involved in leading the curriculum and instructional changes to
increase student learning and achievement.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
120

Professional & Best Practices
Seeking out best practices is the last of Odden & Archibald’s (2009) strategies
deployed by districts and schools that produce significant improvements in student
learning in professional organizations. Best practices in most professional learning
communities embrace practices that include teacher-teacher observations, instructional
coaching and collaborative groups that analyze assessment and performance data.
Schools that have significantly improved student performance delved into several
strategies while seeking out best practices. Some schools visited various design fairs
while others attended educational conferences or visited successful school systems. Some
schools even uncovered best practices within their own school districts. The goal of
seeking out best practices by districts and schools is to get all teachers to understand best
instructional practices and utilize them in the classroom.
In Iris, best practice seeking behaviors have become a part of school structures to
promote the success of professional learning communities. The district employs the
strategies of Robert Marzano, an educational consultant and expert, to help frame and
implement strategies in Marzano’s Nine Instructional Strategies for Effective Teaching
and Learning. Principals also indicated that working in professional isolation is not
effective. The principal of Kangaroo Paw mentioned that research from professional
journals and EL strategies are posted on the school’s website weekly for teachers and
parents. Posting is done on the school website by the principal and instructional
facilitator.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
121

Data for Research Question Two and Three
Resource Allocation & Gaps Between What Research Suggest Is Effective
As previously discussed in the review of the literature, an evidence-based model
approach seeks to identify a set of effective educational procedures based on successful
research strategies in order to deliver an adequate and comprehensible instructional
program for all students at the school site level (Odden & Picus, 2008). The Evidence-
based model (EBM), developed by Odden & Picus (2008), is a framework that can be
used to identify effective educational strategies in schools. The model has two steps: a
review of evidence from research and best practice on what programs work in education;
and, a study of schools and districts that have dramatically increased the level of student
performance over a three to seven year time period. A review of the evidence in this
study uncovered individual strategies that have been successful as well as gaps that
persist.
Clark and Estes (2002) indicate that a gap analysis is a tool for improving the
performance of an organization (e.g. school). Its purpose is to find the gaps between a
current state and a desired state. By understanding what these gaps are, it is possible to
make changes that will move the academic achievement of students at elementary schools
within IUSD toward their desired state, most of all, high academic achievement and total
student proficiency in language arts and mathematics. This chapter presents the findings
of the current state of key performance indicators such as resource allocation as related to
the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) and student performance results as
related to the Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance (Odden, 2009). The next
chapter seeks to measure the actual gap between the current state and the desired state by
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
122

calculating the difference between the key performance indicators of each school’s
current state versus the key performance indicators of each school’s desired state.
EBM: School Characteristics
A study of five elementary schools in the Iris Unified School District offers
examples of what can be accomplished when schools and the central office work together
and increase student performance on state assessments. The data in Table 4.6 indicates
the characteristics of each school within the study and the averages.
Table 4.6 Case Study Characteristics & Average Characteristics
School
Element

Bird of
Paradise

Calla
Lily

Hyacinth
Kangaroo
Paw
Orchid

Average

School
configuration
& size
K-6: 735 K-6: 766 K-6: 426 K-6: 712 K-6: 730 K-6: 656
Class size
K-3: 23
4-6: 27

K-3: 22
4-6: 30

K-3: 21
4-6: 26

K-3: 22
4-6: 32

K-3: 21
4-6: 30

K-3: 22
4-6: 29
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day Full-day Full-day Full-day
Instructional
Days
180, incl. 1
PD day
180, incl. 1
PD day
180, incl. 1
PD day
180, incl. 1
PD day
180, incl. 1
PD day
180, incl.
1 PD day
Students
with
disabilities
.02% .03% .03% .02% .02% .02%
% Poverty
90% 96% 93% 90% 92% 92%
% ELL 27% 42% 41% 27% 38% 35%
Source: California Department of Education Educational Demographics Unit - DataQuest – 2011-2012

As demonstrated in Table 4.6, on average, the schools used for this study were
significantly larger than the prototypical elementary school recommended by the EBM
with 432 students by more than 200 students. Hyacinth was the only school that had a
total student population comparable to that of the EBM. All schools offered full-day
Kindergarten classes and class sizes ranged from 21-32 students. The average class size
in kindergarten through third grade classes and fourth through sixth grade classes was
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
123

also slightly larger than that of elementary schools indicated in the EBM. The length of
the school year for schools in the study was shorter by 11 days. One prominent
characteristic was the percentage of students with disabilities. The average in the study
(.02%) was significantly less than the percentage (13.7%) allotted in the prototypical
school. On the contrary, the percentages of students in poverty as determined by students
qualifying for the Free or reduced meal program and English language learners were
drastically higher in schools within the study compared to those in the EBM.
EBM: Personnel Resources
The Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) includes the following
resources in prototypical schools with an enrollment of 432 for the elementary level:
1. Core class sizes of 15 for grades K-3 and class sizes of 25 for 4-6. Core
teachers in elementary school are those who teach a regular grade or
multi-age class in the areas of language arts, mathematics, science and
history.
2. Specialist teachers provide classroom instruction in music, physical
education, art, etc. This resource provides all teachers with time during the
day for collaborative planning and to work on the instructional program.
3. Instructional facilitators or instructional coaches provide an ambitious set
of professional development resources. One instructional coach for every
200 students.
4. Resources to provide one-to-one tutoring at the ratio of one FTE teacher
tutor position for every 100 at-risk students.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
124

5. One additional FTE teacher position for every 100 English language
learner (ELL) students.
6. Extended day resources to provide academic assistance for up to two
hours, before or after school, at the ration of one FT position for every 30
at-risk students.
7. Summer school would be resourced at the ratio of one FTE position for
every 30 at-risk students.
8. Three teacher positions for students with mild disabilities, with an
additional 0.5 aide per full-time special education staff member.
9. The EBM recommends full state funding of costs for special needs
students with severe disabilities.
10. $25 per pupil to provide extra strategies for gifted and talented students.
11. Substitute teacher resources at 10 days for each teacher and instructional
facilitator position.
12. Pupil support staff at one FTE for every 100 at-risk students.
13. Non-instructional aides or supervisory aides to cover recess, lunch
monitoring and bus loading and unloading.
14. One librarian or library media technical person.
15. One full time principal.
16. Two secretarial positions in the prototypical elementary school.
As evidenced in Table 4.6, all schools except for one have significantly higher student
populations that what is suggested by the EBM. Table 4.7 presents the actual personnel
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
125

resources at each study school (e.g. BOP) and the resources generated by the EBM based
on each school’s enrollment (e.g. BOPEBM).
Table 4.7 Resource Allocation at Study Schools vs. EBM Resource Allocation
School
Element
BOP
BOP
EBM

CL

CL
EBM
H
H
EBM
KP
KP
EBM
O
O
EBM
1. Core
teachers
22 41 27 42 16 24 25 40 24 41
2.
Specialist
teachers
0 8.2 0 8.4 0 4.8 0 8 0 8.2
3. Instr.
facilitator
1 3.75 1 3.9 1 2.2 1 3.6 1 3.7
4. Tutors:
struggling
students
2 6.6 7 7.4
*Peer
Tutors
4 6 6.4

0

6.7
5. Tchrs:
EL
students
*All
tchrs
2
*All
tchrs
3
*All
tchrs
1.7
*All
tchrs
1.9
*All
tchrs
2.8
6.
Extended
day
0 2.2 0 2.1 0 1.29 0 2.16 0 2.2
7. Summer
School
2 2.2 0 2.1 0 1.29 0 2.16 0 2.2
8. Mild
disabilities
9. Severe
disabilities
2

0
5

0
3

0
5.1

0
2

0
3

0
2

0
4.8

0
2

0
4.9

0
10. Gifted
students
$10
per
$25
per
$10
per
$25
per
$10
per
$25
per
$10
per
$25
per
$10
per
$25
per
11. Sub.
10
days
per
FTE
Same
10
days
per
FTE
Same
10 days
per
FTE
Same
10 days
per
FTE
Same
10 days
per
FTE
Same
12. Pupil
support
staff
5 6.6 0 7.4 3 4 3 6.4 0 6.7
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008). Copyright 2008 by McGraw-Hill.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
126

Table 4.7a Resource Allocation at Study Schools vs. EBM Resource Allocation
School
Element
BOP
BOP
EBM

CL

CL
EBM
H
H
EBM
KP
KP
EBM
O
O
EBM
13. Non-
instr.
Aide
1 3.4 2 3.1 2 2 1 3.3 1 3.4
14.
Librarian
1 1.7 1 1.6 0 1 1 1.6 1 1.7
15.
Principal
1 1.7 1 1.6 1 1 1 1.6 1 1.7
16.
Secretary
2 3.4 1 3.1 2 2 1 3.3 2 3.4
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008). Copyright 2008 by McGraw-Hill.

The comparison between the resources recommended by the Evidence-based
model and the actual resource use, given the higher student population at all but one
school, indicates that at the majority of schools in the study retain fewer resources than
recommended by the EBM. Hyacinth is the only school with a similar number of
suggested students although the school carries grade 6. The resource strategies as
recommended by the Evidence-based model were divided into the following categories
for the purpose of this study: (1) core teachers, (2) specialist teachers and preparation
time/collaborative professional development, (2) instructional facilitators, (3) extra help
strategies, (4) students with special needs, (5) support staff, and (6) school administration.
Core Teachers
Table 4.7 shows that the number of core teachers varied considerably in study
schools, from 16 to 27. This variation is in part due to range of total student population or
class configuration in relation to classrooms serving students with special needs in each
of the five elementary schools. Hyacinth had the least number of core teachers based on a
total enrollment of 426. Although Bird of Paradise had the highest total enrollment, Calla
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
127

Lily carried more core teachers as a result of a greater percentage of special education
and EL learner students. In relation to the recommendations of the EBM (as shown in
Table 4.7), all study schools were significantly understaffed, except for Hyacinth.
Specialist Teachers and Planning and Preparation Time/
Collaborative Professional Development

Schools need to provide art, music, vocational and physical education for its
students. Teachers also need time during the instructional day for planning and
collaborative professional development. The key focus on professional development is
for better instruction in the core subjects of language arts and reading, mathematics,
history and science. Odden & Archibald (2001) advocate for providing professional
development by using a significant portion of planning and preparation time within the
normal school day. The Evidence-based model recommends an additional 20 percent
allocation of teachers to provide specialist content classes. All schools within the study
were deficient in this area. Table 4.7 indicates the number of specialist teachers for each
school site. Yet, the researcher found in interviews with principals and instructional
facilitators that some teachers infuse instruction outside of (e.g. art, music) but relative to
core subjects within the instructional day.
The evidence-based model requires one specialist for every five core teachers to
provide adequate planning time for classroom teachers. However, with a lack of specialist
teachers to provide coverage for all teachers to have a daily planning and preparation
period, as discussed previously, the reallocation of time within the instructional day has
proven necessitous. As mentioned previously, several principals indicated that
disciplinary assemblies, classroom computer time or library time was imbedded within
the school day to potentially allow schools to provide teachers with up to 30 to 60
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
128

minutes of planning time. The days and times varied per school, thus requiring smart
scheduling of teachers during the regular school day and week.
Instructional Facilitators
Most comprehensive school designs, and the Evidence-Based adequacy studies
conducted by consultants in Kentucky (Odden, Fermanich & Picus, 2003) and Arkansas
(Odden, Picus & Fermanich, 2003), call for school-based instructional facilitators.
Facilitators are integral to the success of the school and help teachers incorporate the
professional and best practices into their instructional repertoire. These individuals
coordinate the instructional program and provide essential coaching and mentoring that
the professional development literature shows is so critically necessary for teachers to
change and improve their instructional practice (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman &
Yoon, 2001). Most often, facilitators spend the majority of their time in classrooms,
modeling lessons, giving feedback to teachers, and helping improve the instructional
program.
In Iris, the instructional facilitator at the elementary level is referred to as the
Program & Instructional Facilitator (PIF). Throughout the district, there is only one PIF
per school site. In recent years, the role of the Literacy Coach and Math Coach has been
removed eliminated at the primary level. Based on the model, the facilitator’s role is
embedded in an ambitious set of professional development resources. As identified in
Table 4.7, schools within the study were considerably deficient in this area.
Extra Help Strategies
Every district and school should have a strong and effective strategy for
struggling students. Typically, students who need the greatest support are those
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
129

struggling to learn English, those with learning and other mild disabilities, and those from
lower income backgrounds. Wasik & Slavin (1993) argue that the most powerful and
effective strategy is individual one-to-one tutoring provided by licensed teachers. A
comprehensive range of extra help strategies for students who need additional
instructional assistance as well as extra time to achieve state proficiency standards
includes providing struggling/at-risk and EL students with tutors, extended day resources,
summer school, and additional teachers for special needs students.
Support for struggling students varies in Iris. District wide intervention at the
primary level consists of the Response to Intervention (RTI) program. All schools
incorporate components of the Response to Intervention (RTI) model to provide students
with extra help during the school day. The RTI model is a system of leveled intervention
that increase in intensity based the needs of students. Teachers at Bird of Paradise, Calla
Lily, Hyacinth, Kangaroo Paw and Orchid provide extra support to struggling within the
classroom mostly via small group instruction, followed by individualized instruction.
Orchid indicated that there were no paid tutors available for struggling students
yet some teachers provided tutoring before school, during lunch or afterschool. The
principal mentioned that student grouping is a strategy that has proven valuable and
worthwhile. On site, weekly test preparation proved to be an effective strategy year after
year with a specific grade level. In keeping with tradition, every Wednesdays, 3
rd
grade
student groups review test-released questions for state assessments in the cafeteria for an
hour.
Hyacinth uses cross-age tutors provided by the high performing high school daily.
The academic tutoring program pairs upper-level high school students with teachers who
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
130

request assistance, typically for struggling students. Teachers then provide cross-age
tutors with their assignments for the day or week, depending on student’s academic
needs.
Iris, considered a high-poverty, inner-city school district, maintains a significant
English learner population within its schools. As a result, the district does not hire EL
specialist or specific EL teachers to teach its ELL students. All teachers within the state
of California must comply with NCLB teacher requirements or a Certificate of
Compliance. The federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 requires teachers in
K-12 schools to meet the definition of Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) through three
criteria: 1) minimum of a bachelor's degree, 2) full state teacher certification, and 3)
demonstrated subject matter knowledge in each core academic subject assigned to teach,
including in Bilingual, English Language Learner, and Special Education
classrooms. The English Learner (EL) Authorization and Cross-cultural, Language, and
Academic Development (CLAD) Certificate authorize instruction to English learners. In
Iris, all elementary teachers within the study schools are expected to provide at least 30
minutes of instruction for English Language Development (ELD) daily. Principals and
instructional facilitators indicated that this does occur within classrooms at their
respective sites.
Extended day and summer school resources continue to dwindle in Iris. Due to the
district’s fiscal insolvency, these interventions have become scarce. Elementary schools
no longer offer teacher’s extra duty pay for afterschool tutoring or summer school.
Though, the district has contracted with the not-for-profit program LEAP, to provide
additional support for students who are struggling to meet state standards and proficiency
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
131

on state exams. LEAP, an acronym for Learning Enrichment After-school Program, is in
nine school campuses within the Iris Unified School District. The program is offered 5
days a week for 2.5 to 3 hours after school hours in neighborhoods vulnerable to after
school gang activity such as Bird of Paradise, Hyacinth, Kangaroo Paw, and Orchid. The
purpose of the program is to provide assistance to students with below average test
scores. The program provides a nutritious snack, homework help and back-to-basics
tutoring. Calla Lilly reported that Title III is available for struggling EL learners and the
After School Education and Safety (ASES) is available afterschool.
Students with Special Needs
The allocation for students with mild disabilities in the prototypical elementary
school is the addition of three teaching positions. With the increase in the number and
percentage of “learning disabled” students, over labeling of poor and minority students
into special education, and underfunding of the costs of severely disabled students,
funding programs for special needs students proves a challenge for many schools and
districts in California. The state currently uses a census basis (e.g. AB 602 formula) to
utilize federal funding for disabled students. As the basic principle underlying the
allocation of federal special education funds, it is not based on a measure of an individual
district’s estimated need for special education services or the amount of services it is
provided. Rather, it is based on a Special Education Local Education Plan’s total average
daily attendance (ADA), with the remainder distributed based on specific students and
circumstances. On average, all schools in the study provide fewer special education
teachers than what the EBM recommends for each school.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
132

Gifted and talented students are students who perform above state proficiency
standards. Access to specialized services for gifted and talented learners in the
elementary years is especially important for increased achievement among vulnerable
students. The prototypical model suggests that gifted and talented students be provided
with $25 for extra strategies to ensure success. Data indicated that every school site is
underfunded in the area of gifted and talented students. Iris’ expenditure per student is
forty percent less than the suggested amount.
Support Staff
Pupil support staff includes counselors, nurses, psychologists, and other direct
service providers. Pupil support staff varied in the five schools within the study. Bird of
Paradise had the highest number of pupil support staff, while Calla Lily and Orchid
reported having no pupil support staff. All schools were resourced below the
recommendations of the EBM with a deficiency range of 1 to 7.4.
The EBM recommended two non-instructional or supervisory aides to cover
recess, lunch, hall monitoring and bus loading and unloading. Hyacinth was the only
school in line with this recommendation. However, Bird of Paradise, Calla Lily,
Kangaroo Paw and Orchid had only one non-instructional aide on campus and were
resourced far below what the model suggested.
According to California regulations, every school must have a library. At all
sites, these individuals provide instructional support for much of the day in the areas of
literacy, research, and technology. All schools except for Hyacinth had at least one
librarian or library media technical person. However, based on the allocation of resources
according to the EBM, the average range of deficiency was .7 to 1.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
133

Based on the Evidence-based model, the recommended allocation that each
school receives is an amount of money equal to 10 days for each regular classroom and
specialist teacher. Substitute teacher resources means that the district needs a pot of
money approximately equal to ten substitute days per year for all teachers, in order to
cover classrooms when teachers are absent from the classroom. The researcher found that
substitute teacher resources are the same in Iris as the prototypical elementary school in
the EBM.
School Administration
For the purpose of this study, school administration encompasses the principal
(#15) and school site secretary (#16) position as indicated in Table 4.7. All schools in the
study had one full time principal. On average, all schools were deficient in both areas
except for Hyacinth. Based on the total student population at all schools except for
Hyacinth, the administration position required an extra principal at 60 percent to 70
percent. The actual resource allocation of study schools was deficient at a FTE range of
1.4 to 2.3.
Data for Research Question Four
How Human Resources Can Be Strategically Reallocated
Principals and instructional facilitators at all five elementary schools that
participated in this study observe that the availability of resources plays a role in the
development and implementation of the instructional improvement plan at the site. All
individuals offer suggestions for strategic reallocation of resources within the district and
their school. Additionally, feedback addressing additional resources necessitous to
providing an instructional program that effectively supports ongoing performance
improvements is provided.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
134

Five resource themes emerged from discussions with all principals and
instructional facilitators: (1) time for collaboration and professional development, (2)
support personnel, (3) shared resources for students, (4) class size reduction/number of
core teachers, and (5) curricular programs and technology.
Time for Collaboration & Professional Development
Principals and instructional facilitators all mentioned that time for collaboration
and professional development was deficient. During interviews, the resource of time
surfaced in two ways: (1) time for teacher collaboration, and (2) time for professional
development. With the reduction of two days allocated for professional development on
the district’s annual calendar, principals and instructional facilitators mentioned that
resources were undersupplied. Losing two days before the school year prevented
principals and other administrators from reviewing student assessment data, focusing on
needs assessments for all student groups, and allowing teachers to effectively collaborate
in grade-level teams in a timely manner. The researcher found that one day of
professional development disallowed many effective and productive conversations to
occur without haste. Principals and instructional facilitators indicated the need for this
resource (time) to be transformed into effective and productive instructional practices by
bidding more time for professional development outside of the regular school year.
Collaborative work with teachers in their schools during planning and preparation
periods garnered a request for more time. In order to improve the instructional program
while reinforcing the strategic and instrumental need for planning and preparation time
during the regular school day, a need for time is imperative. In the primary school setting,
preparation and planning time is not typically factored into a teacher’s workday. Instead,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
135

smart scheduling of teachers during the regular school day and week is required.
Principals and program facilitators assisted as much as possible with the reallocation of
time; however, this varied across schools in the district. Specialist teachers, currently not
present in Iris elementary schools within the study, will allow for reallocation of a
teacher’s time during the regular day. On average, it would allow 30 to 60 minutes of
non-instructional time for teachers to prepare, plan, and collaborate with grade level
teams daily.
Support Personnel
Every principal or instructional facilitator made the request for additional support
personnel at the school-site level. Support personnel requested included assistant
principals and counselors. Due to the reduction of assistant principals at the elementary
level in Iris, the principal is the lead administrator followed by the instructional
facilitator. These individuals indicated that the roles and responsibilities of the assistant
principal had been collapsed and reallocated to the principal and instructional facilitator
resulting in a lack of time to spend on collaborating, supporting teachers, and being
accessible. The assistant principal would encompass an instructional leadership role with
emphasis on monitoring, sharing knowledge, and providing resources. In turn, principals
from Hyacinth, Kangaroo Paw and Orchid expressed that the addition of an assistant
principal would free principals to focus on instructional needs, instructional leadership
responsibilities, and learning and achievement.
Principals and program facilitators expressed the need for on-site counselors at
their school sites. The principal of Hyacinth indicated that the addition of an on-site, full-
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
136

time counselor would allow for students to increase self-efficacy when experiencing
academic issues, manage behavioral issues, and promote positive self-esteem.
Shared Resources for Students
Principals and instructional facilitators at all schools expressed the need for
shared resources for students. These individuals indicated that most Program &
Instructional Facilitators currently use email to request instructional resources between
schools from other instructional facilitators. This system has proven somewhat effective
but not technology issues can slow down the process at some school sites.
All elementary schools within the study carry one or more grade 6 classes at their
school sites. In Iris, grade 6 has a separate curriculum for language arts and mathematics.
The principal of Hyacinth mentioned the need for more collaboration across the district
between grade 6 teachers and instructional leaders (department chairpersons). The
principals believe that middle schools have more resources and sharing those resources
will allow for all sixth graders to have equal and adequate access the state mandated
curriculum. The goal is for sixth graders at primary schools to have adequate access to
the same curricular and supplementary resources and be on an equal “playing field” with
other sixth graders at secondary schools (middle school).
Class Size Reduction/Number of Core Teachers
All principals and program facilitators in the study believed that class size
reduction is vital to the success of the school’s instructional program. Class size
reduction, over time, has been impeded based on the reduction in force of teacher’s
across the district. The principal of Orchid mentioned the increase of class sizes within
the kindergarten, grade 1 and grade 2 classes to a maximum of 32 students. Based on the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
137

EBM, a maximum of 15 students is recommended. Research on class size shows that
small classes of 15 in kindergarten through grade 3 have significant, positive impacts on
student achievement in mathematics and reading (Achilles, 1999). By reducing class
sizes, the number of core teachers will consequently increase.
Curricular Programs and Technology
Principals and instructional facilitators indicated the increasing, essential need for
technology to support curricular programs and interventions. Interviews of principals and
instructional facilitators documented a positive impact on student test scores of
curriculum programs that embed technology into the instructional delivery system. Thus,
technology varies in Iris.
All interviewees reported having some level of technology at their sites. The
instructional facilitator of Bird of Paradise mentioned that the school did not have enough
computers to implement the upcoming Common Core curriculum and impending
assessments as well as the need for server updates. The instructional facilitator of Calla
Lily indicated the resistance of veteran teachers to incorporate technology of curricular
programs into lesson plans. The principal of Hyacinth mentioned that more technology
was needed within classrooms to support current curricular and intervention programs
such as RTI. The principal of Kangaroo Paw discussed the need for a computer lab for
students to visit for the purpose of practicing curriculum-based concepts or intervention
strategies. Most classrooms had one to three computers and all teachers had one iPad to
use within the classroom. Every grade 4, grade 5 and grad 6 classroom had a Smartboard.
The need for Smartboards to enhance the curriculum in lower grades was evident and
expressed by the principal. The principal of Orchid indicated that although an on-site
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
138

computer lab existed, it was three years old and needed upgrades. He mentioned that
some teachers at Orchid have outdated and underserviced computers. Notably, the
principal mentioned that every kindergarten student was exposed to and utilized the
Waterford Early Learning program, a computer-based curriculum designed to help
children build the academic foundation necessary for a lifetime of learning. In addition,
one incentive to keep grade 6 students at the school site was the offer of a rentable laptop
for the entire school year.
Summary
As previously discussed in the review of the literature, the Evidence-Based
approach identifies a set of school-level ingredients that are required to deliver a
comprehensive and high-quality instructional program within a school and the evidence
of their effectiveness, and then determines an adequate expenditure level by placing a
price on each ingredient and aggregating the ingredients to a total cost. Utilizing the
Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, this chapter examined and
summarized the findings for each of the four research questions addressed by this study
within the study district. Ten instructional improvement strategies were presented as well
as a description of the ways in which all schools allocated various resources to support
these strategies. Thus, school-level resource use was compared to the level of resources
recommended by the Evidence-based model (EBM), indicative of existing gaps.
Additional resource needs were included to identify requests and provide feedback from
principals and instructional facilitators.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
139

