University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
AN EXAMINATION OF RESOURCE ALLOCATION STRATEGIES AND
FINANCE ADEQUACY: CASE STUDIES OF AMERICAN SAMOA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SECONDARY SCHOOLS

by

Akenese Epifania Nikolao-Mutini

_______________________________________________________________

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

December 2012

Copyright 2012 Akenese Epifania Nikolao-Mutini
ii
DEDICATION
This is dedicated to those who have brought much meaning to my life. To my
humble father, the late US Army Retired SGM, the Rev. Deacon (RC) Ta’afulisia
Pula Iuli Tuiteleleapaga Malopao Nikolao and my loving mother, faletua, Susitina T.
Nikolao, you two have molded me into the God-fearing woman I am. You have only
showed unconditional love, offered endless prayers and support to all of your
children and I thank you two from the bottom of my heart.
To my siblings: Teofilo T. Nikolao and Apuh and children; CWO4 John T.
Nikolao and Gina and children; Oloalilo Anita Nikolao and children; Tanumafili
Kelemete Leaiseigoa Nikolao and Tina and children; my birdie Sanjohlea Agnes
Nikolao, I thank God for choosing me to be your sister and I thank you for always
being in my life. To my parents-in-law, Tasi ‘Papana’ Iosua and Musu Fuiava Mutini
and my brother-in-laws and sister-in-laws, thank you for your kindness, love and
direction.
To my other sister, Falenaoti S. Loi-On Fruean and spiritual brother, Br.
Akamu Becerra, FSP, thanks for always encouraging me to never give up. To my
newfound siblings, Jewel and Taumiloga Tuiteleleapaga and children. Thanks for
being there for the kids and me. To Saofa’igama’atua and Theresa, Fa’atupu and
Mila and Afenoa Si’imalevai, thank you for being a part of our family. To Emily
and Fritz Reed, thanks for always being true. To my Holy Family Choir in
Honolulu…thanks for your heaven-sent voices that gave me strength at every mass.
iii
To the real friends (especially military families) I have made throughout the years
and around the world…thank you for keeping it real.
To my children: Nikolao II Chacko; Taofinu’u Izrael; Musu Tiffanie;
To’oto’oali’i Brandon, and nephew Clement Ta’a, I say, “If I can do this then you
can do better...and will do better.” To all of my God-children, trust in God and keep
the faith.
To my dear sons, Chacko and Izzy, thank you for putting up with a mother
like me. You two have been my reason to live, my heart beat, and my life. I am
sorry I may have not been able to give you my undivided attention during the last
three years as I was many times consumed in meeting paper deadlines or at choir
practice. You two have been exceptional and supporting sons. You have been there
to pick up where I left off. I am proud to be your mother. All I do is for you boys.
Keep the faith boys, be proud of who you are and where you are from, fear God and
always be humble. I love you two boys and can’t wait for you two to grow up into
successful men.
And last, my husband, Solialealofiotagaloa Iosua Tasi Mutini. You have
been my driving force to beat the odds and to better myself regardless of what people
say. You have been my truest friend. You have forced me to re-define the meaning
of a wife…to be an independent individual and strive to prove nothing to anyone but
myself.
Love & Prayers to all…ME.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to Dr. Picus, my dissertation chairperson. Your knowledge and
expertise in education is a true treasure for those who seek information in the field.
You have been the backbone to Team Picus 2012: Kawohi; Bernie; Brandon; Kyle
and Kyle; Joanne; Mitzie and me. Thanks for pushing us throughout our program.
I would also like to acknowledge co-chairpersons, Dr. Melora Sundt and Dr.
Dom Brewer. It has been a great joy to cross paths with great minds. You have
made me look at different lenses to see the unseen. I am honored and humbled by all
the professors at the University of Southern California.
I would also like to acknowledge my spiritual father, Fr. Sebastian Chacko.
Thanks for all the sound advice, support and prayers throughout my journey as a
student, a mother, a wife and strong Catholic Christian.
I would like to give acknowledge to the participants, American Samoa
Department of Education for their support and all of the other unheard educators in
this field. Your compassion and dedication to the profession is immeasurable.
A special acknowledgment to my car pool buddy, my peer, my co-worker at
McKinley High School in Honolulu, my ‘sparring partner’ in this fight, Kawohi
Clarice A. Tuasivi (and your wonderful family), who has helped me achieve this
victory. It’s been a tortuous and grueling match but with God on our side, we made
it happen. Fight On! Write On! Fa’afetai lava le fai uso lelei Wohi!