Chapter 5
SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Background
Over the last decade, states have shifted their school finance focus on equity to
adequacy, as courts and legislatures interpret the education clauses of state constitutions
to require that the school finance system provides each district, school and student an
adequate level of resources (Odden & Picus, 2008). Adequacy is defined as a level of
funding would allow each district and school to deploy a range of educational programs
and strategies that would provide each student an equal opportunity to achieve the state’s
education performance standards.
The mission of the California Department of Education is “to provide a world-
class education for all students, from early childhood to adulthood” (CDE, 2012). In a
time of fiscal crisis, educational organizations have faced difficult financial
circumstances. Since the onset of the economic recession in 2007, California’s fiscal
problems have increased precipitously and affected public school education adversely. K-
14 public school funding is the largest program in the state budget, receiving more than
40 percent of the state's general fund resources, as mandated by Proposition 98. In total,
during the focal year of the study (2011-2012), the state provided over $64.1 billion to
support primary and secondary education (CDE, 2012). Despite this level of funding, the
budget reflected the third consecutive year of reductions spending in California schools to
$7,713 per pupil. Given that figure, schools were funded at lower levels than they were
three years prior (2007-2008), at $8,235 per pupil, as a result of reduced state spending
and increasing school enrollments. Although the exceptionally challenging fiscal
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
140

situation faced by state and local governments has had an unpleasant impact on spending
for elementary and secondary education, and public school enrollment has continued to
decline annually due to the increase of charter schools, schools and districts continue to
move forward on the adequacy agenda to educate children.
It is common sense that eliminating critical educational programs due to drastic
budget cuts, increasing class sizes, and reducing the school year indicates that our
students receive less attention and fewer chances to achieve an adequate education.
Detrimental effects of underinvesting in education have been researched; thus, there have
been proposed alternative solutions for correcting historical inequities in school district
resource levels. Despite reductions in funding levels, case study research findings on
schools that have made substantial improvements in student performance have been done
(Odden & Picus, 2008). Odden & Picus (2008) propose that alternative methods usually
identify differing levels of expenditure to fund an adequate instructional program. This
has been accomplished with educational strategies and resources similar to those
recommended by the Evidence-based model.
This final chapter will present a discussion of the findings as related to research-
based school improvement strategies (Odden, 2009), accompanied by the ways in which
five Southern California elementary schools allocate resources as related to the Evidence-
based model (Odden & Picus, 2008). It summarizes the research study findings that were
obtained by examining these case studies (Appendices D-H). In addition, it will provide
an analysis of results in the context of the literature described in Chapter 2 and presented
in Chapter 4. Implications for further research, practice, and “closing the gap” will be
offered as to how schools can utilize resources effectively.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
141

Summary of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the school level resource allocation in
five elementary schools within one urban school district that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. The five schools that participated in this study
shared similar student demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and
mathematics, and API score ranges at the initiation of the study. The following four
research questions were used to guide the study:
1. What research based human resource allocation strategies improve student
achievement?
2. How are human resources allocated across the Iris Unified School District and its
schools?
3. Is there a gap between current human resource allocation practices and what the
research suggests is most effective?
4. How can human resources be strategically re-allocated to align with strategies that
improve student achievement?
Sampling Plan
The sample for the study included five elementary schools, each of which made
increasing academic achievement a priority. Due to district restrictions regarding research
access and principal availability, not all of the schools that met the original selection
criteria participated in the study.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
142

Two characteristics were important:
• Urban setting and poverty.
The aim was to study schools that were urban in nature. All schools were
comprised of a significant percentage of socio-economically
disadvantaged (poor) students.
• Racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity.
The focus on urban school sites stemmed from a desire to understand the
ways in which students were exposed to and utilized a range of
educational programs and strategies to achieve performance standards
within schools that faced daunting learning challenges with respect to
racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity.
Schools within the study offered a variety of contexts in which to study the level of
personnel resources, varying in student populations and school size and formation within
the Iris Unified School District.
Data Sources and Data Collection Procedures
Qualitative data sources were designed to develop an in-depth portrayal of how all
five schools engaged in practices that help them invest in staffing resources in equitable
ways. The data collected thus came from sources at the school level. One primary source
of data collection was through interviews with school leaders and school instructional
support staff (e.g. instructional facilitators/coaches). Other sources of data included
staffing rosters, the Single Plan for Student Achievement, and relevant personnel data.
Each data source served as a vantage point from which to explore the research questions,
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
143

and allowed the researcher to develop a comprehensive picture of the level of resources
available at each site.
Interviews.
Through site visits, the researcher gathered semi-structured interview data
concerning leadership decisions about strategies to increase student performance and its
relation to staffing resources. All interviews occurred in a single visit during the fall of
2012. The goal of the interviews was to yield detailed descriptions about the level of
personnel resources and school process regarding student achievement. Interview data
provided important background information and a variety of perspectives regarding
school functions, goals for students and achievement, teacher capacity, data-based
decision making and so forth. The interviews captured the perspectives and activities of
principals and individuals in instructional leadership roles at the school level:
• Principals.
Principals spend a significant portion of their time figuring out how to best
configure personnel resources at the school and to provide support. Thus,
the principals of Hyacinth, Kangaroo Paw, and Orchid were interviewed.
• Individuals in instructional leadership roles.
Instructional facilitators support classroom teachers and provide guidance
to those teachers. Thus, the instructional facilitators of Bird of Paradise
and Calla Lily were interviewed.
School staffing rosters and personnel data.
Given the study’s focus on personnel resources, data regarding the characteristics
of administrators, teachers, and support staff provided an important source of
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
144

information. The researcher examined data regarding the number and type of certificated
and classified personnel as well as the variety of instructional support staff roles present
at each site. The personnel data combined with staffing rosters, allowed the researcher to
make comparisons of staffing resource allocations across schools.
School documents and data.
In addition to personnel data, the researcher also examined school data about
student demographics, assessment trend data, and accountability trend measures (e.g.
API, AYP) by means of web-based data sites such as DataQuest and Ed-Data. The
researcher collected documents from school principals and instructional facilitators such
as the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) that described each school’s annual
improvement plan for student performance and the like. Information assembled from
these sources served as additional points of triangulation with data collected from
interviews and personnel data.
Process of Study Analysis
The researcher analyzed data through triangulation and integration of data from
the variety of qualitative and quantitative sources preciously mentioned. Quantitative data
such as number of students, staff to student ratios, personnel, and instructional support
was verified and then compared across schools in relation to the Evidence-based model
(Odden & Picus, 2008). Qualitative data was generated from principal and instructional
facilitator interviews for each school. Once all data were collected, the researcher
compared all data to detect emerging themes and gaps across school site.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
145

Summary of the Findings
This section provides a summary of the study findings as they related to each of
the four research questions. The research questions were answered using data found in
the five individual case studies. Case studies for all five elementary schools can be found
in Appendices D-H.
Strategies for Doubling Student Performance and Levels of Implementation
An analysis of interviews and documents from principals and instructional
facilitators that participated in this study indicate that a plethora of strategies were
utilized in schools at differing levels of implementation. The most common evidence-
based strategies executed were in the areas of conducting a needs assessment/analyzing
student achievement data, using data-based decision making, and providing extra help
strategies for struggling students.
A cross-comparison analysis of interviews indicated that each school
implemented elements of researched-based strategies in a number of ways and at varying
levels of implementation (refer to Table 5 in Appendices D-H). Of the ten steps to double
student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009), all five elementary schools were
analyzed by description and in the implementation of each strategy (1-10).
A high level of implementation across study schools included conducting needs
assessment/analyzing student achievement data (1), a commitment to data-based decision
making (4), and providing multiple interventions for struggling students (7). A moderate
level of implementation across study schools consisted of setting higher goals (2),
investing in on-going PD (5), creating professional learning communities (8),
empowering leaders to support instructional improvement (9), and taking advantage of
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
146

external expertise (10). Two strategies were at a low level of implementation at all
schools. Consequently, adopting a new curriculum (3) and focusing class time more
efficiently (6) lacked presence or were poorly implemented across study schools.
High levels of implementation.
With increasing state and federal expectations of student performance over time
and the reduction of district and school budgets, a sense of urgency exists. A heightened
awareness of school issues emerges when administrators and teachers analyze student
performance data collaboratively (Odden, 2009). The goal of this analysis is to become
more informed about the academic effectiveness within a school. Within the study, all
schools reported analyzing student assessment data to become knowledgeable about
performance in staff development meetings and in grade-level teams. Assessment
analysis included a thorough review of state exam results (e.g. STAR) to drive instruction
and intervention. Diagnostic and formative assessments were used to hone instructional
strategies before each chapter unit within core textbooks. Chapter tests and end-of-unit
assessments measured what students learned in a specific time span.
Moving beyond analysis of state exams to a use of a battery of assessments is
necessary when analyzing data and making decisions based on that analysis. Odden
(2009) suggests that the battery of assessments consists of formative and diagnostic
assessment, common end-of-curriculum unit assessment, and benchmark assessments.
All five elementary schools in the study were engaged in ongoing analysis of student
assessment data to gain more knowledge and awareness of student performance issues.
Time within the regular school day was provided for grade-level team collaboration at
some sites; bi-monthly grade-level team collaboration was considered routine at all
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
147

school sites, in place of regular afterschool staff meetings. Thus, data was used heavily in
the decision-making processes related to instruction and learning, student growth and the
goal to 100 percent proficiency in language arts and mathematics. Likewise, data
informed decisions on interventions for students struggling to meet content standards.
All schools in the study provided additional support for struggling students within
the regular school day and after school hours utilizing Response to Intervention (RTI),
the district’s adopted intervention program. In addition to RTI, each school provided
extra-help strategies and supports for underperforming students. An array of strategies,
from thirty minutes of daily ELD to a referral to the SST, existed across schools. Every
school participated in afterschool programs such as LEAP or ASES to provide additional
support to student who were struggling to meet state standards.
Instead, Calla Lilly offered ASES as an afterschool support for struggling students.
Moderate levels of implementation.
Setting ambitious goals is considered the second strategy in the ten strategies to
double student performance (Odden, 2009). The goals are usually interrelated to student
performance on state tests, the percentage of students scoring at proficient and advanced
levels, and in elementary school, an assurance that not one student performs below the
basic level at the end of grade 3, and that all students enter grade 4 on reading level.
Odden (2009) suggests that annual school goals should surpass goals used for adequate
yearly progress of students. In Iris schools, the staff and SSC in all schools use the
Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) to set SMART (e.g. specific, measurable
attainable, realistic, timely) goals for the school year. During the 2011-2102 school year,
all schools in the study set goals for core areas such as language arts and mathematics.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
148

English Language Development was a key area of focus given the significant numbers of
Hispanic/Latino students at each study school. Schools also set goals for parent
involvement, safety, and other content areas. Odden (2009) indicates that setting higher
goals involves setting high goals with a focus on educating 90-95 percent of students to
proficient and advanced levels of achievement. The level of implementation for setting
ambitious goals is moderate due to some schools setting goals below the 90 percent mark
for performing at proficiency and higher levels of achievement on state exams. A high
level of implementation would indicated that a relentless pursuit of attainment
irrespective of student demographics would include: (1) doubling student performance on
state tests, (2) doubling the percentage of students achieving at advanced levels on those
tests and, (3) closing achievement gaps by 50% for significant populations of African-
American/Black, Hispanic/Latino, Socio-economically Disadvantaged, and even English
Learner students.
Schools within the study focused on data based-decision making throughout the
course of the school year but implemented various strategies during weekly staff
development meetings. Each school site indicated a different focus for discussing and
analyzing data. The principal of Kangaroo Paw indicated that he analyzed data before he
presented to staff and then demonstrated the metacognitive processes he engaged in while
doing so. Other principals and instructional facilitators indicated that sometimes staff
focused on data in whole group and sometimes staff did so in grade-level teams. The
decision-making process, however, varied at each school. Analysis of data and input
occurred with staff but decisions on how to help improve the success of students and
schools was made by either the principal, the leadership team, or a whole staff consensus.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
149

A moderate level of implementation was evident due to varying ways of data analysis in
which multiple types of data were being used in schools. A high level of implementation
would demonstrate that: (1) all schools used state exams to identify student group
performance issues and other cumbersome problems, (2) all schools used benchmark data
to monitor student progress throughout the year, (3) all schools frame curricular units
before the teaching process begins with shorter-cycle assessments, and (4) all schools use
common formative assessment to assess the effect of teacher collaborative efforts and
instructional practices on student learning.
The concept of professional learning communities is based on the collaborative
efforts of school staff and administrators (Dufour, 1998). The characteristics of a
professional learning community consist of shared goals, collaborative teams focused on
learning and best practices, commitment to continuous improvement, and results
orientation. Thus, making a shift to PLCs means that schools adopt the theory that “all
students learn” vs. “all students are taught”. The most promising strategy for school
improvement is building teacher school personnel to function as a professional learning
community. For most schools, the fundamental assumption of the PLC, to develop a
collaborative culture, is a challenge. Thus, all schools within the study indicated that
grade-level teams were useful and indicative of the analysis of student performance data.
Traditional bi-monthly meetings supported the collaborative time of grade-level teams
within and outside of the regular school day. In interviews with principals and
instructional facilitators, the researcher found that although school staff’s had the
capacity to function as professional learning communities, some teachers still were
overcome with a tradition of teacher isolation. On one hand, some teachers were resistant
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
150

to working within grade-level teams. The instructional facilitator of Calla Lily indicated
“push-back” from the staff when technology was integrated into daily lesson-planning
and, most of all, analysis of student assessment data through Data Director, the district’s
web-based data and assessment management system. On the other hand, other schools
learned to work in effective, high performing teams. The principals of Hyacinth and
Orchid indicated that time for collaboration was built into the school day. Thus, this time
was negotiable with other teachers in the use of the computer lab or library and when
grade-level assemblies occurred. Time for collaboration had almost been completely
removed from the school calendar due to budget cuts and a reduction of days in the
school year (e.g. “furlough days”). Bird of Paradise, Calla Lily and Kangaroo Paw
continued to meet afterschool when collaboration was embedded into routine staff
meetings twice a month. Thus, schools within Iris were at a moderate level of
implementation due to the following: (1) time for collaboration was not built into the
school day and school calendar although some sites engaged in school-day collaboration
time, (2) products of collaboration were not always made explicit, and (3) teams did not
focus meetings around critical questions associated with learning such as How will we
know what students are learning?
Distributing the school’s instructional leadership is a key strategy in increasing
student performance. One way to do this is by identifying teachers who are collaborative
work team leaders, instructional facilitators or coaches, or curriculum specialists. Another
way is to strategically recruit and manage teacher talent. Schools within this study all
indicated that empowering leaders was a critical element in supporting instructional
improvement. Bird of Paradise indicated that it garnered support from the leadership
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
151

team, instructional leaders, administration and staff and focused collaboration meetings
around data-based decision making. Other schools varied in the ways in which decision-
making processes were implemented at their sites. Odden (2009) suggests that high-
poverty schools already have their share of effective teachers and principals, which can
require changing recruitment and hiring practice. Thus, schools within the study were at a
moderate level of implementation. During interviews with principals, all of them
commented on the lack of involvement during the hiring process. With the recent fiscal
crisis resulting in teacher lay-offs and shifting of personnel, the researcher learned that
principals indicated that it had become challenging to pay attention to teacher and
administrator talent. To raise empowering leaders to support instructional improvement
to a higher level of implementation, schools must partake in the following: (1) distribute
the school’s instructional leadership by identifying teachers who are effective team
leaders or display leadership qualities of an effective team leaders, instructional facilitator
or coach, or curriculum specialist, (2) assess recruitment, hiring, and transfer practices
along with the district to ensure that there is an equitable share of effective teachers and
administrators at each school site.
Using external professional knowledge is the last strategy to “double” student
performance. It requires modest additional resources based in subscriptions to
professional journals, effective use of professional development funds, and educational
conference attendance. The belief behind using outside expertise is that schools cannot
“do it on their own”. The five schools in the study indicated that external expertise was
used in several ways but all were at differing levels of implementation. The instructional
facilitator of Bird of Paradise and the principal of Orchid indicated that Teach Like a
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
152

Champion strategies were used, while others indicated a focus on Marzano and other
strategies. Not all schools sent teachers and support staff to educational conferences and
workshops to enhance capacity on relevant educational issues affecting inner-city youth.
Therefore, all schools were at a moderate level of implementation. A high level of
implementation would indicate that schools use external professional knowledge by: (1)
utilizing the county office of education, (2) hiring consultants to provide professional
knowledge and action plans with respect to each school’s achievement issues, and (3)
implementing research-based curriculum programs that support the student population of
each school.
Low levels of implementation.
Adopting new curriculum and textbook materials was at a poor level of
implementation across study schools. Since the previous adoption, four years prior to the
focal year of the study, the school district had not adopted any new core curricular
instructional materials in language arts or mathematics. However, intervention materials
were ordered to provide extra help support and strategies to struggling students. Odden
(2009) suggests that new and better materials are needed to move the student
achievement needle; over time, this includes developing a school wide vision of effective
instructional practice and expecting all teachers to use those practices. To raise the level
of implementation to a higher degree, the district will need to adopt a new research-based
curriculum, which is aligned to needs of students enrolled in Iris elementary schools.
Focusing class time more efficiently proved challenging for the five schools in the
study. The most costly strategy in the evidence-based approach to education is reducing
lower elementary grades to a class size of no more than 15 students. All schools indicated
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
153

higher numbers of students within classes with detriments to the instructional program.
The researcher found that all classrooms had at least one struggling student; therefore,
class time to support one or more students in need of intervention had to be strategically
reallocated. Every school had similar but varying ways of implementing intervention
strategies and support to these students. All schools indicated higher percentages of
Hispanic/Latino students who were English learners but Bird of Paradise was the only
school that demonstrated a systematic way of providing ELD school wide. Other schools
mentioned that ELD was embedded in the school day but at teacher discretion. To raise
the level of implementation of using school time more efficiently while increasing
student performance, schools should consider the following: (1) incorporating reading
and math blocks, (2) expanding instructional minutes, (3) reducing class sizes to the
recommendations set in the EBM (e.g. K-3: 15; 4-6: 25), and (4) providing 1:1 and small
group tutoring by licensed teachers and trained aides to all underperforming students.
Conclusions
Although there were high levels of implementation of three of Odden’s (2009) ten
strategies (e.g. needs assessment, data-based decision making, interventions for
struggling students), schools in the study still have 70 percent of those strategies at the
low or moderate level of implementation. Critical elements of school improvement
suggest that recruiting and supporting high quality teachers, high quality instruction,
classroom resources and additional time must be aligned to school resources to maximize
effectiveness of the school’s instructional program.
With recent cutbacks to per pupil spending in the last few years, the challenge is
for schools to scale up these strategies by using resources provided by the state’s funding
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
154

model effectively and efficiently. This means that schools can implement the core
recommendations but the challenge lies within the willingness to focus on “core
subjects”, effective leadership practices, and teacher capacity. Without a heightened
sense of urgency, the willingness to implement these changes, linked to best practices and
increased student learning, will not use total resources for evidence-based reforms.
The Evidence-based Approach to Increasing Academic Student Success
In addition to research-based strategies, the Evidence-based approach (Odden &
Picus, 2008), specifies the educational strategies and operational resources necessary for
academic student success. An analysis of personnel data and staffing rosters, indicate
that the five elementary schools in the study were resourced below the core
recommendations of the EBM for prototypical schools.
Only one school came close to the school size although its configuration included
one more grade level (grade 6). All other schools contained higher numbers of students
and all consisted of grade 6, whereas the prototypical school suggested kindergarten
through grade 5. Class sizes were larger than the model recommended; there were less
instructional days, and greater numbers of students in poverty and students who were
considered language learners. Except for two schools, there were fewer teachers. There
were no specialist teachers or extended day teachers in relation to the EBM. All schools
understaffed instructional facilitators and summer school was only held at one school.
The number of pupil support staff, non-instructional aides, and librarians varied – with an
average of resources below the level of the core recommendations in the model.
Odden & Picus (2008) suggest that school performance can improve even when
funding is constrained – drawn from conclusions in their work in school finance
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
155

adequacy and in schools that have literally doubled student performance on state tests
over a four to six year time period (Odden, 2009), and partnerships with districts in
reallocating resources to more powerful education visions.
Reallocating Resources in Practice
A number of studies, voter approved initiatives, historic spending patterns and
adequacy court cases, such as The Robles-Wong v. California (2010), have established
that California’s funding model has three major flaws: it is inadequate, inequitable, and
overly complex (Imazeki, 2007; Chambers, Levin & DeLancey, 2007; Sonstelie, 2007).
The state of California, thus, has been criticized for underfunding its educational system
in that it does not provide students with enough resources to meet the state’s academic
performance standards. These flaws are based in the current personnel challenges, level
of underfunded resources, and more threats to school budgets at schools within the study,
Odden & Picus (2008) suggest that schools such as these can provide an adequate level of
education funding. To reallocate scarce dollars schools can use the personnel
recommendations indicated in the model as a general guideline and reallocate current
staff to the configurations for the prototypical elementary school. In doing so, schools
would have to be flexible about class size; some classes can have varied numbers of
students depending on student academic need and support staff at each site. Time, a
valuable resource, could be reallocated so that grade-level teams would have structured
time for collaborative meetings during the school day. Odden, Picus, & Goetz (2009)
suggest that schools should be organized so that all key teacher groups have at least three
45-minute periods a week for collaborative work, even if it means increasing class size.
Additionally, they suggest that schools provide all of the resources needed to assist
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
156

teachers and students with regard to instructional facilitators/coaches and support staff for
students that require additional support.
Gap Analysis Model: Closing the Gap
The Gap Analysis Model can be divided into three parts: 1) the ideal situation, 2)
the current situation and, 3) closing the gap. The ideal contains a detailed description of
the intended benchmark, result, or outcome. Descriptors for this section provide an
opportunity for stakeholders to work together to set a vision for the school. The current
situation contains a detailed description of the situation as it currently stands. Descriptors
provide an opportunity for stakeholders to collectively analyze data relating to the current
situation. The final section, closing the gap, contains specific strategies that are designed
to close the gap between the actual and the ideal.
Ideal Situation
All of the schools involved in this study indicated that the SMART goals set in
the SPSA were under the overarching performance goal set by the California State Board
of Education to achieve the goals of NCLB: all students will reach high standards, at a
minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics, by 2013-2014
(NCLB, 2001). The goals as set by NCLB (2001) along with performance indicators and
targets, constitute the state’s framework for ESEA accountability. Since then, California
has built an educational system consisting of five major components that are parallel to
Odden’s (2009) ten strategies for doubling student performance: 1) rigorous academic
standards, 2) standards aligned instructional materials, 3) standards-based professional
development, 4) standards-aligned assessment, and 5) an accountability structure that
measures school effectives in light of student achievement.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
157

The Current State
The researcher performed data analysis using current and recent quantitative data
of key performance indicators in each school’s school plan (SPSA), student performance
indicators in state and federal accountability systems, and the level of resources as
compared to the EBM. In addition, interviews presented the findings to pertinent
questions regarding strategies indicative of Odden’s strategies to double student
performance at each school site. As a result, gaps were identified in both areas and
presented in a summary table of each school’s level of resource use in comparison to the
EBM (Appendices D-H, Table 6). The current state indicates that all schools perform
below the level of resources as suggested by Odden & Picus (2008) due to the fiscal crisis
of the state that trickles down to districts and then schools.
Closing the Gap
All schools have gaps between the present state and the desired or ideal state. The
purpose of the gap analysis is to create a plan to transition from the current state to a
more desirable one. This plan of improvement addresses each area that schools have
determined to be an area of need in terms of measuring between where the school is and
where it needs to be. Based on an analysis of data and personal interviews,
recommendations will reflect specific gaps identified and offer key performance
indicators for reducing or eliminating them all together. As indicated earlier, the current
fiscal standing of the state, district, and each school is the cause for lingering problems
that ultimately create or intensify the gap in student achievement.
After a thorough review of the ways in which all schools implement the ten steps
to double student performance (Odem, 2009), recommendations for closing the gap will
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
158

indicate, in the future, how well each school maintains expectations of student
proficiency, sets high standards, and ensures that all students are provided with a quality
education. Clark & Estes (2002) point out that the gaps occur between goals and current
performances and recommend to gather information on the three big causes of
knowledge/skills, motivational, and organizational performance gaps. Through data
collected from interviews of principals and instructional facilitators, school plans (SPSA),
and personnel data, is has been determined that additional support is needed to support
the achievement of each school’s goals. Three critical factors were examined during the
analysis process: people’s knowledge/skills, motivation to achieve goals, and
organizational barriers (Clark & Estes, 2002).
The collection and analysis of data for this study was indicative of two critical
factors that created a momentum for student learning, teacher knowledge and motivation.
Principals and instructional facilitators indicated that teachers, for the most part,
displayed and carried out effective instructional practice (knowledge). Participation in
grade-level team meetings and PD with a focus of an analysis of student performance
data and decisions based on these same data, were indicative of the staff’s willingness to
achieve the goal of increasing student achievement (motivation). But the researcher found
that most schools in the study did not have sufficient resources to attain the target goals
(organizational).
Odden & Picus (2008) suggest that school performance can improve even when
funding (barriers to the organization) is constrained. More money could mean, more
resources but the strategic reallocation of resources may also prove effective for all
school’s ultimate goal. Picus, et. al (2008) found that even when resources increased
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
159

substantially, schools frequently did not use new dollars to strategically improve
performance.
Recommendations for bridging the gap between the current reality of each school
and the desired reality, inclusive of research-based best strategies to double student
performance, is one of the final steps in a gap analysis. With modest adjustments in
certain practices and even class size flexibility, schools can come very close to deploying
all strategies behind the suggested recommendations. Based on all five case studies in one
Southern California school district, recommended indicators for closing the gaps are
presented in Table 5.1. The table is inclusive of emerging themes, based on the findings
from the final research study question presented in the previous chapter: How can human
resources be strategically reallocated to align with strategies that improve student
achievement?