v
A dear acknowledgment to all of my students and institutions I have had the
honor to work for. I salute all those whom I had the privilege to learn from. You are
the reason I found my passion in this field. I thank you for being the best teachers.
Fight On!
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iv
List of Tables vii
List of Figures ix
Abstract xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 1
Chapter Two: Literature Review 28
Chapter Three: Methodology 54
Chapter Four: Findings 65
Chapter Five: Conclusion 113
References 128
Appendices 133
Appendix A: Letter of Agreement with American Samoa 134
Department of Education
Appendix B: Email Invitation to Participate 135
Appendix C: Final Budget – FY 2012 Appropriated Funds 136
Accounts and Grants Account
Appendix D: Final Budget – FY 2012 of Appropriated Funds 137
Account
Appendix E: Qualitative Data Collection Protocol 138
Appendix F: Open-Ended Data Collection Protocol School Sites 140
Appendix G: Data Collection Code Book 143
Appendix H: Quantitative Data Collection Protocol 154
Appendix I: Agamalu High School 160
Appendix J: Fa’atuatua High School 177
Appendix K: Olioli High School 197
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: American Samoa Demographics 2008-2009 16
Table 2.1: Adequate Prototypical Elementary & Middle School Resources 39
Table 4.1: Characteristics of Sample Schools 68
Table 4.2: American Samoa Teacher Credentials (2010) 71
Table 4.3: Summary of Data-Driven Decisions 87
Table 4.4: Summary of Interventions for Struggling Students 92
Table 4.5: Summary of Collaboration and PLC Elements 94
Table 4.6: Core Academic Teachers and Elective/Specialist & EBM 98
Comparison
Table 4.7: Tutors, Extended Day and Summer School Programs – Actual 100
vs. EBM
Table 4.8: Support Staff, Librarians and Secretaries – Actual vs. EBM 104
Table 4.9: Substitutes and Professional Development – Actual vs. EBM 106
Table 4.10: Administration and Instructional Facilitators – Actual vs. EBM 108
Table 4.11: Student Enrollment, Class Size, Disabilities, Free Reduced 109
Lunch – Actual
Table I.1: Agamalu High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies to 171
Increase Student Performance
Table I.2: Agamalu High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison 174
of Resource Allocation
Table J.1: Reading Percent according to Grade Level (Holt – DARI, Level 9) 184
Table J.2: Fa’atuatua High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies 192
to Increase Student Performance

viii
Table J.3: Fa’atuatua High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison 194
of Resource Allocation
Table K.1: Bell Schedule at Olioli High School 212
Table K.2: Olioli High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies to 215
Increase Student Performance
Table K.3: Olioli High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison of 217
Resource Allocation
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. Federal expenditure to American Samoa for FY 1995-2001 13
(Hunkin, 2011)
Figure 1.2. American Samoa SBA 10th grade subgroup scores – SY 20
2008-2009
Figure 1.3. ASDE Stanford Achievement Test – SY 2008-2009 20
Figure 2.1. The Evidence Based Model 38
Figure 4.1. Student enrollment of sample schools 68
Figure 4.2. Ethnic breakdown of the sample schools 70
Figure 4.3. Percentage of ELL & FRE students at the sample schools and 73
EBM prototype
Figure 4.4. Comparison of SBA reading scores for sample schools 75
(Grade 10)
Figure 4.5. Comparison of SBA writing scores for sample schools 76
(Grade 10)
Figure 4.6. Comparison of SBA science scores for sample schools 77
(Grade 11)
Figure 4.7. Comparison of SBA math scores for sample schools (Grade 11) 78
Figure I.1. Agamalu High School student ethnic demographic for 161
SY 2011-2012
Figure I.2. Agamalu High School student enrollment from SY 2008-2009 162
to SY 2011-2012
Figure I.3. Agamalu High School credentials of staff and faculty 163
SY 2011-2012
Figure I.4. Agamalu High Schools – SBA results of students, percent 165
proficient and advanced on SBA

x
Figure J.1. Fa’atuatua High School student ethnic demographic for SY 179
2011-2012
Figure J.2. Fa’atuatua High School student enrollment 180
Figure J.3. Fa’atuatua High School credentials of teachers SY 2011-2012 181
Figure J.4. Fa’atuatua High Schools – SBA results of students, percent 183
proficient and advanced on SBA
Figure J.5. Reading percent of FHS SY2010-2011 of Holt Diagnostic 185
Assessment for Reading Intervention (DARI), Level 9
Figure K.1. Olioli High School student ethnic demographic for SY 200
2011-2012
Figure K.2. Olioli High School student enrollment 201
Figure K.3. Olioli High School credentials of teachers SY 2011-2012 203
Figure K.4. Olioli High Schools – SBA Results of students, percent 205
proficient and advanced on SBA
Figure K.5. Olioli High School SAT10 Stanine scores comparative graph 207
xi
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to analyze American Samoa Department of
Education (ASDE) and collect allocation of resources data and determine how the
resources are used to increase student performance among a purposeful sample of
three public high schools with similar demographics, challenges, fiscal constraints
and funding sources located in the territory of American Samoa. Sample schools
were non-charter, Title I, public schools with student populations of 95%-100%
Samoan, 95%-100% English Language Learners, 100% eligible for Free and
Reduced Lunch per USDA, 100% socioeconomically disadvantaged and produced
similar assessment scores on the local SBA.
The case studies collected data from school and government documents,
performance assessment data of ASDE Standards Based Assessment (SBA) scores
for the sample schools, and information from interviews to analyze the practice of
resource allocation and implemented strategies to increase student performance at
the school site level as well as compare it with the frameworks of the Evidence-
Based Model (EBM) of resource allocation (Odden & Picus, 2008) and Odden’s
(2010) 10 Strategies for Doubling Student Performance.
The findings found ASDE: spent far below the national average for per pupil
expenditure; implemented strategies of the EBM resource allocation and Odden’s
(2010) strategies to double student performance at lower levels than ideal; and
lacked adequate funding practices of resource allocation to improve student
performance and double student achievement.