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
160

Table 5.1 Recommendations for Closing Organizational Gaps
Emerging
Themes
Ideal State Current State Deficiency Recommendations for Closing
the “Gap”
Time for
collaboration
and PD
Time for
collaboration
factored into the
regular school
day, using
specialist teachers
to allow core
teachers to have
non-instructional
time.
Time for
collaboration is
not regularly
factored into the
school day. All
schools use
afterschool staff
meetings for
grade-level team
mtgs and PD.
Lack of
specialist
teachers across
study schools.
Time and money are allotted
to effectively support school
wide learning.
*Reallocate instructional time
by hiring specialist teachers to
allow core teachers adequate
time to discuss issues based on
student data and make
collaborative decisions
informed by such data.
Support
Personnel
Support personnel
as recommended
by the EBM = 1
FTE per 100 at-
risk students;
requests from
principals
included staffing
an on-site
counselor and
assistant principal.
All schools were
resourced at
different levels for
support personnel.
No schools had
on-site counselors
and the assistant
principal position
was removed from
all elementary
schools.
Lack of support
personnel across
study schools.
Over time, increase the
allocation of support personnel
supported by each school’s
budget.
Shared
Resources
for students
All elementary
schools share
resources to
support learning
and instruction
(e.g. Grade 6).
Not an efficient
system of sharing
resources among
schools in Iris.
Grade 6
materials are
deficient at
elementary
schools but not
at middle
schools.
Schools supporting Grade 6
(elementary and middle) will
have a system where resources
are shared and maintained so
that “all” students have access
to the same core materials and
curriculum.
Class size
reduction/nu
mber of core
teachers
The EBM
recommends 15
students in K-3
classrooms and 25
students in 4-5 or
6 classrooms.
All schools have
more students per
class than the
EBM
recommends.
There are less
core teachers
across study
schools, which
effects the
reduction of
class size.
1. Rehire laid-off teachers to
support the reduction of class
sizes
or
2. Hire core and specialist
teachers to support the
reduction of class sizes
Curricular
programs
and
technology
Technology
supports curricular
and intervention
programs.
All schools have
different levels of
technology to
support student
learning.
Lack of
technology
specialists to
implement and
support
technology
infrastructure in
the district.
Rethink and revise the
district’s technology plan to
support every school’s
technology infrastructure for
Common Core
implementation, standards and
web-based assessments.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
161

Implications for Researchers, Policymakers and Practitioners
A review of the literature and analysis of the five study schools provided an array
of information for researchers, policymakers and practitioners on how resources are
allocated that have implications for student achievement (Odden, 2009), and how
resource patterns at schools compare to the strategies outlined in the Evidence-based
model (Odden & Picus, 2008). It is apparent that the efficiency of how resources are
utilized is more crucial that the amount of available resources (Hanushek & Rivkin,
1997). This study implicates that urban elementary schools with large populations of
historically underrepresented students can implement effective strategies to improve
student achievement, even with strict district and school budgets, and the state’s fiscal
crisis. Cuts to state funding often have very sizeable drawbacks for school districts. Such
cuts mean that local school districts must either reduce the educational services they
provide, raise more revenue to cover the gap, or both. Thus, there are implications that
increased funding has been linked to higher student outcomes.
In California, Governor Jerry Brown proposed a tax initiative to generate
revenues to an “Education Protection Account” within the state’s General Fund, for the
November 2012 ballot. The goal of this initiative, Proposition 30, was to raise an average
of $6 billion per year by raising the sales tax a quarter cent for four years and increasing
the income tax for seven years on those earning more than $250,000 per year. In general,
40 to 60 percent of the generated revenues will go to schools and community colleges
under funding formulas required by Proposition 98, the voter approved constitutional
amendment. Of revenues spent on education, 89 percent will go to K-12 schools and 11
percent will go to community colleges. For K‑12 schools, funding levels will increase by
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
162

almost $2,700 per student through 2016-17, including an increase of more than $1,100
per student in 2013-14 over 2011-12 levels. This educational reinvestment also provides
the opportunity to begin to correct historical inequities, specifically for districts serving
high student populations of socio-economically disadvantaged students, English learners,
and students requiring special services, in school district funding. By allocating new
funding to districts on the basis of the number of students they serve, all California school
districts can improve. This new funding will be coupled with new, but simplified,
accountability measures such as the Common Core framework, standards, and
assessments. Implementing such a system can achieve equity, transparency and
accountability for all students although historical trends suggest that simply increasing
funding for education will not lead to corresponding improvement in academic
achievement. Some proponents of education reform believe that instead of increasing
funding, policymakers and school leaders should implement reforms that improve
resource allocation as suggested by the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008).
Recommendations for Future Research
This study provides an analysis of the current state of five elementary schools in
Iris Unified School District utilize human (personnel) resources and evidence-based
strategies to support student achievement. The gap analysis concluded that each school
within the study had desires to transition to a more “ideal” state, thus closing the
achievement gap to proficiency. It would be valuable to collect data used in this study
from all schools within the district to gain a more comprehensive picture of the district.
Additional studies will lend themselves to cross-comparisons of all 17 schools in IUSD
utilizing the EBM and strategies for increasing student performance while factoring in
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
163

additional funding from Proposition 30 and the incorporation of the newly state adopted
Common Core standards and assessments.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
164

References

Baker, B.D., Taylor, L.L., & Vedlitz, A. (2005). Measuring educational adequacy in
public schools, The Bush School of Government & Public Service Working Paper
#580. Retrieved May 1, 2012 from http:// bush.tamu.edu/research/workingpapers/.
California Tax Data. (2002). Proposition 13. California Tax Data, Inc. Retrieved from
http://www.californiataxdata.com/pdf/Prop13.pdf.
Celio, M.B., & Harvey, J. (2005). Buried treasure: Developing a management guide from
mountains of school data. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.
California Department of Education. (2012). Retrieved from www.cde.org.
Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research Into Results: A Guide to Selecting the
Right Performance Solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (2007). “School Finance Redesign
Reports”. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
EdSource. (2012). www.edsource.org
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005).
Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: The
National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).
Fullan, M. The six secrets of change: What the best leaders do to help their organizations
survive and thrive. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hannaway, J., McKay, S., & Nakib, Y. (2002). Reform and resource allocation: National
trends and state policies. Developments in School Finance, 1999-2000 (pp. 57-
76). Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department
of Education.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
165

Ikemoto, G. S. & Marsh, J. A. (2007). Cutting through the “data-driven” mantra:
Different conceptions of data-driven decision making. National Society for the
Study of Education Yearbook, 106(1), 105-131.
Legislative Analyst’s Office. (2011). The 2011-2012 Budget: Year Two Survey. Update
on School District Finance in California. Sacramento: LAO Publications.
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, S. (2006). Making sense of data-driven decision
making in education: Evidence from Recent RAND Research. Santa Monica, CA:
RAND.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J. (2006). Classroom assessment and grading that work. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Walters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School Leadership Than Works:
From Research to Results. Virginia: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., & Haystead, M. W. (2008). Making standards useful in the classroom.
Alexandria, VA:ASCD.
Miles, K. H., Odden, A. R., Fermanich, M., & Archibald, S. (2004). Inside the black box
of school district spending on professional development: Lessons from five urban
districts. Journal of Education Finance, 30(1), 1-26.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). (2000). A better return on
investment: Reallocating resources to improve student achievement. Oak Brook,
IL: Author.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
166

Odden, Allen. (2009). 10 Strategies for Doubling Student Performance. Corwin
Publications.
Odden, A. Picus, L.O., Archibald, S., Goetz, M., Mangan, M.T., and Aportela, A. (2007).
Moving from Good to Great in Wisconsin: Funding Schools Adequately and
Doubling Student Performance. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin
Center for Education Research, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Odden, A. R., Goetz, M. E., & Picus, L. O. (September 2008). Paying For School
Finance Adequacy With The National Average Expenditure Per Pupil. Journal of
Education Finance and Policy. 3(3), 374-397.
Odden, A., Fermanich, M., and Picus, L.O. (2003) A State-of-the-Art Approach to
School Finance Adequacy in Kentucky. Submitted to the Kentucky Department of
Education, Frankfort, KY (February)
Odden, A., Picus, L.O., and Fermanich, M. (2003). An Evidenced-Based Approach to
School Finance Adequacy in Arkansas. Submitted to the Joint Committee on
Educational Adequacy of the Arkansas Legislature, Little Rock, AR. (September)
Odden, A., Picus, L.O., and Goetz, M.E. (under review). A 50 State Strategy To Achieve
School Finance Adequacy. Submitted to Educational Administration Quarterly,
January, 2008
Odden, A., Picus, L.O., Fermanich, M., and Goetz, M. (2004). An Evidence Based
Approach to School Finance Adequacy in Arizona. Prepared for the Steering
Committee of the Arizona School Finance Adequacy Study.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
167

Odden, A., Picus, L.O., Goetz, M., Mangan, M.T., and Fermanich, M. (2006). An
Evidence-Based Approach to School Finance in Washington. Submitted to the
Washington Learns Steering Committee, Olympia, WA.
Odden, A.O., Picus, L.O. and others (2005). An Evidence Based Approach to
Recalibrating the Wyoming Block Grant School Funding Formula. State of
Wyoming, Legislative Service Office.
Odden, A.O., Picus, L.O., and Goetz, M. (2006). Recalibrating the Arkansas School
Funding Structure: Final Report submitted to the Adequacy Study Oversight Sub-
Committee of the House and Senate Interim Committees on Education of the
Arkansas General Assembly. North Hollywood, CA: Lawrence O. Picus and
Associates.
Odden, A.R., and Picus, L.O. (2008). School Finance: A Policy Perspective, 4th Edition.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Picus, L.O., Odden, A., and Fermanich, M. (2003). A Professional Judgment Approach to
School Finance Adequacy in Kentucky. Submitted to the Kentucky Department of
Education, Frankfort, KY (May)
Picus, L.O., Odden, A., Aportela, A. Mangan, M.T., and Goetz, M. (2008). Implementing
School Finance Adequacy: School Level Resource Use in Wyoming Following
Adequacy-Oriented Finance Reform. North Hollywood, CA: Lawrence O. Picus
and Associates. Prepared for the Wyoming Legislative Service Office. Available
at, www.lpicus.com.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
168

Reeves, D. (2004). Accountability for Learning: How Teachers and School Leaders Can
Take Charge. Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Schmoker, M. (1999) The Key to Continuous School Improvement, 2
nd
ed. Alexandria,
VA.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Schmoker, M., & Marzano, R. J. (1999). Realizing the promise of standards-based
education. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 17-21.
Stevenson, M. B. (1987). Instructional leadership: Teacher perceptions of elementary
principal leadership behaviors. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota,
1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 49, 3028-A.
Walter, F. (2001). District leaders’ guide to reallocating resources. Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from
www.nwrel.org/csrdp/reallocating.html
Wiggins, G. and Mc Tighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design, expanded 2
nd
ed.
Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
169

Appendix A

OPEN-ENDED DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL

Following are open-ended questions intended to capture each school’s strategies for
improving school performance. This interview guide will be used and followed during the
interview process.

Interview Guide

Research Study Questions:

The following four research questions address the purpose of this study:
1. What research based human resource allocation strategies improve student
achievement?* (Odden and Archibald’s (2009) Ten Research-based
Strategies)
2. How are human resources allocated across the Iris Unified School District and
its schools? * (Data Collection: School Characteristics & Personnel
Resources)
3. Is there a gap between current human resource allocation practices and what
the research suggests is most effective? * (Interview)
4. How can human resources be strategically re-allocated to align with strategies
that improve student achievement? (Analysis of data collection)

Interview Questions:
BACKGROUND ON SCHOOL:
*Please provide any background information on the school that may help frame the
case study portion of the study.

ETHNIC BACKGROUND (STUDENTS/STAFF):
*What is the ethnic make-up of your students? Staff?

TEST RESULTS/ACHEIVEMENT GAP:
*What does the test data show for your school over (i.e. last year: 2011-2102; two
years ago: 2010-2011; three years ago: 2009-2010)?
*API (increase or decrease)?
*AYP (changes)?
*Overall gap in achievement (*think of subgroups who may not meet their AMOs)

KEY ELEMENTS & THEMES OF INSRUCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROCESS:
*What are the key elements and themes of instructional improvement process?
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
170

DATA-BASED or DATA-DRIVEN DECSION MAKING (DBDM/DDDM):
Part I: Analysis of Data
*Explain the reason(s) for engaging or not engaging in data-based or data-driven
decision making at your school site?
*Describe the type of student data that (admin, staff, students) analyze at this school.
*What is the organizational capacity of your staff? What is the organizational
capacity to teach data-driven decision making at your site?
*Is there any training (of staff) involved before the data analysis process?
*How do you get the staff involved in DBDM/DDDM?
*How does data analysis “look” at your school?

Part II: Decision Making Based on Data
*Describe the decision making process (once data has been analyzed) at your school
site.

*What are some common themes that you have seen during and after analyzing
academic data?

*How does your staff use the following assessments to make decisions based on
student data:

-formative
-summative
-interim
-benchmark
-common assessment
-student work products
-others (not mentioned)
*To your knowledge, what are the ways in which teachers bridge the information
about student performance and the instructional strategies they will implement based
on the analysis of student data?

*Explain the importance of collaboration around data-driven or based decision
making processes at your school site.

*Is this a true statement at your school site, “When teachers work together
collaboratively on data use, they perform better”?

*How does the entire staff (admin/teachers/tutors) understand the performance
challenge?

SETTING AMBITIOUS GOALS:
*How does the school set ambitious goals?

What are the school’s SMART goals (reference: School Plan)?

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
171

IMPLEMENTING AN EFFECTIVE CURRICULUM & INSTRUCTIONAL
PROGRAM:

*Describe the instructional program at your school.

*What curriculum is being used for your core classes: ELA, Math, Science, Social
Studies?

*What are some ways that teachers implement an “effective” curriculum (you can
mention any challenges here as well)?

ON-GOING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT:
*What are the ways in which your staff engages in professional development?

*In your opinion, how does teacher professional development affect student
achievement?

*How often does your staff engage in on-site PD?

*What are the common themes of PD at your school site?

*How is PD typically funded at your school site?

*How often do teachers go off-site for PD? How is this type of PD funded?

USING TIME EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY:
*What are some of the ways that your staff balances lesson planning, instructional
time, departmental/staff meetings, and data analysis?

*Does your school bank time? If so, how does this work?

*If your school does not bank time, how often do you meet for staff meetings or staff
development?

(Do teachers swap lesson-planning time for instructional time provided by specialist
teachers?)

PROVIDING INTERVENTIONS FOR STRUGGLING STUDENTS:
*How do you identify struggling students?

*Once struggling students are identified, what are “next steps”?

*What programs are in-place to assist struggling students (i.e. reading, mathematics)?

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
172

*Is extended learning time (i.e. teacher tutors, summer school, extended day
programming with tutoring elements, etc.) offered for struggling students? If so, what
does it look like?

*What funding source pays for these interventions?

CREATING COLLABORATIVE CULTURES & DISTRIBUTED LEADERSHIP:

*Are teachers organized into collaborative work groups? If so, please explain the
ways in which the groups are organized?

*How often does each collaborative group meet during the school day? Afterschool?
*Describe the “work” that is done while teachers meet in their collaborative groups.

*What is the goal of collaboration at your school site?

*What results have you seen of this work (to date)?

*How are instructional coaches (PIF’s) used in this type of collaboration? (What is
the role of the instructional coach?)

INSPIRING A PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION:

*Describe the school’s leadership team (i.e. participants, goals, roles &
responsibilities)

*What types of professional or best practices does leadership participate in?

ASSESSING TALENT & HUMAN CAPITAL ISSUES:
Please speak on any of the following:
-Using data to support boosting student performance
-Focusing on effective instruction
-Setting goals to drive resource allocation priorities
-Setting priorities for situations that require budget cuts
-Hiring top teachers and providing ongoing professional development

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
173

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEN STRATEGIES TO DOUBLE STUDENT PERFORMANCE:
Odden and Archibald’s (2009) ten research-based strategies are as follows:
1. Understanding the performance problem and challenge
2. Set ambitious goals
3. Change the curriculum program and create a new instructional vision
4. Formative assessments and data-based decision making
5. Ongoing, intensive professional development
6. Using time efficiently and effectively
7. Extending learning time for struggling students
8. Collaborative, professional culture
9. Widespread and distributed instructional leadership
10. Professional and best practice

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
174

Appendix B

DATA COLLECTION

School Characteristics & Personnel Resources
*Sample School Name:
Date Completed:
Information Provided By:
*All schools will be confidentially coded/renamed by the researcher.

Directions: Fill in the middle column (sample school) for each school element.

School Element Elementary School
School
Characteristics
Sample School
School
Configuration
(K-5; K-6; K-8)

School size
Class size
Full day-
kindergarten
Yes or No?
Number of teacher
work days

Student instructional
days

Personnel
Resources

1. Core teachers
2. Specialist
teachers

3. Instructional
Facilitators
# of PIF’s:

4. Tutors for
struggling students

5. Teachers for ELL
students

6. Extended day
7. Summer School
8. Students with
learning disabilities
and who are mildly
or moderately
disabled

9. Students who are
severely disabled

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
175

10. Gifted students
(GATE)

11. Career and
Technical Education
N/A
12. Substitutes
13. Pupil support
staff

14. Non-
instructional aides

15. Librarians -
Media specialists
# of Librarians:
or/and
# of Media Specialists:
16. Principal
17. School site
secretary

18. Professional
development

19. Technology
20. Instructional
materials

21. Student
activities

22. Counselors
23. Nurse’s aide
24. Registered
nurse

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
176

Appendix C

FISCAL INSOLVENCY OF THE STUDY DISTRICT
(Note: Study district name has been changed.)

After taking office nearly two years ago, Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of
Public Instruction, warned that California's schools were in a state of financial crisis, and
urged that years of severe budget cuts to schools be reversed to avoid sending more
school districts into insolvency.

Iris Unified School District was projected to run out of money in the spring of
2013. The school board requested a state loan that triggered a state takeover of the school
district. Initiated at the request of the school district during the 2011-2012 school year,
SB 533 (D-Wright) provides up to $55 million in emergency state loans to help the
district meet its financial obligations. Thus, the loan must be paid back to the state within
20 years.

The law requires the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Torlakson, to
assume all the legal rights, duties, and powers of the governing board of the district and
appoint a state administrator for the following school year (2012-2013). The school
district's elected governing board serves only in an advisory capacity until a number of
conditions are met.

The administrator's authority continues until the loan has been repaid, the district
has adequate fiscal systems and controls in place, and the State Superintendent has
determined that the district's future compliance with the fiscal plan approved for the
district is probable. The recovery plan also includes steps to improve the district's
community relations and governance, pupil achievement, financial management,
personnel management, and facilities management.

Iris Unified School District is the ninth school district to request an emergency
loan and state takeover since 1990. Since then, local governance has been returned to five
districts.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
177

Appendix D

CASE STUDY: BIRD OF PARADISE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Utilizing the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this case study is to examine the site level resource allocation in five
elementary schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student
demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and
API score ranges at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide
comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based
on the single unit of schools (Patton, 2002). The purpose of using the case study approach
was to provide comprehensive, detailed information regarding resource allocation. In
providing an analysis at the school level, the five case studies contribute to the ways in
which an evidence-based approach can help identify educational best practices and
strategies for improving student academic performance. Moreover, these strategies would
assist in further recommendations based on school finance adequacy models to achieve
gains in student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). The case study is divided in to
the following areas: (1) school background, (2) analysis of student performance, (3)
analysis of educational practices (4) education improvement goals and, (5) alignment of
education improvement goals and strategies to research-based strategies double student
performance, and (6) comparison of school resources to the Evidence-based model.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
178

School Background
Bird of Paradise is K-6 elementary school located in an urban unified school
district (K-12) within Los Angeles County. It is one of eleven elementary schools that
serve approximately 14,275 students. Bird of Paradise is a California Distinguished
School. During the 2011-2012 school year, Bird of Paradise reported an enrollment of
735 students (California Department of Education, 2012), making it one of the largest
elementary schools within the district. The school has a population of students that
closely mirrors the city’s diverse population of African-American and Hispanic/Latino
residents. Table D.1 provides a description of the school demographics.
Table D.1: Bird of Paradise Demographic Data, 2011-2012

School

Grades

Enrollment

AA
#
%

Hispanic
#
%

ELL
#
%

Free/Reduced
Meals %
Bird Of
Paradise
K-6 735 237
32%
461
64%
201
27%
662
90%
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012); School Demographic Chart – API by California
Department of Education (2012).

As evidenced in Table D.1, Hispanic students were the largest enrolled population
at Bird of Paradise, followed by African American students. In the 2011-2012 school
year, Hispanic students comprised of 64 percent of the total school enrollment. African
American students were the next largest ethnic group with 32 percent of the total school
enrollment. Based on this enrollment data, Bird of Paradise served a disproportionately
large Hispanic student enrollment. Of the total school enrollment of 735 students, 27
percent were considered English language learners (ELL); 90 percent of the total student
population participated in the Free and Reduced Meal Program before and during school.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
179

Analysis of Student Performance
It is imperative to use data when analyzing student performance and making
school improvement decisions. According to the US Department of Education (1998),
hard data can motivate schools to take action. Elementary schools typically analyze
student achievement data, including results of the API, AYP, STAR, CELDT, and local
benchmark and curriculum embedded assessments. In addition to accountability
measures, student group data from state assessments must be painstakingly analyzed
when evaluating programs and developing school goals for the year.
Academic Performance Index (API)
In order to meet federal requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA), a growth API must reflect if the school or student groups scored at or above
the statewide performance of 800 (California Department of Education, 2012). At the
initiation of the study, Bird of Paradise had an API of 814. A year later, during the 2011-
2012 school year, a slight decrease was demonstrated in student academic performance
by 14 index points, bringing the API to 800. Although student performance tabulated in
the Academic Performance Index fell, the school met its school wide growth target and
still met the statewide performance target of 800. The California Department of
Education (2012) indicates that schools with APIs at or above 800 must maintain a
minimum API of 800. A school meets its overall API Growth target if it meets its school
wide target and all numerically significant student group targets. Student groups must
score at or above 800 index points in order to meet statewide annual targets. Bird of
Paradise did not meet targets for all student groups Table D.2 reflects the summary of the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
180

API target information, base and growth, from the 2011 school year to the 2012 school
year.
Table D.2: Bird of Paradise API Growth Targets, 2011-2012

Growth Targets

2011
Base

2011-2012
Growth

2012
Growth

Met
Target?
School wide 814 -14 800 Yes
All Student Groups
AA/Black
Hispanic/Latino*
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged*
English Learners
Students with Disabilities

819
813
810
N/A
742

-23
-10
-9
N/A
-10

796
803
801
N/A
732
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
All Targets > Both School wide & Student Groups No
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012). English Learner data was not available (N/A) on
CDE website. * Student groups declined but scored at or above the statewide performance target of 800.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
In 2012, the AYP requirement for the API was 740 index points. If a school
already reached the statewide API goal of 800, a one-point increase from the 2011 Base
API for a school was required to meet the 2012 Growth API. In the “met target” column
in Table D.2, the school wide and student group growth targets reflect state
accountability requirements and match the federal AYP requirements (California
Department of Education, 2012). Bird of Paradise met the statewide accountability
requirements for school wide API growth target for making AYP, but did not meet the
federal accountability requirements for AYP.
AYP is a series of annual academic performance goals established for each school
and district, as well as the state. These institutions are determined to have made adequate
yearly progress if they meet or exceed each year’s goals. Under the state’s criteria for
ESEA, schools such as Bird of Paradise are required to meet or exceed requirements
within four areas to make AYP annually: (1) participation rate, (2) percent proficient –
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
181

annual measurable objectives (AMOs), (3) API as an additional indicator, and (4)
graduation rate (does not apply to elementary schools). Under ESEA, schools, districts,
and the state must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant student
groups within those schools, districts and the state. Thus, if an educational institution
does not meet one or more requirements by any significant student group, it does not
make annual yearly progress.
During the focal year of the study, Bird of Paradise did not make adequate yearly
progress. The conditions for making AYP consisted of a total of 17 criteria, inclusive of
three core areas (e.g. participation, proficiency, API). Three significant subgroups at Bird
of Paradise did not meet all of the requirements in order to satisfy the criteria for
adequate yearly progress. Significant student groups for the year included: (1) Black or
African American, (2) Hispanic or Latino and, (3) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged.
The school did not meet its annual measurable objectives in English-language arts
or mathematics. Figure D.1 reflects the percentage of student groups that were at the
proficient or advanced levels in both subject areas. The statewide target for English-
language arts was 78.4 percent and 79.0 percent for mathematics. Students at Bird of
Paradise demonstrated weakness in language arts and mathematics. In both subject areas,
students missed the statewide targets for the percentage of students performing at the
proficient or advanced levels.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
182

Figure D.1: AYP Percent Proficient, School wide and Student Groups, 2011-2012

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

Percent Proficient: English Language Arts.
As evidenced in Figure D.1, all student groups were within 3.1 percentage points
of one another. School wide, 50.7 percent of students were considered at or above the
proficient level of performance in English Language Arts on state exams. The highest
performing student group was the African-American/Black student group with 53.3
percent of students reaching proficiency or above. The Hispanic/Latino student group
performed lower than all students. The Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group
performed higher than Hispanic/Latino students and to students’ school wide, but slightly
lower than the African-American/Black student group.
Percent Proficient: Mathematics.
In mathematics, 60.8 percent scored at the proficient or advanced levels, while the
state expected 79.0 percent of the total school wide population to score at these same
levels. Based on the data, only 76 percent of students at Bird of Paradise met or exceeded
the percent proficient criteria for the 2011-2012 school year. The Hispanic/Latino student
group had a higher percentage of students at the proficient or advanced level than any
other significant student group at the school, followed by the Socioeconomically
50.7

60.8

53.3

54.5

50.2

64.3

51.2

62.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ELA
MATH

SCHOOLWIDE

AA

HISPANIC

SED

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
183

Disadvantaged group. African-American/Black students had fewer students scoring at the
proficient or above level than any other student group.
API: Additional AYP Indicator.
The Academic Performance Index (API) is used as an additional indicator for
AYP. In 2012, the API Criteria for meeting federal AYP was a minimum "2012 Growth
API" score of 740 OR "2011-12 Growth" of at least one point (California Department of
Education, 2012). Bird of Paradise met the statewide accountability requirements for
school wide API growth target for making AYP but did not meet the federal
accountability requirements for AYP.
Based on an API of 800 for the 2011-2012 school year.
Program Improvement Status
In California, PI is the formal designation for Title I-funded schools and districts
that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years. A school or district that was in PI
during 2011–12 and does not make AYP in 2012 will advance to the next level of PI for
2012–13 and be required to immediately implement the applicable ESEA requirements.
Although Bird of Paradise maintained the requirement for the state in school wide
academic performance, it did not meet the federal requirements as determined by
academic yearly progress (AYP) of all its student groups. The school did not make AYP
for two consecutive years in the same content area school wide or for any numerically
significant subgroup. Thus, the 2011-2012 school year, Bird of Paradise was identified
for Program Improvement (PI).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
184

Figure D.2: Identification for Program Improvement

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

As illustrated in Figure D.2, Bird of Paradise did not meet AYP for two years
prior to the 2011-2012 school year. The California Department of Education (2012)
indicates that a Title I school will be identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive
years, the Title I school does not make AYP in the same content area school wide or for
any numerically significant subgroup, or on the same indicator school wide. During the
2009-2010 school year, Bird of Paradise met the participation rate criteria, percent
proficient criteria for mathematics, and an additional indicator for AYP by meeting API
but failed to meet the targets for students scoring at the percent proficient level for
English-language arts. In the following school year, Bird of Paradise mirrored the
previous year with the exception of not meeting the percent proficient mathematics
target. Thus, based on the academic yearly progress data for two consecutive years, Bird
of Paradise was identified for and entered Program Improvement in 2011-2012.

2009-‐2010

MADE
AYP:
NO

2010-‐2011

MADE
AYP:
NO

2011-‐2012
MADE

AYP:
NO

PI
STATUS

YEAR
1

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
185

Table D. 3: Bird of Paradise AYP Trend, 2008-2012
AYP Criteria 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Participation Rate: ELA
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Participation Rate: Math
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Percent Proficient: ELA

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
Yes
No
No
No

No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
Percent Proficient: Math

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
Yes
No
No
No

No
No
Yes
No
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
API
Met API Criteria
782
Yes
823
Yes
814
Yes
800
Yes
Made AYP Yes No No No

Result
Year 1 – Did
not meet
AYP
Year 2 – Did
not meet
AYP
PI Status
Year 1
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
As demonstrated in Table D.3, after the 2008-2009 school year, school wide
student performance on state exams declined. The result of this decline was demonstrated
in student performance, specifically the number of students considered proficient or
advanced in English-language arts and mathematics. Numerically significant student
groups contributed heavily to the overall school wide results for AYP. The African-
American/Black student group has not made AYP for two consecutive years since the
2009-2010 school year in language arts and mathematics. The Hispanic/Latino student
group did not make AYP, every other year since that same school year in language arts
and mathematics. The Socioeconomically Disadvantaged group performed the same as
the Hispanic/Latino group in language arts but has not made AYP for three consecutive
years in mathematics. English learners did not make AYP in the 2009-2010 school year
but so the following year. Last year, English learners were not considered a numerically
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
186

significant subgroup. A school can exit Program Improvement only after making all AYP
criteria for two consecutive years (California Department of Education, 2012). As a
result, Bird of Paradise has taken a closer look at student achievement data and revisited
educational improvement goals to enhance the instructional program of the school. These
data and goals have been written and implemented in the Single Plan for Student
Achievement (SPSA). The purpose of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA)
is to create a cycle of continuous improvement of student performance, and to ensure that
all students succeed in reaching academic standards set by the State Board of Education.
Analysis of Educational Practices
Analysis of educational practices can result in large, positive effects for all
students. Practices are typically investigated by analyzing student achievement data.
Analyzing data allows schools to describe the gap between what exists and what practices
need refining.
Alignment of Curriculum and Instructional Materials
Bird of Paradise aligns its curriculum, instruction and materials to content and
performance standards for the state of California. All students have access to core
standards-based instructional materials and supplemental materials. Both core and
supplemental materials address the needs of five types of learners: (1) challenge, (2)
benchmark, (3) strategic, (4) intensive and, (5) English learners. The school has selected
supplemental instructional materials school wide to enhance the regular instructional
program and to provide extra support for strategic and intensive students as well as an
intervention for students who are not yet proficient in English. In addition, assessment
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
187

materials are utilized to target student performing below grade level and for intensive
state examination preparation during the months of January through April.
Alignment of Staff Development
The staff of Bird of Paradise participates in a variety of professional development
(PD) sessions twice a month. Teachers are encouraged to attend workshops and seminars
provided through the county office of education and other educational organization.
During the 2011-2012 school year, Teach Like A Champion (Doug Lemov) strategies
were a key component to ongoing professional development. Student engagement was
the focal point wherein the mantra was “100% of student engagement, 100% of the
time”. Likewise, the results of benchmark and quarterly assessment data were used in PD.
School wide professional development goals included the following: (1) reading
comprehension, (2) vocabulary development, (3) student engagement and checking for
understanding, and (4) building relationships with students.
Services to Enable Underperforming Students to Meet Standards
ESEA contains a “safe harbor” provision for meeting annual measurable
objectives (AMOs) in some circumstances (California Department of Education, 2012).
Safe harbor is an alternative method of meeting a school’s AMOs. During the 2011-2012
school year, Bird of Paradise had 212 Safe Harbor students. Safe harbor students were
identified at the beginning of the school year using the previous year’s state assessment
data and diagnostic assessments.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
188

Figure D.3: Safe Harbor Students, 2011-2012
Source: Bird of Paradise Single Plan for Student Achievement, 2011-2012
Safe harbor students are provided with extensive extra helps strategies and
interventions at Bird of Paradise. These include 1:1 teacher tutoring, small group tutoring
and extended-day programs with a strong academic focus. After school Supplemental
Educational Providers (SES) provides tutoring for students in grade 3 through grade 6.
These extend instructional time while holding high performance standards constant.
Underperforming students have access to supplemental materials and computer programs
in the regular classroom setting and learning center. A Student Success Team (SST)
provides a problem-solving, progress monitoring approach to support the academic and
behavioral growth of systematically selected students. Thus, student who continue to
perform below grade level for two consecutive years are assess to determine the need for
special educational services.
Use of State and Local Assessments
State and local assessments are utilized to modify instruction and improve student
academic achievement. More specifically, weekly and quarterly assessments measure
student academic growth. Results are analyzed during grade level, leadership and
administrative meetings to plan classroom instructional strategies, professional
development and student intervention programs.
10

30

42

63

36

31

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Grade
1
Grade
2
Grade
3
Grade
4
Grade
5
Grade
6

Safe
harbor
students

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
189

Resources to Assist Struggling Students
An array of resources are made available to meet the needs of struggling students.
On the campus of Bird of Paradise, student have access to the Learning Center and the
Reading and Math Lab. Parents and members of the community have access to the Parent
Resource Center which provides instructional materials to boost student achievement.
The Student Success Team and parent-teacher conferences assist students, families, and
teachers in seeking positive solutions for maximizing student potential. Students
struggling to meet grade level standards may require resources provided by specialists.
Thus, if a student has an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) or 504 Plan, they may
receive services from a resource specialist, for speech and language therapy or counseling
services from an outside organization.
Limitations to Enable Underperforming Students
Several limitations of the current program exist that make it difficult for
underperforming student to meet grade level content standards. There is a need to find
creative ways to provide additional intervention programs for underperforming students.
The lack of federal, state, county, and district level funding places budget restrictions on
supplemental resources for struggling students. Teacher layoffs and the inability to
replace ineffective teachers also present limitations followed by the number of
instructional minutes in a school day.
Educational Improvement Goals
Educational improvement goals are based upon analysis of verifiable state data,
including the Academic Performance Index and other assessments, and include local
measures of student achievement. The staff and School Site Council (SCC) at Bird of
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
190

Paradise analyzes the academic performance of all student groups, including English
learners, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with exceptional needs
and has considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for
students failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. The SSC considers input from the
staff and school community. Based upon this analysis, staff and the SSC establish the
following educational improvement goals.
For the 2011-2012 school year, Bird of Paradise adopted the following school
goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student
groups not meeting state standards: (1) English-language arts, (2) English Language
Development, (3) Technology, (4) Mathematics, (5) Science. The school included four
additional goals to support student learning and achievement: (1) School Climate, (2)
Professional Development, (3) Parental Development and, (4) Centralized Services. A
total of nine goals were implemented in the school’s Single Plan for Student
Achievement for the school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
191

Table D. 4: School Goals for Improving Student Achievement, 2011-2012
School Goal Description
Goal 1: English Language Arts – Proficiency
All students will reach high standards, at minimum
89% of students, scoring at proficiency or above on
state exams.
Goal 2: English Language Development –
Proficiency
By June 2012, 80% of all English learners will
demonstrate growth in vocabulary mastery by using
core text strategies on state exams.
Goal 3: Technology – Accelerated Reader (AR)
All students will have access to AR, which enables
powerful practice by providing data to monitor and
manage substantial amounts of personalized practice,
and reinforce the understanding of content-area topics.
Goal 4: Mathematics – Proficiency
By June 2012, 89% of all students will score at or
above proficient on the mathematics section of the
state exam.
Goal 5: Science – Science Participation Across All
Grade Levels
Student assessment data will be used to drive
instruction, modify lessons, and evaluate programs.
Student achievement will increase to 89% through on-
going and vigilant review of data.
Goal 6: School Climate – 1. Categorical Personnel
2. Promote Health and Wellness
1. Categorical funds will be allocated for the
following positions: PIF, program aides, instructional
aides, substitutes.
2. All students will participate in a balanced
physical education program inclusive of grade-level
appropriate skills; 120 minutes of physical education
every two weeks.
Goal 7: Professional Development – Increased
Opportunities for Staff Development
Staff will be provided with ongoing professional
development in all core content areas and technology.
Goal 8: Parental Involvement – Parent Training &
Participation
To help support student achievement and develop a
community of learners, parent classes, informational
meetings and volunteer programs will be implemented.
Goal 9: Centralized Services Provide direct and indirect services to school sites.
Source: Single Plan for Student Achievement, Bird of Paradise, 2011-2012.
Alignment of Education Goals and Strategies to Research-based Strategies
Districts and schools need effective instructional strategies and adequate
resources. Although student test scores are deemed successful on state exams and the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
192

state’s definition of proficiency, the results are not so certain when a federal definition of
proficiency is applied.
Bird of Paradise has met or exceeded the state’s goal on the Academic
Performance Index (API) but not met the federal school wide target for the Adequate
Yearly Progress measure since the 2008-2009 school year. These results lend support to
its success on one measure of accountability and the need for increasing student
performance to strengthen student’s future on another.
Odden & Picus (2009) assert that there is knowledge about how to dramatically
improve student academic achievement, which is labeled as “doubling” performance. In
their study of schools and districts that doubled student performance, Odden, et al.,
(2007) found that the schools followed a strong similar set of steps in their improvement
strategies. These strategies are as follows:
1. Conducting a needs assessment: Schools analyzed state assessments
data and formative assessment data to become more knowledgeable
about the status of student performance and he nature of the
achievement gap.
2. Setting high goals: Schools set high goals with a focus on educating 90-
95 percent of students to proficient and advanced levels of achievement.
3. Adopt a new curriculum: Schools reviewed evidence on effective
curriculum and made decisions on a new instructional program for the
site. All schools replaced the old curriculum with a more rigorous and
research-based curriculum.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
193

4. Commit to data-based decision making: Schools committed to an
ongoing practice of analyzing data to help tailor instruction to student
needs.
5. Invest in ongoing professional development: Schools invested in teacher
professional development that included summer institutes, resources for
trainers, placed instructional coaches in all schools and extended the
school year for teachers.
6. Focus class time more effectively: Schools used time more effectively,
reducing class time interruptions. This was done by increased time
allocations for some core subjects.
7. Provide multiple interventions for struggling students: Schools provided
assistance to struggling students that consisted of tutoring, extended day
programs, summer school, and English language development for all
English learner students.
8. Create professional learning communities: Schools created professional
learning communities to allow teachers to work collaboratively on data
analysis and the instructional program.
9. Empower leaders to support instructional improvement: Schools
employed strong leadership around data-based decision making.
10. Take advantage of external expertise: Schools brought external
professional knowledge to the school.
Table D.5 1 illustrates a synthesis of results at Bird of Paradise as compared to the ten
steps to doubling student performance for the 2011-2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
194

Table D.5: Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Bird of Paradise
Odden’s Ten Steps to
Double Student
Performance
Bird of Paradise

Level of Implementation

Low Moderate High
1. Conduct needs
assessment/analyze
student achievement
data
Analyzed student assessment data to become
knowledgeable about performance in PD and
grade-level teams. Assessment analysis
included analysis of state exam results and
formative assessments (i.e. benchmark,
quarterly) to drive instruction.

High

2. Set higher goals
Use of the Single Plan for Student Achievement
to set SMART goals for the school year by the
staff and SSC. Set goals to 89% proficiency for
ELA, Math, and Science.

Moderate

3. Adopt a new
curriculum
New core curriculum not adopted. Staff and
administration reviewed best practices and
effective classroom strategies (i.e. Teach Like a
Champion). Supports for struggling students
implemented

Low

4. Commit to data-
based decision making
Ongoing analysis of student assessment data to
gain more knowledge and awareness of student
performance issues; time provided for grade
level team collaboration.

High

5. Invest in on-going
professional
development
Focused on data-based decision making, Teach
Like a Champion strategies, and school wide
professional development goals. 1 coach for
entire school.

Moderate

6. Focus class time
more efficiently
Class sizes did not decrease during the 2011-
2012 school year.

Low

7. Provide multiple
interventions for
struggling students
Provided extra help for struggling students
inclusive of: (1) extended day provided by SES
providers/LEAP, (2) intervention tutoring
within the classroom, (3) ELD daily. Lack of
funds for teachers to receive extra-duty pay for
afterschool tutoring.
High
8. Create professional
learning communities
Grade-level teams characterized by data-based
decision making, ongoing discussion of good
instruction and strategies and sharing of best
practices.
Moderate
9. Empower leaders to
support instructional
improvement
Supported by the leadership team, instructional
leaders, administration, and the staff around
data-based decision making with an emphasis
on improving the instructional program.
Moderate
10. Take advantage of
external expertise
PD based on best practices and successful
strategies. School focused PD on Teach Like A
Champion (Doug Lemov).
Moderate
Source: Adapted from Ten Strategies to Double Student Performance (Odden, 2009).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
195

Bird of Paradise is already using several strategies recommended by evidence-
based adequacy model. It is evidenced by the data in Table D.5 that Bird of Paradise
needs to focus on identifying resources recommended to double student performance in
the near future. It is apparent that two areas were at a low level of implementation: (1)
adopting a new curriculum and (2) focusing class time more effectively. The other eight
strategies were either at a moderate or high level of implementation.
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-based Model
The Evidence-based model is a research driven approach to linking resources to
student achievement. The Evidence-based approach identifies a set of school-level
components that are required to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality instructional
program within a school and the evidence of their effectiveness (Odden & Picus, 2008).
It determines the level of resources needed to meet a school’s educational goals. This
approach is based on evidence from three sources: (1) research with randomized
assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of evidence), (2) research with other
types of controls or statistical procedures that can help separate the impact of a treatment
and, (3) best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district or school
level. The Evidence-based funding approach coupled with the funding model includes
positions that research and best practice identify as linked to increased student learning.
Future Considerations
School characteristics and personnel can significantly impact student
achievement. The resources allocated in the EBM and the strategies they support are one
way to boost student achievement – based on best practices and research-driven schools
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
196

already using the model. Many schools and districts have boosted student performance
and narrowed achievement gaps by using Odden’s ten strategies. The level of
implementation of these strategies at Bird of Paradise range from low to high; thus,
developing a more powerful school vision is imperative to attaining impressive student
outcomes. Strategies needing improvement are labeled in the “implementation” column
as “low” and presented in Table D.5, are as follows:
• Low implementation à (1) Adopt a new curriculum and textbook
materials. Bird of Paradise has not adopted a new curriculum since the
previous textbook adoption in ELA and mathematics in 2008. Only
intervention or support materials have been adopted.
Consideration: Newer and better materials are needed to increase student
achievement – inclusive of the future development of a school wide vision
of effective instructional practice and 100% teacher buy-in.
(2) Focus class time more efficiently. With an increase in class size, Bird
of Paradise cannot change the work life of teachers. Classes are over-
capacity in relation to the EBM and the lack of specialist teachers impacts
the time teachers need in the regular school day to plan instructional
lessons and collaborate with grade-level teachers to analyze data to inform
instruction.
Consideration: Reduce class sizes; provide core teachers at ratios of 15:1
in K-3 and 25:1 in K-5. Hire specialist teachers at a rate of 20% of all
teachers at Bird of Paradise.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
197

Bird of Paradise Resourced by the EBM (BOPEBM)
Bird of Paradise is resourced below the core recommendations in the Evidenced-
based model. Class size, percent poverty, and percent ELL are considerably higher than
the suggested level of resources for a prototypical elementary school. The reduction of
core teachers and the lack of specialist teachers on staff obviously impacts class size and
formation, teacher collaboration time, and professional development. Furthermore,
professional development is impacted by the reduction of one instructional facilitator, a
position critical in supporting 27 core teachers in a school almost twice the size as the
model recommends.
Schools can improve learning and teaching using research-based and best
practices-based strategies that in many cases may not require more money, and in others
where more money will help if it is spent strategically. If Bird of Paradise reallocated
staffing resources and used the core recommendations in the EBM, the overall school
vision, school configurations and staffing formulas would serve to provide guidance for
estimating an adequate level of education funding.
Table D.6 displays the actual use of core recommendations in the EBM, which
have been appropriated to the total student population and demographics for Bird of
Paradise. Due to the overall student population of 735 students, Bird of Paradise would
have proportionately more resources than that of the prototypical elementary school.
Additionally, the school has larger concentrations and populations of students in poverty
and EL students, so it would be eligible for a greater level of resources targeted to meet
their needs.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
198

Table D.6: Level of Resources at Bird of Paradise with the EBM (BOPEBM)
School Element
EBM
Prototypical Elementary
Schools
Bird of Paradise BOPEBM*
School configuration &
size
K-5: 432 K-6: 735 K-6: 735*
Class size
K-3: 15
4-5: 25
K-3: 23
4-6: 27
K-3: 29
4-6: 12
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day*
Instructional Days
200, incl. 10 PD days 180, incl. 1 PD day
200, incl. 10 PD
Days*
% of students with
disabilities
13.7% .02% .02%*
Percent Poverty
36.3% 90% 90%*
Percent ELL 10.6% 27% 27%*
School Personnel
Core teachers 24 22 41
Specialist teachers 20% of core teachers =4.8 0 8.2
Instructional Facilitators 2.2 1 3.75
Tutors: struggling
students
1:100 low SES 2 6.6
Teachers: EL students 1:100 EL *All teachers 2
Extended Day 1.31 0 2.2
Summer School 1.31 2 2.2
Mild disabilities
Severe disabilities
3 additional teaching
positions
100% state reimbursement
2
0
5
0
Gifted students $25 per student $10 per student $25 per student
Substitutes 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE
Pupil support staff
1:100 students in poverty =
1.32
5 6.6
Non-instr. Aides 2 2 3.4
Librarians/
media spec.
1 1 1.7
Principal 1 1 1.7
Secretary 2 1 3.4
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008), pp. 132-133.Copyright 2008 by
McGraw-Hill. Adapted with permission. * EBM generated resources considering BOP current school configuration and student
demographics.

Using the staffing recommendations in the EBM as a general guideline and
reallocating the current staff to the current school configuration, size and student
demographics, as indicated in Table D.6 result in the following:
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
199

• Class size: With the current enrollment of 438 students in K-3 and 294
students in grades 4-6, the EBM would generate core teacher ratios of 29:1
in grades K-3 and 12:1 in grades 4-6.
• Instructional Days: Increase by 20 days, the equivalent of one school
month; increase PD days by 9 days as recommended by the EBM.
• Multiple resources for struggling students: Ensure that adequate supports
are available for students in poverty and English learners. Provide one
tutor position for every 100 students with a poverty background and one
teacher position (e.g. ELD) for every 100 ELL students. The EBM would
generate a total of 6.6 tutors for struggling students and 2 tutors for
English learners.
• Core teachers: With an increase of 59 percent to the core teaching staff, in
relation to the total number of students, the EBM would generate 41 core
teachers.
• Specialist teachers: Hire specialist teachers to provide electives, with
ample provision for planning and collaboration time for teaching staff.
Bird of Paradise would staff 8.2 specialist teachers with a student
population of 735 students.
• Instructional facilitators: Increase school-based instructional coaches at a
rate of one coach position for every 200 students. At the current student
population, the EBM would generate 3.68 instructional facilitators for
Bird of Paradise.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
200

• Gifted students: Allocate $10 more dollars to every student enrolled in the
district for services for gifted students. The EBM would generate $25 per
gifted student.
• Pupil support: The EBM would generate 1 full time equivalent for every
student in poverty or 6.6 positions for pupil support (inclusive of
counselors, social workers, nurses).
• Non-instructional aides: The EBM would generate 3.4 non-instructional
aides.
• Administration, secretaries, and librarians: The EBM would generate 1.7
principals, 3.4 secretaries, and 1.7 librarians based on the size of the
sample school.
In a time of fiscal crisis, California schools continue to face drastic budget cuts.
However, despite drastic budget cuts to the general fund and categorical funding sources,
schools must continue to focus resources on enhancing the instructional program and
boosting student achievement. It may be more effective to use the core recommendations
in the EBM to help determine which “cuts” have the least impact on student performance.
With reconsiderations and staff reallocations, Bird of Paradise will be able to focus on
resources that improve the overall instructional program and student learning.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
201

Appendix E

CASE STUDY: CALLA LILY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Utilizing the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this case study is to examine the site level resource allocation in five
elementary schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student
demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and
API score ranges at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide
comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based
on the single unit of schools (Patton, 2002). The purpose of using the case study approach
was to provide comprehensive, detailed information regarding resource allocation. In
providing an analysis at the school level, the five case studies contribute to the ways in
which an evidence-based approach can help identify educational best practices and
strategies for improving student academic performance. Moreover, these strategies would
assist in further recommendations based on school finance adequacy models to achieve
gains in student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). The case study is divided in to
the following areas: (1) school background, (2) analysis of student performance, (3)
analysis of educational practices (4) education improvement goals and, (5) alignment of
education improvement goals and strategies to research-based strategies double student
performance, and (6) comparison of school resources to the Evidence-based model.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
202

School Background
Calla Lily is K-6 elementary school located in an urban unified school district (K-
12) within Los Angeles County. It is one of eleven elementary schools that serve
approximately 14,275 students. Calla Lily became a California Distinguished School in
2006. During the 2011-2012 school year, reported an enrollment of 766 students
(California Department of Education, 2012), making it one of the largest elementary
schools within the district. The school has a population of students that closely mirrors
the city’s diverse population of African-American and Hispanic/Latino residents. Table
E.1 provides a description of the school demographics.
Table E.1: Calla Lily Demographic Data, 2011-2012

School

Grades

Enrollment

AA
#
%

Hispanic
#
%

ELL
#
%

Free/Reduced
Meals %
Calla Lily K-6 766 82
11%
677
88%
319
42%
735
96%
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012); School Demographic Chart – API by California
Department of Education (2012).

As evidenced in Table E.1, Hispanic students were the largest enrolled population
at Calla Lily, followed by African American students. In the 2011-2012 school year,
Hispanic students comprised of 88 percent of the total school enrollment. African
American students followed with 11 percent of the total school enrollment. Based on this
enrollment data, Calla Lily served a disproportionately large Hispanic student enrollment.
Of the total school enrollment of 766 students, 42 percent were considered English
language learners (ELLs); 96 percent of the total student population participated in the
Free and Reduced Meal Program before and during school.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
203

Analysis of Student Performance
It is imperative to use data when analyzing student performance and making
school improvement decisions. According to the US Department of Education (1998),
hard data can motivate schools to take action. Elementary schools typically analyze
student achievement data, including results of the API, AYP, STAR, CELDT, and local
benchmark and curriculum embedded assessments. In addition to accountability
measures, student group data from state assessments must be painstakingly analyzed
when evaluating programs and developing school goals for the year.
Academic Performance Index (API)
In order to meet federal requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA), a growth API must reflect if the school or student groups scored at or above
the statewide performance of 800 (California Department of Education, 2012). At the
initiation of the study, Calla Lily had an API of 807. A year later, during the 2011-2012
school year, a decrease was demonstrated in student academic performance by 35 index
points, bringing the API to 772. The California Department of Education (2012) indicates
that schools with APIs at or above 800 must maintain a minimum API of 800. A school
meets its overall API Growth target if it meets its school wide target and all numerically
significant student group targets. Student groups must score at or above 800 index points
in order to meet statewide annual targets. Calla Lily did not meet targets for all student
groups Table D.2 reflects the summary of the API target information, base and growth,
from the 2011 school year to the 2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
204

Table E.2: Calla Lily API Growth Targets, 2011-2012

Growth Targets

2011 Base

2011-2012
Growth

2012
Growth

Met
Target?
School wide 807 -35 772 No
All Student Groups
AA/Black
Hispanic/Latino
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
English Learners
Students with Disabilities

806
808
807
N/A
707

-49
-32
-35
N/A
-2

757
773
772
N/A
705

No
No
No
No
No
All Targets > Both School wide & Student Groups No
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012). English Learner data was not available (N/A) on
CDE website.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
In 2012, the AYP requirement for the API was 740 index points. If a school
already reached the statewide API goal of 800, a one-point increase from the 2011 Base
API for a school was required to meet the 2012 Growth API. In the “met target” column
in Table D.2, the school wide and student group growth targets, reflect state
accountability requirements and match the federal AYP requirements (California
Department of Education, 2012). Calla Lily met the statewide accountability
requirements for school wide API growth target for making AYP, but did not meet the
federal accountability requirements for AYP.
AYP is a series of annual academic performance goals established for each school
and district, as well as the state. These institutions are determined to have made adequate
yearly progress if they meet or exceed each year’s goals. Under the state’s criteria for
ESEA, schools such as Calla Lily are required to meet or exceed requirements within
four areas to make AYP annually: (1) participation rate, (2) percent proficient – annual
measurable objectives (AMOs), (3) API as an additional indicator, and (4) graduation rate
(does not apply to elementary schools). Under ESEA, schools, districts, and the state
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
205

must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant student groups within
those schools, districts and the state. Thus, if an educational institution does not meet one
or more requirements by any significant student group, it does not make annual yearly
progress.
During the focal year of the study, Calla Lily did not make adequate yearly
progress. The conditions for making AYP consisted of a total of 17 criteria, inclusive of
three core areas (e.g. participation, proficiency, API). Three significant subgroups at
Calla Lily did not meet all of the requirements in order to satisfy the criteria for adequate
yearly progress. Significant student groups for the year included: (1) Black or African
American, (2) Hispanic or Latino and, (3) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged.
The school did not meet its annual measurable objectives in English-language arts
or mathematics. Figure D.1 reflects the percentage of student groups that were at the
proficient or advanced levels in both subject areas. The statewide target for English-
language arts was 78.4 percent and 79.0 percent for mathematics. Students at Calla Lily
demonstrated weakness in language arts and mathematics. In both subject areas, students
missed the statewide targets for the percentage of students performing at the proficient or
advanced levels.
Figure E.1: AYP Percent Proficient, School wide and Student Groups, 2011-2012