1
CHAPTER ONE
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Accountability movements in school finance have evolved from different
events in the history of American education. The social implication of the civil
rights movements of the 1950s paved the way for equity and accessibility in
education. It also helped abolish school segregation in education. The 1954
landmark decision of Brown v Board of Education made segregation unlawful. At
the same time, international occurrences such as the Soviet Union’s launch of
Sputnik in 1957 catalyzed the link between financial investment into public
education spending and the national Defense Education Act of 1958 (Marzano,
2003) with the goal of creating more globally competitive American students. The
release of A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education
(NCES), 1983) disclosed startling information about the decline of student
performance in the United States (U.S.) and how the education system was standing
still while more focused nations moved rapidly ahead (Darling-Hammond, 2010).
The NAR report propelled a move from measuring school quality by resources
received to an expectation that performance be judged on student outcomes as
measured by standardized assessments (Guthrie & Springer, 2004, p. 7). The latest
federal policy reform of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (2001) was the high-
risk accountability system that mandated schools to be proficient by the year 2014.
In order to improve student performance, the U.S. exerted energy into the inputs and
outputs of the educational system through large investment into school finance.

2
The large investments of finance into the American education system peaked
demand for more accountability within the schooling system by policymakers and
taxpayers. On the other hand schools, equipped with fewer financial resources, still
had to unconditionally meet the diversified needs of the students. The schools took
care of the students with no regards to their social economic status, demographics, or
level of ability.
Over the past 100 years in the U.S., there has been a steady increase of per-
pupil education expenditures at a constant growth of about 3.5% annually (Odden,
2007) and still the performance of U.S. students are far behind those from other
advanced countries (Schneider, 2008). In 1983, the national average per-student
spending was $5,691 and by 2005 it increased to about $9,226 (Snyder, Dillow, &
Hoffman, 2008, p. 254) but the achievement gap showed no remarkable changes.
The demands for the education system to produce a positive return on
investment with respect to student achievement has charged reformers to focus on
improvement of instruction, student learning, resource allocation and school finance
in the public school system. The focus on accountability prompted a shift in school
finance from equity towards the most adequate amount of fiscal adequacy in
education. The problem of how much funding is adequate in allocating resources
and the deployment of best-practice strategies for improving student performance
are vital in this effort, ergo this study will examine specific manifestations of each of
these strategies while confronting the uniqueness of American Samoa Department of
Education’s (ASDE) single school district, a Territory of the United States.

3
Background of the Problem
Federal Role in Education
The Federal government plays a significant role in k-12 education as it
influences movements for reform in public education and has the capability of
advocating for the passage of legislation that can impact public schooling in every
state. The official mission of the Federal Department of Education is to promote
student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering
education excellence and ensuring equal access (USDOE, 2011). This mission has
influenced many reforms throughout the history of American education.
The Federal government has been an advocate of many reforms in the U.S.
educational system. After the 1954 landmark decision of Brown v Board of
Education that made segregation illegal there was the 1958 National Defense
Education Act that aimed at building America’s nation of young minds into being
global competitors among the best in the world. The Elementary and Secondary Act
(ESEA) of 1965 was passed as a part of the “War on Poverty” emphasizing on high
standards, accountability and equal access to education. The ESEA was later
reauthorized in 2001 as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. The NCLB Act of
2001 emphasized on low student achievement and low student performance of the
U.S. school systems.
The latest reform, the NCLB (2001), is at the forefront of education reform
for accountability and has triggered the most recent ‘high –risk’ accountability
system. The broad purposes of NCLB are to close the achievement gap between

4
groups of students within our nation, raising achievement levels of all students’
performances and improving the school performance. Darling-Hammond (2001)
argues that the opportunity for students to learn at high standards should be
considered a right for all children. As stipulated in the NCLB, states are required to
demonstrate proficiency and progress annually through Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) indicators and standards that are set by the state and approved by the U.S.
Department of Education. A study by the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) in 2007 found that the NCLB endorses the mandate for accountability to
education standards however; there are disparities of design and implementation of
the NCLB. According to NCLB (2001) all students will reach high standards, at a
minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by 2013-2014.
Moving from Equity to Adequacy
Finance equity and the control of school spending was the focus of the
education system before the 1970s. The practice of education spending differs
among each state. In many states