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
43.5

56.7

41.7

47.9

43.5

57.3

43.9

57.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ELA
MATH

SCHOOLWIDE

AA

HISPANIC

SED

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
206

Percent Proficient: English Language Arts.
As evidenced in Figure E.1, all student groups were within 1.8 percentage points
of one another. School wide, 43.5 percent of students were considered at or above the
proficient level of performance in English Language Arts on state exams. The highest
performing student group was the Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group with
43.9 percent of students reaching proficiency or above. The African-American/Black
student group performed lower than all students. The Hispanic/Latino student group
performed higher than African-American/Black students and the same as students’ school
wide, but slightly lower than the Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group.
Percent Proficient: Mathematics.
In mathematics, 56.7 percent scored at the proficient or advanced levels, while the
state expected 79.0 percent of the total school wide population to score at these same
levels.. The Hispanic/Latino student group had a higher percentage of students at the
proficient or advanced level than any other significant student group at the school,
followed by the Socioeconomically Disadvantaged group. African-American/Black
students had fewer students scoring at the proficient or above level than any other student
group.
API: Additional AYP Indicator.
The Academic Performance Index (API) is used as an additional indicator for
AYP. In 2012, the API Criteria for meeting federal AYP was a minimum "2012 Growth
API" score of 740 OR "2011-12 Growth" of at least one point (California Department of
Education, 2012). Calla Lily met the statewide accountability requirements for school
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
207

wide API growth target for making AYP but did not meet the federal accountability
requirements for AYP.
Based on an API of 772 for the 2011-2012 school year.
Program Improvement Status
In California, PI is the formal designation for Title I-funded schools and districts
that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years. A school or district that was in PI
during 2011–12 and does not make AYP in 2012 will advance to the next level of PI for
2012–13 and be required to immediately implement the applicable ESEA requirements.
Although Calla Lily maintained the requirement for the state in school wide
academic performance, it did not meet the federal requirements as determined by
academic yearly progress (AYP) of all its student groups during the 2011-2012 school
year. Calla Lily was not identified for Program Improvement during the focal year of the
study.
Figure E.2: Identification for Program Improvement

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

As illustrated in Figure E.2, Calla Lily met AYP two years prior to the 2011-2012
school year, but did not meet AYP for the year prior to the same school year. The
California Department of Education (2012) indicates that a Title I school will be
2009-‐2010

MADE
AYP:YES

2010-‐2011

MADE
AYP:
NO

2011-‐2012
MADE

AYP:
NO

NOT
IN
PI

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
208

identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive years, the Title I school does not
make AYP in the same content area school wide or for any numerically significant
subgroup, or on the same indicator school wide. During the 2009-2010 school year, Calla
Lily met the participation rate criteria, percent proficient criteria for mathematics, and an
additional indicator for AYP by meeting API. Thus, based on the academic yearly
progress data for two consecutive years, Bird of Paradise was not identified for Program
Improvement in 2011-2012. Nevertheless, the school will enter PI Year 1 during the
2012-2013 school year.
Table E. 3: Calla Lily AYP Trend, 2008-2012
AYP Criteria 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Participation Rate: ELA Yes Yes Yes Yes
Participation Rate: Math Yes Yes Yes Yes
Percent Proficient: ELA

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
Percent Proficient: Math

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
API
Met API Criteria
717
Yes
769
Yes
807
Yes
772
Yes
Made AYP Yes Yes No No

Result
Year 1 – Did
not meet
AYP
Year 2– Did
not meet
AYP
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
As demonstrated in Table E.3, after the 2008-2009 school year, school wide
student performance on state exams declined. The result of this decline was demonstrated
in student performance, specifically the number of students considered proficient or
advanced in English-language arts and mathematics. Numerically significant student
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
209

groups contributed heavily to the overall school wide results for AYP. The African-
American/Black student group did not make AYP for two consecutive years, since the
2009-2010 school year, in language arts and mathematics. The Hispanic/Latino student
group did not make AYP, every other year since that same school year in language arts
and mathematics. The Socioeconomically Disadvantaged group performed the same as
the Hispanic/Latino group in language arts and mathematics. English learners did not
make AYP in the 2009-2010 school year but so the following year. Last year, English
learners were not considered a numerically significant subgroup. As a result, Calla Lily
has taken a closer look at student achievement data and revisited educational
improvement goals to enhance the instructional program of the school. These data and
goals have been written and implemented in the Single Plan for Student Achievement
(SPSA). The purpose of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is to create a
cycle of continuous improvement of student performance, and to ensure that all students
succeed in reaching academic standards set by the State Board of Education.
Analysis of Educational Practices
Analysis of educational practices can result in large, positive effects for all
students. Practices are typically investigated by analyzing student achievement data.
Analyzing data allows schools to describe the gap between what exists and what practices
need refining.
Alignment of Curriculum and Instructional Materials
Calla Lily uses a comprehensive, standards-based curriculum that was selected by
IUSD. The school’s textbooks and supplemental materials are aligned directly with the
content standards for the state and offer students the opportunity to achieve academic
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
210

excellence. The school’s goal is to take the core academic program at Calla Lily and
strengthen each student’s knowledge base as they transition to the next grade level and
into middle school.
Alignment of Staff Development
The staff of Calla Lily participates in a variety of professional development (PD)
sessions twice a month. Teachers are encouraged to attend workshops and seminars
provided through the county office of education and other educational organization. All
staff development and professional growth courses and trainings are designed to have a
positive impact on teacher performance in the classroom, increase student academic
achievement and safeguard the academic learning of all student groups on campus
annually. During the school year, teachers engage in grade-level collaborations and
professional development monthly to share ideas and new curriculum updates. Teachers
identify strengths and areas that need improvement among all student groups school
wide, and devise strategies to help students acquire skills needed to improve
academically and gain mastery on the CST annually. Teachers also conduct cross grade
level articulation meetings to share strategies that have successful in improving students’
performance, and to identify what specific measures need to be implemented to ensure
success among all learners.
Services to Enable Underperforming Students to Meet Standards
Calla Lily offers an array of services to enable underperforming student to meet
state content standards such as the following:
• Differentiated instruction
• Peer tutoring
• Recess/lunch reading and math
clubs
• Targeted small group
interventions
• RTI
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES 211

Use of State and Local Assessments
State and local assessments are utilized to modify instruction and improve student
academic achievement. More specifically, weekly and quarterly assessments measure
student academic growth. Results are analyzed during grade level, leadership and
administrative meetings to plan classroom instructional strategies, professional
development and student intervention programs.
Resources to Assist Struggling Students
Parents and members of the community have access to the Parent Resource
Center, which provides instructional materials to boost student achievement. Parents also
have been provided with language and parenting classes to support their children. The
Student Success Team and parent-teacher conferences assist students, families, and
teachers in seeking positive solutions for maximizing student potential. Students
struggling to meet grade level standards may require resources provided by specialists.
Thus, if a student has an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) or 504 Plan, they may
receive services from a resource specialist, for speech and language therapy or counseling
services from an outside organization.
Limitations to Enable Underperforming Students
Several limitations of the current program exist that make it difficult for
underperforming student to meet grade level content standards. There is a need to find
creative ways to provide additional intervention programs for underperforming students.
The lack of federal, state, county, and district level funding places budget restrictions on
supplemental resources for struggling students. Teacher layoffs and the inability to
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
212

replace ineffective teachers also present limitations followed by the number of
instructional minutes in a school day.
Educational Improvement Goals
Educational improvement goals are based upon analysis of verifiable state data,
including the Academic Performance Index and other assessments, and include local
measures of student achievement. The staff and School Site Council (SCC) at Calla Lily
analyzes the academic performance of all student groups, including English learners,
socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with exceptional needs and has
considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students
failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. The SSC considers input from the staff and
school community. Based upon this analysis, staff and the SSC establish the following
educational improvement goals.
For the 2011-2012 school year, Calla Lily adopted the following school goals,
related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student groups not
meeting state standards: (1) English Language Development, (2) Mathematics, and (3)
Reading/Language Arts. The school included three additional goals to support student
learning and achievement: (4) Professional Development, (5) Parent Involvement, and (6)
Discipline & Safety. A total of six goals were implemented in the school’s Single Plan
for Student Achievement for the school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
213

Table E. 4: School Goals for Improving Student Achievement, 2011-2012
School Goal Description
Goal 1: English Language Development – Increase
Reading Comprehension Scores for EL students
By June 2012, the percentage of EL learners, grades 2-
6, scoring at or above proficiency on the ELA section
of the CST will increase by 10%.
Goal 2: Mathematics-Increase Student Scores
By June 2012, 10% of all student groups, grades 2-6,
will be proficient or above on the CST and CMA in
mathematics.
Goal 3: Reading/Language Arts – ELA/Reading
Comprehension & Writing
After a thorough analysis of the previous school year’s
test scores, the goal is to increase student’s proficiency
levels by 10% schoolwide in ELA on the CST and
CMA. Struggling students will receive RTI instruction
from highly qualified teachers to assure they receive
the expected CST proficiency levels.
Goal 4: Professional Development – Instructional
Improvement Strategies
1. Grade level chairpersons will be required to
attend at least one PD workshop (outside of
school) and conduct on PD workshop based
on new knowledge.
2. Teachers with expertise in specific areas will
be asked to share ideas/knowledge during
informal staff development meetings.
3. “Make and Take” workshops will be held to
give teachers ideas and strategies to
implement in their classrooms.
Goal 5: Parent Involvement – Increase Parent
Involvement & Home-School Partnerships
The school’s goals is to encourage and provide new
opportunities and positive programs for parents to
participate in as their children increase academic
proficiency in content areas; increase monthly
attendance at parent and community meetings (e.g.
Title I, EL Parent Trainings, volunteerism, etc.).
Goal 6: Discipline & Safety - Schoolwide Student
Behavior
By June 2012, 95% of Calla Lily students will display
acceptable behavior through the use of character
education themes that promote a positive and safe
school culture, climate and environment.
Source: Single Plan for Student Achievement, Calla Lily, 2011-2012.
Alignment of Education Goals and Strategies to Research-based Strategies
Districts and schools need effective instructional strategies and adequate
resources. Although student test scores are deemed successful on state exams and the
state’s definition of proficiency, the results are not so certain when a federal definition of
proficiency is applied.
Although successful in previous years, during the focal year of the study, Calla
Lily did not meet the state’s goal of 800 index points for the API or the federal
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
214

accountability goal for AYP. These results lend support to the need to increase student
performance to strengthen student’s future on another on both accountability measures.
Odden & Picus (2009) assert that there is knowledge about how to dramatically
improve student academic achievement, which is labeled as “doubling” performance. In
their study of schools and districts that doubled student performance, Odden, et al.,
(2007) found that the schools followed a strong similar set of steps in their improvement
strategies. These strategies are as follows:
1. Conducting a needs assessment: Schools analyzed state assessments
data and formative assessment data to become more knowledgeable
about the status of student performance and he nature of the
achievement gap.
2. Setting high goals: Schools set high goals with a focus on educating 90-
95 percent of students to proficient and advanced levels of achievement.
3. Adopt a new curriculum: Schools reviewed evidence on effective
curriculum and made decisions on a new instructional program for the
site. All schools replaced the old curriculum with a more rigorous and
research-based curriculum.
4. Commit to data-based decision making: Schools committed to an
ongoing practice of analyzing data to help tailor instruction to student
needs.
5. Invest in ongoing professional development: Schools invested in teacher
professional development that included summer institutes, resources for
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
215

trainers, placed instructional coaches in all schools and extended the
school year for teachers.
6. Focus class time more effectively: Schools used time more effectively,
reducing class time interruptions. This was done by increased time
allocations for some core subjects and double class periods for
struggling students.
7. Provide multiple interventions for struggling students: Schools provided
assistance to struggling students that consisted of tutoring, extended day
programs, summer school, and English language development for all
English learner students.
8. Create professional learning communities: Schools created professional
learning communities to allow teachers to work collaboratively on data
analysis and the instructional program.
9. Empower leaders to support instructional improvement: Schools
employed strong leadership around data-based decision making.
10. Take advantage of external expertise: Schools brought external
professional knowledge to the school by hiring experts and adopting
research-based curricula.
Table E.5 1 illustrates a synthesis of results at Calla Lily as compared to the ten steps to
doubling student performance for the 2011-2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
216

Table E.5: Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Calla Lily
Odden’s Ten Steps
to Double Student
Performance
Calla Lily

Level of Implementation

Low Moderate High
1. Conduct needs
assessment/analyze
student achievement
data
Analyzed student assessment data to become
knowledgeable about performance in PD and
grade-level teams. Assessment analysis
included analysis of state exam results and
formative assessments (i.e. benchmark,
quarterly) to drive instruction.

High
2. Set higher goals Use of the Single Plan for Student
Achievement to set SMART goals for the
school year by the staff and SSC. Increase test
scores by 10% for all grade 2-6 students.

Moderate

3. Adopt a new
curriculum
New core curriculum not adopted. Staff and
administration reviewed best practices and
effective classroom strategies. Supports for
struggling students implemented.

Low

4. Commit to data-
based decision
making
Ongoing analysis of student assessment data
to gain more knowledge and awareness of
student performance issues; time provided for
grade level team collaboration.

High

5. Invest in on-going
professional
development
Goal: Instructional strategies will improve via
training. Grade level chairpersons and teachers
being evaluated to attend PD workshops
outside of school and share knowledge with
staff. “Make and Take” workshops with all
teachers input at staff development mtgs.

Moderate

6. Focus class time
more efficiently
Class sizes did not decrease during the 2011-
2012 school year.
Low
7. Provide multiple
interventions for
struggling students
Provided extra help for struggling students
inclusive of: (1) extended day provided by
SES providers/LEAP, (2) intervention tutoring
within the classroom, (3) ELD daily. Lack of
funds for teachers to receive extra-duty pay for
afterschool tutoring.
High
8. Create professional
learning communities
Grade-level teams characterized by data-based
decision making, ongoing discussion of good
instruction and strategies and sharing of best
practices.
Moderate
9. Empower leaders to
support instructional
improvement
Supported by the leadership team,
instructional leaders, administration, and the
staff around data-based decision making with
an emphasis on improving the instructional
program.
Moderate
10. Take advantage of
external expertise
PD based on best practices and successful
strategies. School sent out grade level
chairpersons and teachers (during evaluation
year) to attend PD workshops.
Moderate
Source: Adapted from Ten Strategies to Double Student Performance (Odden, 2009).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
217

Calla Lily is already using several strategies recommended by evidence-based
adequacy model. It is evidenced by the data in Table E.5 that Calla Lily needs to focus on
identifying resources recommended to double student performance in the near future. It is
apparent that two areas were at a low level of implementation: (1) adopting a new
curriculum and (2) focusing class time more effectively. The other eight strategies were
either at a moderate or high level of implementation.
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-based Model
The Evidence-based model is a research driven approach to linking resources to
student achievement. The Evidence-based approach identifies a set of school-level
components that are required to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality instructional
program within a school and the evidence of their effectiveness (Odden & Picus, 2008).
It determines the level of resources needed to meet a school’s educational goals. This
approach is based on evidence from three sources: (1) research with randomized
assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of evidence), (2) research with other
types of controls or statistical procedures that can help separate the impact of a treatment
and, (3) best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district or school
level. The Evidence-based funding approach coupled with the funding model includes
positions that research and best practice identify as linked to increased student learning.
Future Considerations
School characteristics and personnel can significantly impact student
achievement. The resources allocated in the EBM and the strategies they support are one
way to boost student achievement – based on best practices and research-driven schools
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
218

already using the model. Many schools and districts have boosted student performance
and narrowed achievement gaps by using Odden’s ten strategies. The level of
implementation of these strategies at Calla Lily range from low to high; thus, developing
a more powerful school vision is imperative to attaining impressive student outcomes.
Strategies needing improvement are labeled in the “implementation” column as “low”
and presented in Table E.5, are as follows:
• Low implementation à (1) Adopt a new curriculum and textbook
materials. Calla Lily has not adopted a new curriculum since the previous
textbook adoption in ELA and mathematics in 2008. Only intervention or
support materials have been adopted.
Consideration: Newer and better materials are needed to increase student
achievement – inclusive of the future development of a school wide vision
of effective instructional practice and 100% teacher buy-in.
(2) Focus class time more efficiently. With an increase in class size, Calla
Lily cannot change the work life of teachers. Classes are over-capacity in
relation to the EBM and the lack of specialist teachers impacts the time
teachers need in the regular school day to plan instructional lessons and
collaborate with grade-level teachers to analyze data to inform instruction.
Consideration: Reduce class sizes; provide core teachers at ratios of 15:1
in K-3 and 25:1 in K-5. Hire specialist teachers at a rate of 20% of all
teachers at Calla Lily.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
219

Calla Lily Resourced by the EBM (CLEBM)
Calla Lily is resourced below the core recommendations in the Evidenced-based
model. Class size, percent poverty, and percent ELL are considerably higher than the
suggested level of resources for a prototypical elementary school. The reduction of core
teachers and the lack of specialist teachers on staff obviously impacts class size and
formation, teacher collaboration time, and professional development. Furthermore,
professional development is impacted by the reduction of one instructional facilitator, a
position critical in supporting 27 core teachers in a school almost twice the size as the
model recommends.
Schools can improve learning and teaching using research-based and best
practices-based strategies that in many cases may not require more money, and in others
where more money will help if it is spent strategically. If Calla Lily reallocated staffing
resources and used the core recommendations in the EBM, the overall school vision,
school configurations and staffing formulas would serve to provide guidance for
estimating an adequate level of education funding.
Table E.6 displays the actual use of core recommendations in the EBM, which
have been appropriated to the total student population and demographics for Calla Lily.
Due to the overall student population of 766 students, Calla Lily would have more
resources than that of the prototypical elementary school. Additionally, the school has
larger concentrations and populations of students in poverty and EL students, so it would
be eligible for a greater level of resources targeted to meet their needs.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
220

Table E.6: Level of Resources at Calla Lily with the EBM (CLEBM)
School Element
EBM
Prototypical Elementary
Schools
Calla Lily (CL) CLEBM*
School configuration &
size
K-5: 432 K-6: 766 K-6: 766*
Class size
K-3: 15
4-5: 25
K-3: 25
4-6: 27
K-3: 30
4-6: 13
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day*
Instructional Days
200, incl. 10 PD days 180, incl. 1 PD day
200, incl. 10 PD
Days*
% of students with
disabilities
13.7% .03% .03%*
Percent Poverty
36.3% 96% 96%*
Percent ELL 10.6% 42% 42%*
School Personnel
Core teachers 24 27 42
Specialist teachers 20% of core teachers =4.8 0 8.4
Instructional Facilitators 2.2 1 3.9
Tutors: struggling
students
1:100 low SES 7 7.4
Teachers: EL students 1:100 EL *All teachers 3.0
Extended Day 1.31 0 2.1
Summer School 1.31 0 2.1
Mild disabilities
Severe disabilities
3 additional teaching
positions
100% state reimbursement
3
0
5.1
0
Gifted students $25 per student $10 per student $25 per student
Substitutes 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE
Pupil support staff
1:100 students in poverty =
1.32
0 7.4
Non-instr. Aides 2 2 3.1
Librarians/
media spec.
1 1 1.6
Principal 1 1 1.6
Secretary 2 1 3.1
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008), pp. 132-133.Copyright 2008 by
McGraw-Hill. Adapted with permission. * EBM generated resources considering Calla Lily current school configuration and student
demographics.

Using the staffing recommendations in the EBM as a general guideline and
reallocating the current staff to the current school configuration, size and student
demographics, as indicated in Table E.6 result in the following:
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
221

• Class size: With the current enrollment of 451 students in K-3 and 314
students in grades 4-6, the EBM would generate core teacher ratios of 30:1
in grades K-3 and 13:1 in grades 4-6.
• Instructional Days: Increase by 20 days, the equivalent of one school
month; increase PD days by 9 days as recommended by the EBM.
• Multiple resources for struggling students: Ensure that adequate supports
are available for students in poverty and English learners. Provide one
tutor position for every 100 students with a poverty background and one
teacher position (e.g. ELD) for every 100 ELL students. The EBM would
generate a total of 6.5 tutors for struggling students and 3 tutors for
English learners.
• Core teachers: The EBM would generate 42 core teachers.
• Specialist teachers: Hire specialist teachers to provide electives, with
ample provision for planning and collaboration time for teaching staff.
Calla Lily would staff 8.4 specialist teachers with a student population of
766 students.
• Instructional facilitators: Increase school-based instructional coaches at a
rate of one coach position for every 200 students. At the current student
population, the EBM would generate 3.9 instructional facilitators for Calla
Lily.
• Gifted students: Allocate $10 more dollars to every student enrolled in the
district for services for gifted students. The EBM would generate $25 per
gifted student.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
222

• Pupil support: The EBM would generate 1 full time equivalent for every
student in poverty or 7.4 positions for pupil support (inclusive of
counselors, social workers, nurses).
• Non-instructional aides: The EBM would generate 3.5 non-instructional
aides.
• Administration, secretaries, and librarians: The EBM would generate 1.8
principals, 3.5 secretaries, and 1.8 librarians based on the size of the
sample school.
In a time of fiscal crisis, California schools continue to face drastic budget cuts.
However, despite drastic budget cuts to the general fund and categorical funding sources,
schools must continue to focus resources on enhancing the instructional program and
boosting student achievement. It may be more effective to use the core recommendations
in the EBM to help determine which “cuts” have the least impact on student performance.
With reconsiderations and staff reallocations, Calla Lily will be able to focus on
resources that improve the overall instructional program and student learning.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
223

Appendix F

CASE STUDY: HYACINTH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Utilizing the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this case study is to examine the site level resource allocation in five
elementary schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student
demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and
API score ranges at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide
comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based
on the single unit of schools (Patton, 2002). The purpose of using the case study approach
was to provide comprehensive, detailed information regarding resource allocation. In
providing an analysis at the school level, the five case studies contribute to the ways in
which an evidence-based approach can help identify educational best practices and
strategies for improving student academic performance. Moreover, these strategies would
assist in further recommendations based on school finance adequacy models to achieve
gains in student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). The case study is divided in to
the following areas: (1) school background, (2) analysis of student performance, (3)
analysis of educational practices (4) education improvement goals and, (5) alignment of
education improvement goals and strategies to research-based strategies double student
performance, and (6) comparison of school resources to the Evidence-based model.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
224

School Background
Hyacinth is K-6 elementary school located in an urban unified school district (K-
12) within Los Angeles County. It is one of eleven elementary schools that serve
approximately 14,275 students. During the 2011-2012 school year, Hyacinth reported an
enrollment of 426 students (California Department of Education, 2012), making it one of
the smallest elementary schools within the district. The school has a population of
students that closely mirrors the city’s diverse population of African-American and
Hispanic/Latino residents. Table F.1 provides a description of the school demographics.
Table F.1 Hyacinth Demographic Data, 2011-2012

School

Grades

Enrollment

AA

Hispanic

ELL

Free/Reduced
Meals
Hyacinth K-6 426 106
25%
315
74%
175
41%
396
93%
Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012); School Demographic Chart – API by California Department
of Education (2012).

As evidenced in Table F.1, Hispanic students were the largest enrolled population
at Hyacinth, followed by African American students. In the 2011-2012 school year,
Hispanic students comprised of 74 percent of the total school enrollment. African
American students were the next largest ethnic group with 25 percent of the total school
enrollment. Based on this enrollment data, Hyacinth served a disproportionately large
Hispanic student enrollment. Of the total school enrollment of 426 students, 41 percent
were considered English language learners (ELL); 93 percent of the total student
population participated in the Free and Reduced Meal Program before and during school.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
225

Analysis of Student Performance
It is imperative to use data when analyzing student performance and making
school improvement decisions. According to the US Department of Education (1998),
hard data can motivate schools to take action. Elementary schools typically analyze
student achievement data, including results of the API, AYP, STAR, CELDT, and local
benchmark and curriculum embedded assessments. In addition to accountability
measures, student group data from state assessments must be painstakingly analyzed
when evaluating programs and developing school goals for the year.
Academic Performance Index (API)
In order to meet federal requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA), a Growth API must reflect if the school or student groups scored at or above
the statewide performance of 800 (California Department of Education, 2012). At the
initiation of the study, Hyacinth had increased by 35 points the year before and had an
API of 790, just 10 index points below the statewide goal. A year later, during the 2011-
2012 school year, a 25 point decrease was demonstrated in student academic
performance, bringing the API to 765. Based on the state assessment results in 2010-
2011, the SSC, administration and staff projected to increase to meet or exceed the
statewide goal. Since the school experienced a decline on the performance index, it did
not meet is overall API Growth target or any subgroup targets. Hyacinth did not meet
targets for all student groups Table F.2 reflects the summary of the API target
information, base and growth, from the 2011 school year to the 2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
226

Table F.2 Hyacinth API Growth Targets, 2011-2012

Growth Targets

2011 Base

2011-2012
Growth

2012
Growth

Met
Target
?
School wide 790 -25 765 No
All Student Groups
AA/Black
Hispanic/Latino
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
English Learners
Students with Disabilities

757
798
784
N/A
N/A

-22
-26
-17
N/A
N/A

757
772
767
N/A
N/A
No
No
No
No
N/A
N/A
All Targets > Both School wide & Student
Groups
No
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012). English Learner & Students with Disabilities data
was not available (N/A) on CDE website; groups were not numerically significant.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
AYP is a series of annual academic performance goals established for each school
and district, as well as the state. These institutions are determined to have made adequate
yearly progress if they meet or exceed each year’s goals. Under the state’s criteria for
ESEA, schools such as Hyacinth are required to meet or exceed requirements within four
areas to make AYP annually: (1) participation rate, (2) percent proficient – annual
measurable objectives (AMOs), (3) API as an additional indicator, and (4) graduation rate
(does not apply to elementary schools). Under ESEA, not only do schools, districts, and
the state must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant student groups
within those schools, districts and the state. Thus, if an educational institution does not
meet one or more requirements by any significant student group, it does not make annual
yearly progress.
During the 2011-2012 school year, Hyacinth did not make AYP. Significant
subgroups did not meet all of the requirements in order to satisfy all of the criteria for
adequate yearly progress. A total of 17 criteria were included for meeting federal AYP.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
227

Significant student groups for Hyacinth included: (1) Black or African American, (2)
Hispanic or Latino and, (3) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged.
The school did not meet its annual measurable objectives in English-language arts
or mathematics. Figure F.1 reflects the percentage of student groups that satisfied the
targets for both subject areas. The statewide target for English-language arts was 78.4
percent and 79.0 percent for mathematics.
Figure F.1 AYP Percent Proficient, School wide and Student Groups, 2011-2012

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

Percent Proficient: English Language Arts.
Students at Hyacinth demonstrated weakness in language arts and mathematics. In
both subject areas, students missed the statewide targets for the percentage of students
performing at the proficient or advanced levels. As evidenced in Figure F.1, all student
groups were within 5.7 percentage points of one another. School wide, 44.2 percent of
students were considered at or above the proficient level of performance in English
Language Arts on state exams. The highest performing student group was the
Hispanic/Latino student group with 45.0 percent of students reaching proficiency or
above. The African-American/Black student group performed lower than all students.
The Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group performed higher than African-
44.2

49.8

39.3

37.5

45

52.9

44.2

50.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

ELA
MATH

SCHOOLWIDE

AA

HISPANIC

SED

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
228

American/Black students and was equivalent to students’ school wide, but slightly lower
than the Hispanic/Latino student group.
Percent Proficient: Mathematics.
In mathematics, 49.8 percent scored at the proficient or advanced levels, while the
state expected 79.0 percent of the total school wide population to score at these same
levels. Based on the data, only 63.0 percent of students at Hyacinth met or exceeded the
percent proficient criteria for the 2011-2012 school year. The Hispanic/Latino student
group had a higher percentage of students at the proficient or advanced level than any
other significant student group at the school, followed by the Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged group. African-American/Black students had fewer students scoring at the
proficient or above level than any other student group.
API: Additional AYP Indicator.
The Academic Performance Index (API) is used as an additional indicator for
AYP. In 2012, the API Criteria for meeting federal AYP was a minimum "2012 Growth
API" score of 740 OR "2011-12 Growth" of at least one point (California Department of
Education, 2012). Hyacinth met the statewide accountability requirements for school
wide API growth target for making AYP but did not meet the federal accountability
requirements for AYP. Based on an API of 765 for the 2011-2012 school year, Hyacinth
met the 2012 API criteria for the AYP.
Program Improvement Status
In California, Program Improvement (PI) is the formal designation for Title I-
funded schools and districts that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years. A school or
district that was in PI during 2011–12 and does not make AYP in 2012 will advance to
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
229

the next level of PI for 2012–13 and be required to immediately implement the applicable
ESEA requirements.
Although Hyacinth maintained the requirement for the state in school wide
academic performance, it did not meet the federal requirements as determined by
academic yearly progress (AYP) of all its student groups in 2011-2012. Because
Hyacinth did not make AYP during the 2009-2010 school year but made AYP in the
2010-2011 school year, it cannot be identified as a PI school.
Figure F.2 Identification for Program Improvement

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

As illustrated in Figure F.2, Hyacinth did not meet AYP two years prior to the
focal year of the study but met AYP during the initiation year in 2010-2011. The
California Department of Education (2012) indicates that a Title I school will be
identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive years, the Title I school does not
make AYP in the same content area school wide or for any numerically significant
subgroup, or on the same indicator school wide. During the 2009-2010 school year,
Hyacinth met the participation rate criteria for ELA and math, but failed to meet the
targets for students scoring at the percent proficient level for English-language arts.
However, the school did meet the target for percent proficient in mathematics and the
additional indicator for AYP by meeting API. In the following school year, Hyacinth met
2009-‐2010

MADE
AYP:
NO

2010-‐2011

MADE
AYP:
YES

2011-‐2012
MADE

AYP:
NO

NOT
IN
PI

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
230

all student group targets for participation rate and percent proficient in language arts and
mathematics. Thus, based on the academic yearly progress data for two consecutive
years, Hyacinth was not placed in PI during the 2011-2012 school year.
Table F. 3 Hyacinth AYP Trend, 2008-2012
AYP Criteria 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Participation Rate: ELA Yes Yes Yes Yes
Participation Rate: Math Yes No Yes Yes
Percent Proficient: ELA

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
No

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
Percent Proficient: Math

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
API
Met API Criteria
753
Yes
755
Yes
790
Yes
765
Yes
Made AYP Yes No Yes No
Result

NOT IN
PI
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
As demonstrated in Table F.3, after the 2008-2009 school year, school wide
student performance on state exams declined. The result of this decline was demonstrated
in student performance, specifically the number of students considered proficient or
advanced in English-language arts and mathematics. Numerically significant student
groups contributed heavily to the overall school wide results for AYP. The African-
American/Black student group made AYP every other year since the 2008-2009 school
year leading up to the 2011-2012 school year in language arts. The same group made
AYP in mathematics for three years in a row until the 2011-2012 school year. The
Hispanic/Latino, SED, and ELL group mirrored the African-American student group in
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
231

language arts and mathematics over the period of four years. However, English learners
were not statistically significant during the 2011-2012 school year. As a result, Hyacinth
has taken a closer look at student achievement data and revisited educational
improvement goals to enhance the instructional program of the school. These data and
goals have been written and implemented in the Single Plan for Student Achievement
(SPSA). The purpose of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is to create a
cycle of continuous improvement of student performance, and to ensure that all students
succeed in reaching academic standards set by the State Board of Education.
Analysis of Educational Practices
Analysis of educational practices can result in large, positive effects for all
students. Practices are typically investigated by analyzing student achievement data.
Analyzing data allows schools to describe the gap between what exists and what practices
need refining.
Alignment of Curriculum and Instructional Materials
Hyacinth aligns instruction to the state content standards wherein a standards-
based curriculum is implemented. All core programs are available for student
populations. Special needs students, specifically RSP students, acquire and maintain
access to core curriculum through mainstream classes. Special Day Class (SDC) students
acquire and maintain access to core curriculum through the diligence of principal and
instructional facilitator.
Alignment of Staff Development
The staff of Hyacinth participates in a variety of professional development (PD)
sessions twice a month. PD is aligned to specific state content standards or domain within
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
232

the state content area framework, formative assessments, and needs assessment data
completed by teachers. Hyacinth maintains a PD Committee that provides input on
professional development for staff.
Services to Enable Underperforming Students to Meet Standards
At Hyacinth, all teachers are expected to differentiate instruction for students at
every grade level. Students are also provided with the opportunity to attend after school
intervention sessions with LEAP.
Use of State and Local Assessments
State and local assessments are utilized to modify instruction and improve student
academic achievement. More specifically, weekly and quarterly assessments measure
student academic growth. Results are analyzed during grade level, leadership and
administrative meetings to plan classroom instructional strategies, professional
development and student intervention programs.
Resources to Assist Struggling Students
An array of resources are made available to meet the needs of struggling students.
Parents and members of the community have access to the Parent Resource Center, which
provides instructional materials to boost student achievement. The Student Success
Team and parent-teacher conferences assist students, families, and teachers in seeking
positive solutions for maximizing student potential. Students struggling to meet grade
level standards may require resources provided by specialists. Thus, if a student has an
Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) or 504 Plan, they may receive services from a
resource specialist, for speech and language therapy or counseling services from an
outside organization. After school hours, students participate in the Fun Club, run by the
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
233

city of Iris, or LEAP, an afterschool enrichment program with embedded tutoring
services.
Limitations to Enable Underperforming Students
Several limitations of the current program exist that make it difficult for
underperforming student to meet grade level content standards. During the 2011-2012
school year, Hyacinth experienced an increase in class size. Limited funding for
struggling students who are labeled as “English Only” (EO) contributes to increasing the
gap in students not meeting grade level standards. There continues to be a need for more
parent education and English classes.
Educational Improvement Goals
Educational improvement goals are based upon analysis of verifiable state data,
including the Academic Performance Index and other assessments, and include local
measures of student achievement. The staff and School Site Council (SCC) at Hyacinth
analyzes the academic performance of all student groups, including English learners,
socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with exceptional needs and has
considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students
failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. The SSC considers input from the staff and
school community. Based upon this analysis, staff and the SSC establishes the following
educational improvement goals.
For the 2011-2012 school year, Hyacinth adopted the following school goals,
related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student groups not
meeting state standards: (1) English Language Development, (2) Reading and Language
Arts, and (3) Mathematics. The school included three additional goals to support student
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
234

learning and achievement: (1) Parental Involvement, (2) Professional Development, and
(3) School Environment. A total of six goals were implemented in the school’s Single
Plan for Student Achievement for the school year.
Table F. 4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement, 2011-2012
School Goal Description
Goal 1: English Language Development
1. Increase the percentage of students, by
grade level, who score Advanced or Early
Advanced on the CELDT.
2. Increase the number of students who are
reclassified, by grade level.
Goal 2: Reading/Language Arts – Reading
Comprehension and Writing
1. Reading Comprehension: To Exit PI
status by increasing reading scores in
ELA based on Safe Harbor guidelines.
2. Writing: 60% of students will acquire
proficiency on writing samples using core
language arts writing rubric.
Goal 3: Mathematics – Number Sense
To increase overall and subgroup mathematics
scores based on Safe Harbor guidelines as follows:
School wide: 67%; AA* – 61%; Hispanic/Latino –
68%; SED – 65%; ELL – 67%; Students with
Disabilities* – 62%.
*Special focus on subgroups that did not make
AYP.
Goal 4: Professional Development – Provide Quality,
Data Driven Professional Development
By June 2012, 100% of Hyacinth teachers will
participate in a series of instructional
workshops/conferences in the areas identified by
the school’s needs assessment data, assessment
data, and input from school advisory groups.
Goal 5: Parental Involvement – Educate Parents and
Increase Parent Participation
Parents will:
• Actively participate in school functions
and events;
• Have access to a parent center on campus;
Hyacinth will:
• Provide information to enhance parent
involvement and student achievement;
• Offer parent workshops/classes;
• Provide educational fieldtrips to parents;
• Keep parents informed on best practices
and resources for students.
Goal 6: School Environment – Safe Schools
By the end of the 2011-2012 school year, Hyacinth
will maintain a safe environment by implementing
at least four measures to improve safety and boost
morale.

Source: Single Plan for Student Achievement, Hyacinth, 2011-2012.
Alignment of Education Goals and Strategies to Research-based Strategies

Districts and schools need effective instructional strategies and adequate
resources. During the initial year of the study, Hyacinth was 10 index points away from
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
235

meeting or exceeding the state’s goal on the Academic Performance Index (API). Based
on the SPSA, the school projected to make gains on the API for the 2011-2012 school
year but did not. Hyacinth actually decreased by 25 points, a 35 point gap from achieving
the statewide goal. Additionally, the federal school wide target for the Adequate Yearly
Progress measure was not met. These results lend support to its success on one measure
of accountability and the need for increasing student performance to strengthen student’s
future on another.
Odden & Picus (2009) assert that there is knowledge about how to dramatically
improve student academic achievement, which is labeled a s “doubling” performance. In
their study of schools and districts that doubled student performance, Odden, et al.,
(2007) found that the schools followed a strong similar set of steps in their improvement
strategies. These strategies are as follows:
1. Conducting a needs assessment: Schools analyzed state assessments
data and formative assessment data to become more knowledgeable
about the status of student performance and he nature of the
achievement gap.
2. Setting high goals: Schools set high goals with a focus on educating 90-
95 percent of students to proficient and advanced levels of achievement.
3. Adopt a new curriculum: Schools reviewed evidence on effective
curriculum and made decisions on a new instructional program for the
site. All schools replaced the old curriculum with a more rigorous and
research-based curriculum.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
236

4. Commit to data-based decision making: Schools committed to an
ongoing practice of analyzing data to help tailor instruction to student
needs.
5. Invest in ongoing professional development: Schools invested in teacher
professional development that included summer institutes, resources for
trainers, placed instructional coaches in all schools and extended the
school year for teachers.
6. Focus class time more effectively: Schools used time more effectively,
reducing class time interruptions. This was done by increased time
allocations for some core subjects and double class periods for
struggling students.
7. Provide multiple interventions for struggling students: Schools provided
assistance to struggling students that consisted of tutoring, extended day
programs, summer school, and English language development for all
English learner students.
8. Create professional learning communities: Schools created professional
learning communities to allow teachers to work collaboratively on data
analysis and the instructional program.
9. Empower leaders to support instructional improvement: Schools
employed strong leadership around data-based decision making.
10. Take advantage of external expertise: Schools brought external
professional knowledge to the school by hiring experts and adopting
research-based curricula.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
237

Table F.5 illustrates a synthesis of results at Hyacinth as compared to the ten steps to
doubling student performance for the 2011-2012 school year.
Table F.5: Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Hyacinth
Ten Steps to Double
Student Performance
Hyacinth Level of Implementation
Low Moderate High
1. Conduct needs
assessment/analyze
student achievement
data
Analyzed student assessment data to become
knowledgeable about performance in PD and
grade-level teams. Assessment analysis
included analysis of state exam results and
formative assessments to drive instruction.
High
2. Set higher goals Use of the Single Plan for Student Achievement
to set SMART goals for the school year by the
staff and SSC.
Moderate
3. Adopt a new
curriculum
New core curriculum not adopted. Staff and
administration reviewed best practices and
effective classroom strategies (i.e. Marzano,).
Supports for struggling students implemented.
Low
4. Commit to data-
based decision making
Ongoing analysis of student assessment data to
gain more knowledge and awareness of student
performance issues; time provided for grade
level team collaboration to focus on improving
instruction and achievement.
High
5. Invest in on-going
professional
development
Focused on data-based decision making,
instructional strategies, and school wide
professional development goals. 1 coach for
entire school.
Moderate
6. Focus class time
more efficiently
Class sizes increased; teaching staff did not.
Result: classroom over crowdedness.
Low
7. Provide multiple
interventions for
struggling students
Provided extra help for struggling students
inclusive of: (1) extended day provided by SES
providers/LEAP, (2) intervention
individual/small group tutoring within the
classroom, (3) ELD daily. Lack of funds for
teachers to receive extra-duty pay for
afterschool tutoring.
High
8. Create professional
learning communities
Grade-level teams characterized by data-based
decision making, ongoing discussion of good
instruction and strategies and sharing of best
practices.
Moderate
9. Empower leaders to
support instructional
improvement
Supported by the leadership team, instructional
leaders, administration, and the staff around
data-based decision making with an emphasis
on improving the instructional program.
Moderate
10. Take advantage of
external expertise
PD led by principal and supported by the
instructional facilitator. PD based on best
practices and strategies on language
development, writing, student engagement, and
checking for understanding.
Moderate
Source: Adapted from Ten Strategies to Double Student Performance (Odden, 2009).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
238

It is clear that Hyacinth implemented several strategies recommended by
evidence-based adequacy into the instructional program. It is evidenced by the data in
Table F.5 that Hyacinth and the district need to focus on identifying resources needed by
all schools to double student performance in the near future. The researcher found an
average degree of alignment between the resources recommended by the Evidence-based
model and the resource needs of the strategies Hyacinth deployed to increase
performance. It is apparent that resource allocation is needed in specific areas to reduce
class size to the suggested research-based recommendation for grades K-3, invest in an
additional instructional coach, and allot funding for teachers to provide tutoring to
struggling students. Moreover, Hyacinth should take advantage of external expertise by
bringing in more professional knowledge to support its high population of English
learners.
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-based Model
The Evidence-based model is a research driven approach to linking resources to
student achievement. The Evidence-based approach identifies a set of school-level
components that are required to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality instructional
program within a school and the evidence of their effectiveness (Odden & Picus, 2008).
It determines the level of resources needed to meet a school’s educational goals. This
approach is based on evidence from three sources: (1) research with randomized
assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of evidence), (2) research with other
types of controls or statistical procedures that can help separate the impact of a treatment
and, (3) best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district or school
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
239

level. The Evidence-based funding approach coupled with the funding model includes
positions that research and best practice identify as linked to increased student learning.
Future Considerations
School characteristics and personnel can significantly impact student
achievement. The resources allocated in the EBM and the strategies they support are one
way to boost student achievement – based on best practices and research-driven schools
already using the model. Many schools and districts have boosted student performance
and narrowed achievement gaps by using Odden’s ten strategies. The level of
implementation of these strategies at Hyacinth range from low to high; thus, developing a
more powerful school vision is imperative to attaining impressive student outcomes.
Strategies needing improvement are labeled in the “implementation” column as “low”
and presented in Table F.5, are as follows:
• Low implementation à (1) Adopt a new curriculum and textbook
materials. Hyacinth has not adopted a new curriculum since the previous
textbook adoption in ELA and mathematics in 2008. Only intervention or
support materials have been adopted.
Consideration: Newer and better materials are needed to increase student
achievement – inclusive of the future development of a school wide vision
of effective instructional practice and 100% teacher buy-in.
(2) Focus class time more efficiently. With an increase in class size,
Hyacinth cannot change the work life of teachers. Classes are over-
capacity in relation to the EBM and the lack of specialist teachers impacts
the time teachers need in the regular school day to plan instructional
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
240

lessons and collaborate with grade-level teachers to analyze data to inform
instruction.
Consideration: Reduce class sizes; provide core teachers at ratios of 15:1
in K-3 and 25:1 in K-5. Hire specialist teachers at a rate of 20% of all
teachers at Hyacinth.
Hyacinth Resourced by the EBM (HEBM)
Hyacinth is resourced below the core recommendations in the Evidenced-based
model. Class size, percent poverty, and percent ELL are considerably higher than the
suggested level of resources for a prototypical elementary school. The reduction of core
teachers and the lack of specialist teachers on staff obviously impacts class size and
formation, teacher collaboration time, and professional development. Furthermore,
professional development is impacted by the reduction of one instructional facilitator, a
position critical in supporting 16 core teachers in a school with a comparable number of
students.
Schools can improve learning and teaching using research-based and best
practices-based strategies that in many cases may not require more money, and in others
where more money will help if it is spent strategically. If Hyacinth reallocated staffing
resources and used the core recommendations in the EBM, the overall school vision,
school configurations and staffing formulas would serve to provide guidance for
estimating an adequate level of education funding.
Table F.6 displays the actual use of core recommendations in the EBM, which
have been appropriated to the total student population and demographics for Hyacinth.
Due to the overall student population of 426 students, Hyacinth would have similar
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
241

resources than that of the prototypical elementary school. Additionally, the school has
larger concentrations and populations of students in poverty and EL students, so it would
be eligible for a greater level of resources targeted to meet their needs.
Table F.6: Level of Resources at Hyacinth with the EBM (HEBM)
School Element
EBM
Prototypical Elementary
Schools
Hyacinth (H) HEBM*
School configuration &
size
K-5: 432 K-6: 426 K-6: 426*
Class size
K-3: 15
4-5: 25
K-3: 21
4-6: 26
K-3:
4-6:
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day*
Instructional Days
200, incl. 10 PD days 180, incl. 1 PD day
200, incl. 10 PD
Days*
% of students with
disabilities
13.7% .03% .03%*
Percent Poverty
36.3% 93% 93%*
Percent ELL 10.6% 41% 41%*
School Personnel
Core teachers 24 16 24
Specialist teachers 20% of core teachers =4.8 0 4.8
Instructional Facilitators 2.2 1 2.2
Tutors: struggling
students
1:100 low SES *Peer Tutors 4
Teachers: EL students 1:100 EL *All teachers 1.7
Extended Day 1.31 0 1.29
Summer School 1.31 0 1.29
Mild disabilities
Severe disabilities
3 additional teaching
positions
100% state reimbursement
2
0
3
0
Gifted students $25 per student $10 per student $25 per student
Substitutes 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE
Pupil support staff
1:100 students in poverty =
1.32
3 4
Non-instr. Aides 2 2 2
Librarians/
media spec.
1 0 1
Principal 1 1 1
Secretary 2 2 2
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008), pp. 132-133.Copyright 2008 by
McGraw-Hill. Adapted with permission. * EBM generated resources considering Hyacinth current school configuration and student
demographics.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
242

Using the staffing recommendations in the EBM as a general guideline and
reallocating the current staff to the current school configuration, size and student
demographics, as indicated in Table F.6 result in the following:
• Class size: With the current enrollment of 261 students in K-3 and 165
students in grades 4-6, the EBM would generate core teacher ratios of 17:1
in grades K-3 and 7:1 in grades 4-6.
• Instructional Days: Increase by 20 days, the equivalent of one school
month; increase PD days by 9 days as recommended by the EBM.
• Multiple resources for struggling students: Ensure that adequate supports
are available for students in poverty and English learners. Provide one
tutor position for every 100 students with a poverty background and one
teacher position (e.g. ELD) for every 100 ELL students. The EBM would
generate a total of 4 tutors for struggling students and 1.7 tutors for
English learners.
• Core teachers: The EBM would generate 24 core teachers.
• Specialist teachers: Hire specialist teachers to provide electives, with
ample provision for planning and collaboration time for teaching staff.
Hyacinth would staff 4.8 specialist teachers with a student population of
426 students.
• Instructional facilitators: Increase school-based instructional coaches at a
rate of one coach position for every 200 students. At the current student
population, the EBM would generate 2.2 instructional facilitators for
Hyacinth.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
243

• Gifted students: Allocate $10 more dollars to every student enrolled in the
district for services for gifted students. The EBM would generate $25 per
gifted student.
• Pupil support: The EBM would generate 1 full time equivalent for every
student in poverty or 4 positions for pupil support (inclusive of counselors,
social workers, nurses).
• Non-instructional aides: The EBM would generate 1.97 non-instructional
aides.
• Administration, secretaries, and librarians: The EBM would generate 1
principal, 2 secretaries, and 1 librarian based on the size of the sample
school.
In a time of fiscal crisis, California schools continue to face drastic budget cuts.
However, despite drastic budget cuts to the general fund and categorical funding sources,
schools must continue to focus resources on enhancing the instructional program and
boosting student achievement. It may be more effective to use the core recommendations
in the EBM to help determine which “cuts” have the least impact on student performance.
With reconsiderations and staff reallocations, Hyacinth will be able to focus on resources
that improve the overall instructional program and student learning.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
244

Appendix G

CASE STUDY: KANGAROO PAW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Utilizing the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this case study is to examine the site level resource allocation in five
elementary schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student
demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and
API score ranges at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide
comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based
on the single unit of schools (Patton, 2002). The purpose of using the case study approach
was to provide comprehensive, detailed information regarding resource allocation. In
providing an analysis at the school level, the five case studies contribute to the ways in
which an evidence-based approach can help identify educational best practices and
strategies for improving student academic performance. Moreover, these strategies would
assist in further recommendations based on school finance adequacy models to achieve
gains in student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). The case study is divided in to
the following areas: (1) school background, (2) analysis of student performance, (3)
analysis of educational practices (4) education improvement goals and, (5) alignment of
education improvement goals and strategies to research-based strategies double student
performance, and (6) comparison of school resources to the Evidence-based model.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
245

School Background
Kangaroo Paw is K-6 elementary school located in an urban unified school
district (K-12) within Los Angeles County. It is a California Distinguished School (2012)
and a Title I Academic Achievement School. It is one of eleven elementary schools that
serve approximately 14,275 students. During the 2011-2012 school year, Kangaroo Paw
reported an enrollment of 426 students (California Department of Education, 2012),
making it one of the smallest elementary schools within the district. The school has a
population of students that closely mirrors the city’s diverse population of African-
American and Hispanic/Latino residents. Table G.1 provides a description of the school
demographics.
Table G.1 Kangaroo Paw Demographic Data, 2011-2012

School

Grades

Enrollment

AA

Hispanic

ELL

Free/Reduced
Meals
Kangaroo
Paw
K-6 712 297
42%
394
55%
191
27%
641
90%
Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012); School Demographic Chart – API by California Department
of Education (2012).

As evidenced in Table G.1, Hispanic students were the largest enrolled population
at Kangaroo Paw, followed by African American students. In the 2011-2012 school year,
Hispanic students comprised of 55 percent of the total school enrollment. African
American students were the next largest ethnic group with 42 percent of the total school
enrollment. Based on this enrollment data, Kangaroo Paw served a disproportionately
large Hispanic student enrollment. Of the total school enrollment of 712 students, 27
percent were considered English language learners (ELL); 90 percent of the total student
population participated in the Free and Reduced Meal Program before and during school.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
246

Analysis of Student Performance
It is imperative to use data when analyzing student performance and making
school improvement decisions. According to the US Department of Education (1998),
hard data can motivate schools to take action. Elementary schools typically analyze
student achievement data, including results of the API, AYP, STAR, CELDT, and local
benchmark and curriculum embedded assessments. In addition to accountability
measures, student group data from state assessments must be painstakingly analyzed
when evaluating programs and developing school goals for the year.
Academic Performance Index (API)
In order to meet federal requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA), a Growth API must reflect if the school or student groups scored at or above
the statewide performance of 800 (California Department of Education, 2012). At the
initiation of the study, Kangaroo Paw had an API of 832. A year later, during the 2011-
2012 school year, a 20 point decrease was demonstrated in student academic
performance, bringing the API to 812. Although student performance tabulated in the
Academic Performance Index fell, the school met its school wide growth target and still
met the statewide growth target of 800. The California Department of Education (2012)
indicates that schools with APIs at or above 800 must maintain a minimum API of 800. A
school meets its overall API growth target if it meets its school wide target and
numerically significant group targets. Student groups must score at or above 800 index
points in order to meet statewide annual targets. Kangaroo Paw did not meet targets for
all student groups. Table G.2 reflects the summary of the API target information, base
and growth, from the 2011 school year to the 2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
247

Table G.2 Kangaroo Paw API Growth Targets, 2011-2012

Growth Targets

2011
Base

2011-2012
Growth

2012
Growth

Met
Target?
School wide 832 -20 812 Yes
All Student Groups
AA/Black
Hispanic/Latino
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
English Learners
Students with Disabilities

829
830
831
N/A
N/A

-21
-17
-22
N/A
N/A

808
813
809
N/A
N/A
No
No
No
No
N/A
N/A
All Targets > Both School wide & Student
Groups
No
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012). English Learner & Students with Disabilities data
was not available (N/A) on CDE website; groups were not numerically significant.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
AYP is a series of annual academic performance goals established for each school
and district, as well as the state. These institutions are determined to have made adequate
yearly progress if they meet or exceed each year’s goals. Under the state’s criteria for
ESEA, schools such as Kangaroo Paw are required to meet or exceed requirements within
four areas to make AYP annually: (1) participation rate, (2) percent proficient – annual
measurable objectives (AMOs), (3) API as an additional indicator, and (4) graduation rate
(does not apply to elementary schools). Under ESEA, not only do schools, districts, and
the state must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant student groups
within those schools, districts and the state. Thus, if an educational institution does not
meet one or more requirements by any significant student group, it does not make annual
yearly progress.
During the 2011-2012 school year, Kangaroo Paw did not make AYP. Significant
subgroups did not meet all of the requirements in order to satisfy all of the criteria for
adequate yearly progress. A total of 17 criteria were included for meeting federal AYP.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
248

Significant student groups for Kangaroo Paw included: (1) Black or African American,
(2) Hispanic or Latino and, (3) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged.
The school did not meet its annual measurable objectives in English-language arts
or mathematics. Figure G.1 reflects the percentage of student groups that satisfied the
targets for both subject areas. The statewide target for English-language arts was 78.4
percent and 79.0 percent for mathematics.
Figure G.1 AYP Percent Proficient, School wide and Student Groups, 2011-2012

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

Percent Proficient: English Language Arts.
Students at Kangaroo Paw demonstrated weakness in language arts and
mathematics. In both subject areas, students missed the statewide targets for the
percentage of students performing at the proficient or advanced levels. As evidenced in
Figure G.1, all student groups were within 6.8 percentage points of one another. School
wide, 51.1 percent of students were considered at or above the proficient level of
performance in English Language Arts on state exams. The highest performing student
group was the African-American/Black student group with 54.6 percent of students
reaching proficiency or above. The Hispanic/Latino student group performed lower than
all students. The Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group performed higher than
Hispanic/Latino group, but slightly lower than the overall student population.
51.1

67.2

54.6

63.1

47.8

70.4

49.6

67.9

0

20

40

60

80

ELA
MATH

SCHOOLWIDE

AA

HISPANIC

SED

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
249

Percent Proficient: Mathematics.
In mathematics, 67.2 percent scored at the proficient or advanced levels, while the
state expected 79.0 percent of the total school wide population to score at these same
levels. Based on the data, only 85 percent of students at Kangaroo Paw met or exceeded
the percent proficient criteria for the 2011-2012 school year. The Hispanic/Latino student
group had a higher percentage of students at the proficient or advanced level than any
other significant student group at the school, followed by the Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged group. African-American/Black students had fewer students scoring at the
proficient or above level than any other student group.
API: Additional AYP Indicator.
The Academic Performance Index (API) is used as an additional indicator for
AYP. In 2012, the API Criteria for meeting federal AYP was a minimum "2012 Growth
API" score of 740 OR "2011-12 Growth" of at least one point (California Department of
Education, 2012). Kangaroo Paw met the statewide accountability requirements for
school wide API growth target for making AYP but did not meet the federal
accountability requirements for AYP. Based on an API of 812 for the 2011-2012 school
year, Kangaroo Paw met the 2012 API criteria for the AYP.
Program Improvement Status
In California, Program Improvement (PI) is the formal designation for Title I-
funded schools and districts that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years. A school or
district that was in PI during 2011–12 and does not make AYP in 2012 will advance to
the next level of PI for 2012–13 and be required to immediately implement the applicable
ESEA requirements.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
250

Although Kangaroo Paw maintained the requirement for the state in school wide
academic performance, it did not meet the federal requirements as determined by
academic yearly progress (AYP) of all its student groups. The school did not make AYP
for two consecutive years in the same content area school wide or for any numerically
significant subgroup.
Figure G.2 Identification for Program Improvement

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

As illustrated in Figure G.2, Kangaroo Paw did not meet AYP for two years prior
to the 2011-2012 school year. The California Department of Education (2012) indicates
that a Title I school will be identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive years, the
Title I school does not make AYP in the same content area school wide or for any
numerically significant subgroup, or on the same indicator school wide. During the 2009-
2010 school year, Kangaroo Paw met the participation rate criteria, percent proficient
criteria for mathematics, and an additional indicator for AYP by meeting API but failed
to meet the targets for students scoring at the percent proficient level for English-
language arts. In the following school year, Kangaroo Paw did not meet the percent
proficient criteria for mathematics, which resulted in not meeting the AYP for the second
consecutive year. Thus, Kangaroo Paw entered Program Improvement in 2011-2012.

2009-‐2010

MADE
AYP:
NO

2010-‐2011

MADE
AYP:
NO

2011-‐2012
MADE

AYP:
NO

PI
STATUS

YEAR
1

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
251

Table G. 3 Kangaroo Paw AYP Trend, 2008-2012
AYP Criteria 2008-
2009
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Participation Rate: ELA Yes Yes Yes Yes
Participation Rate: Math Yes Yes Yes Yes
Percent Proficient: ELA

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

No
No
No
No
No
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

No
No
No
No
N/A
Percent Proficient: Math

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

No
No
Yes
No
N/A
API
Met API Criteria
822
Yes
802
Yes
832
Yes
812
Yes
Made AYP Yes No No No
Result Year 1 – Did
not meet
AYP
Year 2 – Did
not meet
AYP
PI Status
Year 1
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
As demonstrated in Table G.3, after the 2008-2009 school year, school wide
student performance on state exams declined. The result of this decline was demonstrated
in student performance, specifically the number of students considered proficient or
advanced in English-language arts and mathematics. Numerically significant student
groups contributed heavily to the overall school wide results for AYP. During the 2009-
2010 school year, no student groups were met the proficiency target in language arts yet
all student groups met the target for mathematics. In the following year, all students
groups met the proficiency target for language arts and all student groups except for the
African American/Black student group did not. During the focal year of the study,
Kangaroo Paw did not meet the percent proficient rate criteria for English-Language Arts
or Mathematics. All student groups did not meet the language arts proficiency target of
78.4 percent. Of the total school wide population only 51.1 percent were at the proficient
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
252

or advanced level, a gap of over 25 percent. In mathematics, Kangaroo Paw fell short of
meeting proficiency targets in the African American/Black and SED student groups. The
Hispanic/Latino student group was the only group to meet the percent proficient rate
criteria under Safe Harbor. As a result, Kangaroo Paw has taken a closer look at student
achievement data and revisited educational improvement goals to enhance the
instructional program of the school. These data and goals have been written and
implemented in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). The purpose of the
Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is to create a cycle of continuous
improvement of student performance, and to ensure that all students succeed in reaching
academic standards set by the State Board of Education.

Analysis of Educational Practices
Analysis of educational practices can result in large, positive effects for all
students. Practices are typically investigated by analyzing student achievement data.
Analyzing data allows schools to describe the gap between what exists and what practices
need refining.
Alignment of Curriculum and Instructional Materials
All textbook and supplemental curricular materials are aligned to the California
Content Standards and California State Framework. The school uses curriculum a
separate curriculum for kindergarten through grade five and grade six. Grade six students
use the curriculum adopted by the district for middle school level students, grade six
through grade eight. Weekly lesson plans indicate the standards that are being taught in
all core subjects including ELD, and include the required 200 minutes every two weeks
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
253

of physical education instruction. Bulletin boards in classrooms and the main building
reflect specific standards.
Alignment of Staff Development
The staff of Kangaroo Paw participates in a variety of staff development sessions
throughout the school year. Staff development is focused on teaching content standards
and achieving the API and AYP annual targets. During the 2011-2012 school year, one
grade level meeting each month was dedicated to comparing and analyzing unit results
form the core language arts curriculum, mathematics benchmarks, writing samples and
district benchmark assessment results. Other meetings were focused on utilizing all grade
levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy within the core curriculum and implementing Specially
Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) strategies to support English
learners. Staff development also included implementation of Common Core Standards
during the 2013-2014 school year.
Services to Enable Underperforming Students to Meet Standards
Many services provided by the regular program enable the underperforming
students to meet state standards. The RTI model is used in conjunction with SSTs to set
goals and plan instruction for targeted students. In all grades, various components (e.g.
intervention, reteach, ELD supplement) of the core curriculum are designed to reach
struggling students. Lower elementary students use Waterford Early Learning, a
comprehensive, computer-based curriculum designed to help children build the academic
foundation necessary for a lifetime of learning in language arts, math, and science
education. Title I, EL and GATE students are clustered within the regular classroom.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
254

Students with identified speech and language needs receive services from the district
speech specialist.
Use of State and Local Assessments
State and local assessments are utilized to modify instruction and improve student
academic achievement. More specifically, weekly and quarterly assessments measure
student academic growth. Results are analyzed during grade level, leadership and
administrative meetings to plan classroom instructional strategies, professional
development and student intervention programs. Teachers meet monthly with grade level
teams to compare results and plan instructional needs based on results.
Resources to Assist Struggling Students
An array of resources are made available to meet the needs of struggling students.
School resources encompass differentiated instruction in the classroom. If a student
requires more assistance outside of the classroom, the Student Success Team meets to
identify the student’s strengths and upon which an improvement plan can be designed.
The RSP teacher provides instruction to students who have mild or moderate learning
disabilities. The PlayWorks Junior Program provides an opportunity to foster the
physical, social and emotional development of students in low-income areas. Kangaroo
Paw employs school resources that provide assistance to families such as holding parent
meetings throughout the course of the school year. During the 2011-2012 school year, the
school held SST meetings, Back to School Night, Open House and parent-teacher
conferences. Language transition meetings are held with parents to reclassify students
from English learner (EL) to fluent English proficient.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
255

District resources made available at Kangaroo Paw include several programs that
enhance the regular instructional program. Peer mediation is offered through Chill Out
and Project Peace, programs that helped to assist in the development of fostering a safer
community and reducing and preventing violence. The district holds bi-monthly District
Advisory Council and District English Learner Advisory Committee meetings for parents
of students enrolled in Iris’ schools.
Limitations to Enable Underperforming Students
Based on Kangaroo Paw’s SPSA, limitations of the current program to enable
underperforming students to meet standards exist. The school plan indicates that the
requirements of NCLB and the expanded curriculum do not take into consideration the
amount of time in the school day and the number of days in the school year. And in order
to attain high student achievement, class size reduction in all grades would provide more
time for individualized attention. The principal indicated that the academic calendar does
not allow for minimum days to offer professional development to staff. In addition, the
high mobility rate impacts the classroom dynamic throughout the course of the school
year.
Educational Improvement Goals
Educational improvement goals are based upon analysis of verifiable state data,
including the Academic Performance Index and other assessments, and include local
measures of student achievement. The staff and School Site Council (SCC) at Kangaroo
Paw analyzes the academic performance of all student groups, including English learners,
socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with exceptional needs and has
considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
256

failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. The SSC considers input from the staff and
school community. Based upon this analysis, staff and the SSC establishes the following
educational improvement goals.
For the 2011-2012 school year, Kangaroo Paw adopted the following school
goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student
groups not meeting state standards: (1) English Language Arts, (2) English Language
Development, and (3) Mathematics. The school included two additional goals to support
student learning and achievement: (1) School Climate, and (2) Centralized Services. A
total of five goals were implemented in the school’s Single Plan for Student Achievement
for the school year.
Table G. 4 School Goals for Improving Student Achievement, 2011-2012
School Goal Description
Goal 1: English Language Arts – ELA Proficiency
The percentage of students scoring at or above proficiency
on the ELA section of the CST and CMA will increase
from 51.1% to 56%.
Goal 2: English Language Development – ELA
Proficiency for ELA Students
The percentage of EL students scoring at or above the
proficient level on the ELA section of the CST will
increase from 54.1% to 58.7% in 2012.
Goal 3: Mathematics – Math Proficiency
The percentage of students scoring at or above proficiency
on the Math section of the CST and CMA will increase
from 67.2% to 70.5%.
Goal 4: School Climate – Character Education
All students will participate in Character Education to
promote positive behavior and a safer school climate.
Goal 5: Centralized Services Provide direct and indirect services to school sites.
Source: Single Plan for Student Achievement, Kangaroo Paw, 2011-2012.
Alignment of Education Goals and Strategies to Research-based Strategies

Districts and schools need effective instructional strategies and adequate
resources. During the initial year of the study, Kangaroo Paw exceeded the state’s goal on
the Academic Performance Index (API) by 32 points. One year later, during the focal
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
257

year of the study, Kangaroo Paw decreased by 20 points to 812 index points, still
exceeding the state’s goal but did not meet the federal school wide target for the
Adequate Yearly Progress. These results lend support to its success on one measure of
accountability and the need for increasing student performance to strengthen student’s
future on another.
Odden & Picus (2009) assert that there is knowledge about how to dramatically
improve student academic achievement, which is labeled as “doubling” performance. In
their study of schools and districts that doubled student performance, Odden, et al.,
(2007) found that the schools followed a strong similar set of steps in their improvement
strategies. These strategies are as follows:
1. Conducting a needs assessment: Schools analyzed state assessments
data and formative assessment data to become more knowledgeable
about the status of student performance and he nature of the
achievement gap.
2. Setting high goals: Schools set high goals with a focus on educating 90-
95 percent of students to proficient and advanced levels of achievement.
3. Adopt a new curriculum: Schools reviewed evidence on effective
curriculum and made decisions on a new instructional program for the
site. All schools replaced the old curriculum with a more rigorous and
research-based curriculum.
4. Commit to data-based decision making: Schools committed to an
ongoing practice of analyzing data to help tailor instruction to student
needs.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
258

5. Invest in ongoing professional development: Schools invested in teacher
professional development that included summer institutes, resources for
trainers, placed instructional coaches in all schools and extended the
school year for teachers.
6. Focus class time more effectively: Schools used time more effectively,
reducing class time interruptions. This was done by increased time
allocations for some core subjects and double class periods for
struggling students.
7. Provide multiple interventions for struggling students: Schools provided
assistance to struggling students that consisted of tutoring, extended day
programs, summer school, and English language development for all
English learner students.
8. Create professional learning communities: Schools created professional
learning communities to allow teachers to work collaboratively on data
analysis and the instructional program.
9. Empower leaders to support instructional improvement: Schools
employed strong leadership around data-based decision making.
10. Take advantage of external expertise: Schools brought external
professional knowledge to the school by hiring experts and adopting
research-based curricula.
Table G.5 1 illustrates a synthesis of results at Kangaroo Paw as compared to the ten
steps to doubling student performance for the 2011-2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
259

G.5: Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Kangaroo Paw
Odden’s Ten Steps
to Double Student
Performance
Kangaroo Paw

Level of Implementation

Low Moderate High
1. Conduct needs
assessment/analyze
student achievement
data
Analyzed student assessment data to
become knowledgeable about performance
in PD and grade-level teams. Assessment
analysis included analysis of state exam
results and formative assessments (i.e.
benchmark, quarterly) to drive instruction.

High

2. Set higher goals Use of the Single Plan for Student
Achievement to set SMART goals for the
school year by the staff and SSC. Set goals
for ELA, ELD, and Math; no goals
exceeded 90%.

Moderate

3. Adopt a new
curriculum
New core curriculum not adopted. Staff
and administration reviewed best practices
and effective classroom strategies (i.e.
Teach Like a Champion). Supports for
struggling students implemented

Low

4. Commit to data-
based decision
making
Ongoing analysis of student assessment
data to gain more knowledge and
awareness of student performance issues;
time provided for grade level team
collaboration.

High

5. Invest in on-going
professional
development
Focused on data-based decision making,
instructional strategies, and school wide
professional development goals. 1 coach
for entire school.

Moderate

6. Focus class time
more efficiently
Class sizes did not decrease during the
2011-2012 school year.
Low
7. Provide multiple
interventions for
struggling students
Provided extra help for struggling students
inclusive of: (1) extended day provided by
SES providers/LEAP, (2) intervention
tutoring within the classroom, (3) ELD
daily. Lack of funds for teachers to receive
extra-duty pay for afterschool tutoring.
High
8. Create professional
learning communities
Grade-level teams characterized by data-
based decision making, ongoing discussion
of good instruction and strategies and
sharing of best practices.
Moderate
9. Empower leaders
to support
instructional
improvement
Supported by the leadership team,
instructional leaders, administration, and
the staff around data-based decision
making with an emphasis on improving the
instructional program.
Moderate
10. Take advantage of
external expertise
PD based on best practices and successful
strategies. School focused PD on Bloom’s
Taxonomy and SDAIE strategies.
Moderate
Source: Adapted from Ten Strategies to Double Student Performance (Odden, 2009).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
260

It is clear that Kangaroo Paw implemented several strategies recommended by
evidence-based adequacy into the instructional program. It is evidenced by the data in
Table G.5 that Kangaroo Paw and the district need to focus on identifying resources
needed by all schools to double student performance in the near future. The researcher
found an average degree of alignment between the resources recommended by the
Evidence-based model and the resource needs of the strategies Kangaroo Paw deployed
to increase performance. It is apparent that resource allocation is needed in specific areas
to reduce class size to the suggested research-based recommendation for grades K-3,
invest in an additional instructional coach, and allot funding for teachers to provide
tutoring to struggling students. Moreover, Kangaroo Paw should take advantage of
external expertise by bringing in more professional knowledge to support its high
population of English learners.
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-based Model
The Evidence-based model is a research driven approach to linking resources to
student achievement. The Evidence-based approach identifies a set of school-level
components that are required to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality instructional
program within a school and the evidence of their effectiveness (Odden & Picus, 2008).
It determines the level of resources needed to meet a school’s educational goals. This
approach is based on evidence from three sources: (1) research with randomized
assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of evidence), (2) research with other
types of controls or statistical procedures that can help separate the impact of a treatment
and, (3) best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district or school
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
261

level. The Evidence-based funding approach coupled with the funding model includes
positions that research and best practice identify as linked to increased student learning.
Future Considerations
School characteristics and personnel can significantly impact student
achievement. The resources allocated in the EBM and the strategies they support are one
way to boost student achievement – based on best practices and research-driven schools
already using the model. Many schools and districts have boosted student performance
and narrowed achievement gaps by using Odden’s ten strategies. The level of
implementation of these strategies at Kangaroo Paw range from low to high; thus,
developing a more powerful school vision is imperative to attaining impressive student
outcomes. Strategies needing improvement are labeled in the “implementation” column
as “low” and presented in Table G.5, are as follows:
• Low implementation à (1) Adopt a new curriculum and textbook
materials. Kangaroo Paw has not adopted a new curriculum since the
previous textbook adoption in ELA and mathematics in 2008. Only
intervention or support materials have been adopted.
Consideration: Newer and better materials are needed to increase student
achievement – inclusive of the future development of a school wide vision
of effective instructional practice and 100% teacher buy-in.
(2) Focus class time more efficiently. With an increase in class size,
Kangaroo Paw cannot change the work life of teachers. Classes are over-
capacity in relation to the EBM and the lack of specialist teachers impacts
the time teachers need in the regular school day to plan instructional
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
262

lessons and collaborate with grade-level teachers to analyze data to inform
instruction.
Consideration: Reduce class sizes; provide core teachers at ratios of 15:1
in K-3 and 25:1 in K-5. Hire specialist teachers at a rate of 20% of all
teachers at Kangaroo Paw.
Kangaroo Paw Resourced by the EBM (KEBM)
Kangaroo Paw is resourced below the core recommendations in the Evidenced-
based model. Class size, percent poverty, and percent ELL are considerably higher than
the suggested level of resources for a prototypical elementary school. The reduction of
core teachers and the lack of specialist teachers on staff obviously impacts class size and
formation, teacher collaboration time, and professional development. Furthermore,
professional development is impacted by the reduction of one instructional facilitator, a
position critical in supporting 16 core teachers in a school with a comparable number of
students.
Schools can improve learning and teaching using research-based and best
practices-based strategies that in many cases may not require more money, and in others
where more money will help if it is spent strategically. If Kangaroo Paw reallocated
staffing resources and used the core recommendations in the EBM, the overall school
vision, school configurations and staffing formulas would serve to provide guidance for
estimating an adequate level of education funding.
Table G.6 displays the actual use of core recommendations in the EBM, which
have been appropriated to the total student population and demographics for Kangaroo
Paw. Due to the overall student population of 712 students, Kangaroo Paw would have
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
263

similar resources than that of the prototypical elementary school. Additionally, the school
has larger concentrations and populations of students in poverty and EL students, so it
would be eligible for a greater level of resources targeted to meet their needs.
Table G.6: Level of Resources at Kangaroo Paw with the EBM (KEBM)
School Element
EBM
Prototypical Elementary
Schools
Kangaroo Paw (KP) KPEBM*
School configuration &
size
K-5: 432 K-6: 712 K-6: 712*
Class size
K-3: 15
4-5: 25
K-3: 22
4-6: 32
K-3: 29
4-6: 11
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day*
Instructional Days
200, incl. 10 PD days 180, incl. 1 PD day
200, incl. 10 PD
Days*
% of students with
disabilities
13.7% .02% .02%*
Percent Poverty
36.3% 90% 90%*
Percent ELL 10.6% 27% 27%*
School Personnel
Core teachers 24 25 40
Specialist teachers 20% of core teachers =4.8 0 8
Instructional Facilitators 2.2 1 3.6
Tutors: struggling
students
1:100 low SES 6 6.4
Teachers: EL students 1:100 EL *All teachers 1.9
Extended Day 1.31 0 2.16
Summer School 1.31 0 2.16
Mild disabilities
Severe disabilities
3 additional teaching
positions
100% state reimbursement
2
0
4.8
0
Gifted students $25 per student $10 per student $25 per student
Substitutes 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE
Pupil support staff
1:100 students in poverty =
1.32
3 6.4
Non-instr. Aides 2 1 3.3
Librarians/
media spec.
1 1 1.6
Principal 1 1 1.6
Secretary 2 1 3.3
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008), pp. 132-133.Copyright 2008 by
McGraw-Hill. Adapted with permission. * EBM generated resources considering Kangaroo Paw current school configuration and
student demographics.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
264

Using the staffing recommendations in the EBM as a general guideline and
reallocating the current staff to the current school configuration, size and student
demographics, as indicated in Table G.6 result in the following:
• Class size: With the current enrollment of 430 students in K-3 and 282
students in grades 4-6, the EBM would generate core teacher ratios of 29:1
in grades K-3 and 11:1 in grades 4-6.
• Instructional Days: Increase by 20 days, the equivalent of one school
month; increase PD days by 9 days as recommended by the EBM.
• Multiple resources for struggling students: Ensure that adequate supports
are available for students in poverty and English learners. Provide one
tutor position for every 100 students with a poverty background and one
teacher position (e.g. ELD) for every 100 ELL students. The EBM would
generate a total of 6.4 tutors for struggling students and 1.9 tutors for
English learners.
• Core teachers: The EBM would generate 40 core teachers.
• Specialist teachers: Hire specialist teachers to provide electives, with
ample provision for planning and collaboration time for teaching staff.
Kangaroo Paw would staff 8 specialist teachers with a student population
of 712 students.
• Instructional facilitators: Increase school-based instructional coaches at a
rate of one coach position for every 200 students. At the current student
population, the EBM would generate 3.6 instructional facilitators for
Kangaroo Paw.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
265

• Gifted students: Allocate $10 more dollars to every student enrolled in the
district for services for gifted students. The EBM would generate $25 per
gifted student.
• Pupil support: The EBM would generate 1 full time equivalent for every
student in poverty or 6.4 positions for pupil support (inclusive of
counselors, social workers, nurses).
• Non-instructional aides: The EBM would generate 3.3 non-instructional
aides.
• Administration, secretaries, and librarians: The EBM would generate 1.6
principals, 3.3 secretaries, and 1.6 librarians based on the size of the
sample school.
In a time of fiscal crisis, California schools continue to face drastic budget cuts.
However, despite drastic budget cuts to the general fund and categorical funding sources,
schools must continue to focus resources on enhancing the instructional program and
boosting student achievement. It may be more effective to use the core recommendations
in the EBM to help determine which “cuts” have the least impact on student performance.
With reconsiderations and staff reallocations, Kangaroo Paw will be able to focus on
resources that improve the overall instructional program and student learning.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
266

Appendix H

CASE STUDY: ORCHID ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Utilizing the Evidence-based model (Odden & Picus, 2008) as a framework, the
purpose of this case study is to examine the site level resource allocation in five
elementary schools within one urban school district, that almost met or exceeded the
state’s goal in their Academic Performance Index (API), the cornerstone of the state’s
academic accountability requirements. Schools within the study shared similar student
demographic data, percent proficient in English Language Arts and mathematics, and
API score ranges at the initiation of the study. A case study approach was used to provide
comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth information regarding resource allocation based
on the single unit of schools (Patton, 2002). The purpose of using the case study approach
was to provide comprehensive, detailed information regarding resource allocation. In
providing an analysis at the school level, the five case studies contribute to the ways in
which an evidence-based approach can help identify educational best practices and
strategies for improving student academic performance. Moreover, these strategies would
assist in further recommendations based on school finance adequacy models to achieve
gains in student performance (Odden & Archibald, 2009). The case study is divided in to
the following areas: (1) school background, (2) analysis of student performance, (3)
analysis of educational practices (4) education improvement goals and, (5) alignment of
education improvement goals and strategies to research-based strategies double student
performance, and (6) comparison of school resources to the Evidence-based model.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
267

School Background
Orchid is K-6 elementary school located in an urban unified school district (K-12)
within Los Angeles County. It is one of eleven elementary schools that serves
approximately 14,275 students. During the 2011-2012 school year, reported an
enrollment of 730 students (California Department of Education, 2012), making it one of
the largest elementary schools within the district. The school has a population of students
that closely mirrors the city’s diverse population of African-American and
Hispanic/Latino residents. Table H.1 provides a description of the school demographics.
Table H.1: Orchid Demographic Data, 2011-2012

School

Grades

Enrollment

AA
#
%

Hispanic
#
%

ELL
#
%

Free/Reduced
Meals
Orchid K-6 730 87
12%
624
85%
280
38%
672
92%
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012); School Demographic Chart – API by California
Department of Education (2012).

As evidenced in Table E.1, Hispanic students were the largest enrolled population
at Orchid, followed by African American students. In the 2011-2012 school year,
Hispanic students comprised of 85 percent of the total school enrollment. African
American students followed with 12 percent of the total school enrollment. Based on this
enrollment data, Orchid served a disproportionately large Hispanic student enrollment. Of
the total school enrollment of 730 students, 38 percent were considered English language
learners (ELLs); 92 percent of the total student population participated in the Free and
Reduced Meal Program before and during school.
Analysis of Student Performance
It is imperative to use data when analyzing student performance and making
school improvement decisions. According to the US Department of Education (1998),
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
268

hard data can motivate schools to take action. Elementary schools typically analyze
student achievement data, including results of the API, AYP, STAR, CELDT, and local
benchmark and curriculum embedded assessments. In addition to accountability
measures, student group data from state assessments must be painstakingly analyzed
when evaluating programs and developing school goals for the year.
Academic Performance Index (API)
In order to meet federal requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act (ESEA), a growth API must reflect if the school or student groups scored at or above
the statewide performance of 800 (California Department of Education, 2012). At the
initiation of the study, Orchid had an API of 823. A year later, during the 2011-2012
school year, a decrease was demonstrated in student academic performance by 3 index
points, bringing the API to 823. Thus, Orchid did not meet targets for all student groups.
Table H.2 reflects the summary of the API target information, base and growth, from the
2011 school year to the 2012 school year.
Table H.2: Orchid API Growth Targets, 2011-2012

Growth Targets

2011
Base

2011-2012
Growth

2012
Growth

Met
Target?
School wide 826 -3 823 Yes
All Student Groups
AA/Black
Hispanic/Latino
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
English Learners
Students with Disabilities

849
822
824
N/A
734

821
823
820
N/A
769

-28
1
4
N/A
35

Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
No
All Targets > Both School wide & Student
Groups
No
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012). English Learner data was not available (N/A) on
CDE website.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
269

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
In 2012, the AYP requirement for the API was 740 index points If a school
already reached the statewide API goal of 800, a one-point increase from the 2011 Base
API for a school was required to meet the 2012 Growth API. In the “met target” column
in Table D.2, the school wide and student group growth targets, reflect state
accountability requirements and match the federal AYP requirements (California
Department of Education, 2012). Orchid met the statewide accountability requirements
for school wide API growth target for making AYP, but did not meet the federal
accountability requirements for AYP.
AYP is a series of annual academic performance goals established for each school
and district, as well as the state. These institutions are determined to have made adequate
yearly progress if they meet or exceed each year’s goals. Under the state’s criteria for
ESEA, schools such as Orchid are required to meet or exceed requirements within four
areas to make AYP annually: (1) participation rate, (2) percent proficient – annual
measurable objectives (AMOs), (3) API as an additional indicator, and (4) graduation rate
(does not apply to elementary schools). Under ESEA, schools, districts, and the state
must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant student groups within
those schools, districts and the state. Thus, if an educational institution does not meet one
or more requirements by any significant student group, it does not make annual yearly
progress.
During the focal year of the study, Orchid did not make adequate yearly progress.
The conditions for making AYP consisted of a total of 17 criteria, inclusive of three core
areas (e.g. participation, proficiency, API). Three significant subgroups at Orchid did not
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
270

meet all of the requirements in order to satisfy the criteria for adequate yearly progress.
Significant student groups for the year included: (1) Black or African American, (2)
Hispanic or Latino and, (3) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged.
The school did not meet its annual measurable objectives in English-language arts
or mathematics. Figure H.1 reflects the percentage of student groups that were at the
proficient or advanced levels in both subject areas. The statewide target for English-
language arts was 78.4 percent and 79.0 percent for mathematics. Students at Orchid
demonstrated weakness in language arts and mathematics. In both subject areas, students
missed the statewide targets for the percentage of students performing at the proficient or
advanced levels.
Figure H.1: AYP Percent Proficient, School wide and Student Groups, 2011-2012

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

Percent Proficient: English Language Arts.
As evidenced in Figure H.1, all student groups were within 1.1 percentage points
of one another. School wide, 57 percent of students were considered at or above the
proficient level of performance in English Language Arts on state exams. The highest
performing student group was the Hispanic/Latino student group with 57.2 percent of
students reaching proficiency or above. The Socioeconomically Disadvantaged student
group performed lower than all students. The African American/Black group performed
57

66.4

56.6

57.7
57.2

67.4

56.1

66.3

0

20

40

60

80

ELA
MATH

SCHOOLWIDE

AA

HISPANIC

SED

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
271

slightly lower than the Hispanic/Latino group and students school wide, but slightly
higher than the Socio-economically Disadvantaged student group.
Percent Proficient: Mathematics.
In mathematics, 66.4 percent of students at Orchid scored at the proficient or
advanced levels, while the state expected 79.0 percent of the total school wide population
to score at these same levels. The Hispanic/Latino student group had a higher percentage
of students at the proficient or advanced level than any other significant student group at
the school with 67.4 percent, followed by the Socioeconomically Disadvantaged group.
African-American/Black students had fewer students scoring at the proficient or above
level than any other student group.
API: Additional AYP Indicator.
The Academic Performance Index (API) is used as an additional indicator for
AYP. In 2012, the API Criteria for meeting federal AYP was a minimum "2012 Growth
API" score of 740 OR "2011-12 Growth" of at least one point (California Department of
Education, 2012). The 2012 growth API was 823 for Orchid. The school met the
statewide accountability requirements for school wide API growth target for making
AYP but did not meet the federal accountability requirements for AYP.
Program Improvement Status
In California, PI is the formal designation for Title I-funded schools and districts
that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years. A school or district that was in PI
during 2011–12 and does not make AYP in 2012 will advance to the next level of PI for
2012–13 and be required to immediately implement the applicable ESEA requirements.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
272

Although Orchid maintained the requirement for the state in school wide
academic performance, it did not meet the federal requirements as determined by
academic yearly progress (AYP) of all its student groups during the 2011-2012 school
year.
Figure H.2: Identification for Program Improvement

Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).

As illustrated in Figure H.2, Orchid entered its first year of PI Implementation
during the fall of the 2009-2010 school year but made AYP at the end of that same school
year. The California Department of Education (2012) indicates that a Title I school will
be identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive years, the Title I school does not
make AYP in the same content area school wide or for any numerically significant
subgroup, or on the same indicator school wide. A school that begins the school year in
PI and meets all AYP criteria for that school year will maintain the same PI status for the
next school year (California Department of Education, 2012). Since Orchid did not meet
all AYP criteria for the 2010-2011 school year, it advanced to Year 2 of PI during the
focal year of the study.

2009-‐2010

MADE
AYP:
YES

PI
YEAR
1

2010-‐2011

MADE
AYP:
NO

PI
YEAR
1
CONT.

2011-‐2012
MADE

AYP:
NO

PI

YEAR
2

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
273

Table H. 3: Orchid AYP Trend, 2008-2012
AYP Criteria
2008-
2009
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
Participation Rate: ELA Yes Yes Yes Yes
Participation Rate: Math Yes Yes Yes Yes
Percent Proficient: ELA

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

No
No
No
No
No

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
Percent Proficient: Math

School wide
Black/AA
Hispanic/Latino
SED
ELL

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

No
No
No
No
----
API
Met API Criteria
742
No
826
Yes
826
No
823
No
Made AYP No Yes No No

Result
PI – Year 1 Maintained
PI Status
PI – Year 2
Source: Adapted from DataQuest by California Department of Education (2012).
As demonstrated in Table H.3, Orchid has demonstrated growth on the state’s
accountability measure, API. Thus, it has not matched its growth on the federal
accountability measure. It is obvious that the school demonstrated a trend of positive
student performance in mathematics over the course of three years, but during the focal
year of the study, school wide student performance on mathematics assessments declined.
As a result, Orchid has taken a closer look at student achievement data and revisited
educational improvement goals to enhance the instructional program of the school. These
data and goals have been written and implemented in the Single Plan for Student
Achievement (SPSA). The purpose of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA)
is to create a cycle of continuous improvement of student performance, and to ensure that
all students succeed in reaching academic standards set by the State Board of Education.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
274

Analysis of Educational Practices
Analysis of educational practices can result in large, positive effects for all
students. Practices are typically investigated by analyzing student achievement data.
Analyzing data allows schools to describe the gap between what exists and what practices
need refining.
Alignment of Curriculum and Instructional Materials
Orchid uses a comprehensive, standards-based curriculum that was selected by
IUSD. The school’s textbooks and supplemental materials are aligned directly with the
content standards for the state and offer students the opportunity to achieve academic
excellence. The school’s goal is to take the core academic program at Orchid and
strengthen each student’s knowledge base as they transition to the next grade level and
into middle school.
Alignment of Staff Development
Staff development is geared toward assessing the needs of students and teachers.
The staff of Orchid participates in a variety of professional development (PD) sessions
twice a month. Teachers are encouraged to share best practices and instructional
strategies for teaching core concepts. Teachers are encouraged to attend workshops and
seminars provided through the county office of education and other educational
organization. All staff development and professional growth courses and trainings are
designed to have a positive impact on teacher performance in the classroom, increase
student academic achievement and safeguard the academic learning of all student groups
on campus annually. During the school year, teachers engage in grade-level
collaborations and professional development monthly to share ideas and new curriculum
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
275

updates. Teachers identify strengths and areas that need improvement among all student
groups school wide, and devise strategies to help students acquire skills needed to
improve academically and gain mastery on the CST annually.
Services to Enable Underperforming Students to Meet Standards
Orchid offers an array of services to enable underperforming student to meet state
content standards. Underperforming students receive intervention services during the
regular school day. Services are specific to the area of student weakness provided by
teachers, administrators, and instructional aides. Before and after school tutoring sessions
are offered by SES providers.
Use of State and Local Assessments
State and local assessments are utilized to modify instruction and improve student
academic achievement. More specifically, weekly and quarterly assessments measure
student academic growth. Results are analyzed during grade level, leadership and
administrative meetings to plan classroom instructional strategies, professional
development and student intervention programs.
Resources to Assist Struggling Students
Regular school correspondence is sent home to inform the parents of services and
events to assist struggling students. Bi-monthly meetings are scheduled to inform parents
about available student services, school events, and district wide events. A parent center
is available for parents to attend ESL and parent literacy classes in the mornings and
evenings.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
276

Limitations to Enable Underperforming Students
Several limitations of the current program exist that make it difficult for
underperforming student to meet grade level content standards. Budget cuts have caused
Orchid to limit the number of instructional aides hired, supplemental materials purchased,
and additional programs provided. Increased class size limits the teacher’s ability to
effectively assist all students.
Educational Improvement Goals
Educational improvement goals are based upon analysis of verifiable state data,
including the Academic Performance Index and other assessments, and include local
measures of student achievement. The staff and School Site Council (SCC) at Orchid
analyzes the academic performance of all student groups, including English learners,
socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with exceptional needs and has
considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students
failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. The SSC considers input from the staff and
school community. Based upon this analysis, staff and the SSC establish the following
educational improvement goals.
For the 2011-2012 school year, Orchid adopted the following school goals,
related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student groups not
meeting state standards: (1) English Language Arts, (2) Mathematics, (3) Science, and (4)
English Language Development. The school included an additional goal to support
student learning and achievement: (1) School Climate. A total of five goals were
implemented in the school’s Single Plan for Student Achievement for the school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
277

Table H. 4: School Goals for Improving Student Achievement, 2011-2012
School Goal Description
Goal 1: English Language Arts – Writing/ Reading
By June 2012, 80% of students in grades 2 – 6 will be
proficient on the CST.
Goal 2: Mathematics – Mathematics Proficiency
By June 2012, 80% of the students in grades 2 – 6 will
be proficient on the CST.
Goal 3: Science – Improve Proficiency
By June 2012, 75% of 5
th
graders will be proficient on
the CST.
Goal 4: English Language Development –
Proficiency Progression
By June 2012, 75% of the English Language Learners
will be proficient on the CST.
Goal 5: School Climate – Safe and Drug Free
Schools
By June 2012, 100% of the students in grades K – 6
will be educated in a drug free environment conducive
to learning where all students feel safe.
Source: Single Plan for Student Achievement, Orchid, 2011-2012.
Alignment of Education Goals and Strategies to Research-based Strategies
Districts and schools need effective instructional strategies and adequate
resources. Although student test scores are deemed successful on state exams and the
state’s definition of proficiency, the results are not so certain when a federal definition of
proficiency is applied.
Although successful in previous years, during the focal year of the study, Orchid
did not meet the state’s goal of 800 index points for the API or the federal accountability
goal for AYP. These results lend support to the need to increase student performance to
strengthen student’s future on another on both accountability measures.
Odden & Picus (2009) assert that there is knowledge about how to dramatically
improve student academic achievement, which is labeled as “doubling” performance. In
their study of schools and districts that doubled student performance, Odden, et al.,
(2007) found that the schools followed a strong similar set of steps in their improvement
strategies.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
278

These strategies are as follows:
1. Conducting a needs assessment: Schools analyzed state assessments
data and formative assessment data to become more knowledgeable
about the status of student performance and he nature of the
achievement gap.
2. Setting high goals: Schools set high goals with a focus on educating 90-
95 percent of students to proficient and advanced levels of achievement.
3. Adopt a new curriculum: Schools reviewed evidence on effective
curriculum and made decisions on a new instructional program for the
site. All schools replaced the old curriculum with a more rigorous and
research-based curriculum.
4. Commit to data-based decision making: Schools committed to an
ongoing practice of analyzing data to help tailor instruction to student
needs.
5. Invest in ongoing professional development: Schools invested in teacher
professional development that included summer institutes, resources for
trainers, placed instructional coaches in all schools and extended the
school year for teachers.
6. Focus class time more effectively: Schools used time more effectively,
reducing class time interruptions. This was done by increased time
allocations for some core subjects and double class periods for
struggling students.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
279

7. Provide multiple interventions for struggling students: Schools provided
assistance to struggling students that consisted of tutoring, extended day
programs, summer school, and English language development for all
English learner students.
8. Create professional learning communities: Schools created professional
learning communities to allow teachers to work collaboratively on data
analysis and the instructional program.
9. Empower leaders to support instructional improvement: Schools
employed strong leadership around data-based decision making.
10. Take advantage of external expertise: Schools brought external
professional knowledge to the school by hiring experts and adopting
research-based curricula.
Table H.5 1 illustrates a synthesis of results at Orchid as compared to the ten steps to
doubling student performance for the 2011-2012 school year.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
280

Table H.5: Odden’s Ten Steps & Implementation at Orchid
Odden’s Ten Steps
to Double Student
Performance
Calla Lily

Level of Implementation

Low Moderate High
1. Conduct needs
assessment/analyze
student achievement
data
Analyzed student assessment data to
become knowledgeable about performance
in PD and grade-level teams. Assessment
analysis included analysis of state exam
results and formative assessments (i.e.
benchmark, quarterly) to drive instruction.

High

2. Set higher goals Use of the Single Plan for Student
Achievement to set SMART goals for the
school year by the staff and SSC. Goals set
at 75-80% for all core school goals.

Moderate

3. Adopt a new
curriculum
New core curriculum not adopted. Staff
and administration reviewed best practices
and effective classroom strategies.
Supports for struggling students
implemented.

Low

4. Commit to data-
based decision
making
Ongoing analysis of student assessment
data to gain more knowledge and
awareness of student performance issues;
time provided for grade level team
collaboration.

High

5. Invest in on-going
professional
development
Staff development meetings weekly; Grade
level meetings every two weeks. Teachers
share best practices and instructional
strategies to increase teacher capacity.

Moderate

6. Focus class time
more efficiently
Class sizes did not decrease during the
2011-2012 school year.
Low
7. Provide multiple
interventions for
struggling students
Provided extra help for struggling students
inclusive of: (1) extended day provided by
SES providers/LEAP, (2) intervention
tutoring within the classroom, (3) ELD
daily.
High
8. Create professional
learning communities
Grade-level teams characterized by data-
based decision making, ongoing discussion
of good instruction and strategies and
sharing of best practices.
Moderate
9. Empower leaders
to support
instructional
improvement
Supported by the leadership team,
instructional leaders, administration, and
the staff around data-based decision
making with an emphasis on improving the
instructional program.
Moderate
10. Take advantage of
external expertise
PD based on best practices and successful
strategies. School sent out grade level
chairpersons and teachers (during
evaluation year) to attend PD workshops.
Moderate
Source: Adapted from Ten Strategies to Double Student Performance (Odden, 2009).

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
281

Orchid is already using several strategies recommended by evidence-based
adequacy model. It is evidenced by the data in Table H.5 that Orchid needs to focus on
identifying resources recommended to double student performance in the near future. It is
apparent that two areas were at a low level of implementation: (1) adopting a new
curriculum and (2) focusing class time more effectively. The other eight strategies were
either at a moderate or high level of implementation.
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-based Model
The Evidence-based model is a research driven approach to linking resources to
student achievement. The Evidence-based approach identifies a set of school-level
components that are required to deliver a comprehensive and high-quality instructional
program within a school and the evidence of their effectiveness (Odden & Picus, 2008).
It determines the level of resources needed to meet a school’s educational goals. This
approach is based on evidence from three sources: (1) research with randomized
assignment to the treatment (the “gold standard” of evidence), (2) research with other
types of controls or statistical procedures that can help separate the impact of a treatment
and, (3) best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school design (e.g.,
Stringfield, Ross & Smith, 1996) or from studies of impact at the local district or school
level. The Evidence-based funding approach coupled with the funding model includes
positions that research and best practice identify as linked to increased student learning.
Future Considerations
School characteristics and personnel can significantly impact student
achievement. The resources allocated in the EBM and the strategies they support are one
way to boost student achievement – based on best practices and research-driven schools
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
282

already using the model. Many schools and districts have boosted student performance
and narrowed achievement gaps by using Odden’s ten strategies. The level of
implementation of these strategies at Orchid range from low to high; thus, developing a
more powerful school vision is imperative to attaining impressive student outcomes.
Strategies needing improvement are labeled in the “implementation” column as “low”
and presented in Table H.5, are as follows:
• Low implementation à (1) Adopt a new curriculum and textbook
materials. Orchid has not adopted a new curriculum since the previous
textbook adoption in ELA and mathematics in 2008. Only intervention or
support materials have been adopted.
Consideration: Newer and better materials are needed to increase student
achievement – inclusive of the future development of a school wide vision
of effective instructional practice and 100% teacher buy-in.
(2) Focus class time more efficiently. With an increase in class size,
Orchid cannot change the work life of teachers. Classes are over-capacity
in relation to the EBM and the lack of specialist teachers impacts the time
teachers need in the regular school day to plan instructional lessons and
collaborate with grade-level teachers to analyze data to inform instruction.
Consideration: Reduce class sizes; provide core teachers at ratios of 15:1
in K-3 and 25:1 in K-5. Hire specialist teachers at a rate of 20% of all
teachers at Bird of Paradise.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
283

Orchid Resourced by the EBM (OEBM)
Orchid is resourced below the core recommendations in the Evidenced-based
model. Class size, percent poverty, and percent ELL are considerably higher than the
suggested level of resources for a prototypical elementary school. The reduction of core
teachers and the lack of specialist teachers on staff obviously impacts class size and
formation, teacher collaboration time, and professional development. Furthermore,
professional development is impacted by the reduction of one instructional facilitator, a
position critical in supporting 24 core teachers in a school almost twice the size as the
model recommends.
Schools can improve learning and teaching using research-based and best
practices-based strategies that in many cases may not require more money, and in others
where more money will help if it is spent strategically. If Orchid reallocated staffing
resources and used the core recommendations in the EBM, the overall school vision,
school configurations and staffing formulas would serve to provide guidance for
estimating an adequate level of education funding.
Table H.6 displays the actual use of core recommendations in the EBM, which
have been appropriated to the total student population and demographics for Orchid. Due
to the overall student population of 730 students, Orchid would have more resources than
that of the prototypical elementary school. Additionally, the school has larger
concentrations and populations of students in poverty and EL students, so it would be
eligible for a greater level of resources targeted to meet their needs.

PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
284

Table H.6: Level of Resources at Orchid with the EBM (OEBM)
School Element
EBM
Prototypical Elementary
Schools
Orchid (O) OEBM*
School configuration &
size
K-5: 432 K-6: 730 K-6: 730*
Class size
K-3: 15
4-5: 25
K-3: 21
4-6: 30
K-3: 30
4-6: 11
Kindergarten Full-day Full-day Full-day*
Instructional Days
200, incl. 10 PD days 180, incl. 1 PD day
200, incl. 10 PD
Days*
% of students with
disabilities
13.7% .02% .02%*
Percent Poverty
36.3% 92% 92%*
Percent ELL 10.6% 38% 38%*
School Personnel
Core teachers 24 24 41
Specialist teachers 20% of core teachers =4.8 0 8.2
Instructional Facilitators 2.2 1 3.7
Tutors: struggling
students
1:100 low SES 6 6.7
Teachers: EL students 1:100 EL *All teachers 2.8
Extended Day 1.31 0 2.2
Summer School 1.31 0 2.2
Mild disabilities
Severe disabilities
3 additional teaching
positions
100% state reimbursement
2
0
4.9
0
Gifted students $25 per student $10 per student $25 per student
Substitutes 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE 10 days per FTE
Pupil support staff
1:100 students in poverty =
1.32
3 6.7
Non-instr. Aides 2 1 3.4
Librarians/
media spec.
1 1 1.7
Principal 1 1 1.7
Secretary 2 1 3.4
Note: Adapted from School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.) by Odden and Picus (2008), pp. 132-133.Copyright 2008 by
McGraw-Hill. Adapted with permission. * EBM generated resources considering Orchid current school configuration and student
demographics.

Using the staffing recommendations in the EBM as a general guideline and
reallocating the current staff to the current school configuration, size and student
demographics, as indicated in Table H.6 result in the following:
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
285

• Class size: With the current enrollment of 452 students in K-3 and 278
students in grades 4-6, the EBM would generate core teacher ratios of 30:1
in grades K-3 and 11:1 in grades 4-6.
• Instructional Days: Increase by 20 days, the equivalent of one school
month; increase PD days by 9 days as recommended by the EBM.
• Multiple resources for struggling students: Ensure that adequate supports
are available for students in poverty and English learners. Provide one
tutor position for every 100 students with a poverty background and one
teacher position (e.g. ELD) for every 100 ELL students. The EBM would
generate a total of 6.7 tutors for struggling students and 2.8 tutors for
English learners.
• Core teachers: The EBM would generate 41 core teachers.
• Specialist teachers: Hire specialist teachers to provide electives, with
ample provision for planning and collaboration time for teaching staff.
Orchid would staff 8.2 specialist teachers with a student population of 730
students.
• Instructional facilitators: Increase school-based instructional coaches at a
rate of one coach position for every 200 students. At the current student
population, the EBM would generate 3.7 instructional facilitators for
Orchid.
• Gifted students: Allocate $10 more dollars to every student enrolled in the
district for services for gifted students. The EBM would generate $25 per
gifted student.
PERSONNEL RESOURCE STRATEGIES
286

• Pupil support: The EBM would generate 1 full time equivalent for every
student in poverty or 6.7 positions for pupil support (inclusive of
counselors, social workers, nurses).
• Non-instructional aides: The EBM would generate 3.4 non-instructional
aides.
• Administration, secretaries, and librarians: The EBM would generate 1.7
principals, 3.4 secretaries, and 1.7 librarians based on the size of the
sample school.
In a time of fiscal crisis, California schools continue to face drastic budget cuts.
However, despite drastic budget cuts to the general fund and categorical funding sources,
schools must continue to focus resources on enhancing the instructional program and
boosting student achievement. It may be more effective to use the core recommendations
in the EBM to help determine which “cuts” have the least impact on student performance.
With reconsiderations and staff reallocations, Orchid will be able to focus on resources
that improve the overall instructional program and student learning.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract As pressure increases to ensure that limited resources are utilized as effectively as possible, funding adequacy remains a priority for all California public schools. The research was conducted through a multi-methods approach of principal interviews, site level resource allocation data, and overall student achievement on state assessments. The study compares school-level resource allocations with the Evidence-based adequacy model and instructional improvement strategies of the five case studies are compared to research based strategies proven to double student performance to generate five case studies. An analysis of each school applied the Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance (Odden, 2009) and the Evidence-based model (EBM) (Odden & Picus, 2008). A complete review of the literature included 1) research-based school improvement strategies, 2) allocation and the use of human resources, 3) limited resources and fiscal constraints in California, and 4) performance gap analysis. The findings indicate fewer site level resources than recommended by the EBM as well as applications of Odden’s (2009) strategies. Several insights emerged from this research to support high implementations of: a) grade-level collaboration, b) data-based decision making, and c) additional support for struggling students despite budgetary changes in order to improve student learning. Thus, the other seven strategies were at the moderate or low levels of implementation across schools in the study. The majority of schools were found to retain fewer resources than recommended by the EBM

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Resource allocation practices in start-up charter schools in relation to identified school reform strategies

PDF

Personnel resource allocation strategies in a time of fiscal stress

PDF

Resource allocation practices in three charter middle schools in relation to student achievement improvement strategies

PDF

Personnel resource allocation strategies in a time of fiscal crisis: case study of elementary schools in a California school district

PDF

Personnel resource allocations: a case study of one Hawaii complex

PDF

Allocating human capital resources for high performance in schools: a case study of a large, urban school district

PDF

Evidence-based resource allocation model to improve student achievement: Case study analysis of three high schools

PDF

Resource allocation strategies and educational adequacy: Case studies of school level resource use in California middle schools

PDF

An examination of resource allocation strategies that promote student achievement: case studies of rural elementary schools in Hawaii

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: Case studies of four California charter schools

PDF

Educational resource allocation at the middle school level: a case study of six middle schools in one California district

PDF

School level resource allocation to improve student performance: A case study of Orange County and Los Angeles County Title I elementary schools

PDF

Better is as better does: resource allocation in high performing schools

PDF

Educational resource allocation at the elementary level: a case study of one elementary school district in California

PDF

Resource allocation and educational adequacy: case studies of school-level resource use in southern California with budget reductions

PDF

Aligning educational resources and strategies to improve student learning: effective practices using an evidence-based model

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: case studies of six California schools within two school districts

PDF

An examination of resource allocation strategies and finance adequacy: case studies of American Samoa Department of Education secondary schools

PDF

Adequacy in education: an evidence-based approach to resource allocation in alternative learning environments

PDF

Successful resource allocation in times of fiscal constraint: case studies of school-level resource use in southern California elementary schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Araya, Saba Q. (author)

Core Title Personnel resource allocation strategies in a time of fiscal stress: a gap analysis of five southern California elementary schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/10/2013

Defense Date 03/11/2013

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag allocation strategies,fiscal stress,gap analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,personnel resource allocation strategies

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Elsasser, Jim (committee member), García, Pedro Enrique (committee member)

Creator Email sabaqaraya@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-254789

Unique identifier UC11293657

Identifier etd-ArayaSabaQ-1680.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-254789 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ArayaSabaQ-1680.pdf

Dmrecord 254789

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Araya, Saba Q.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA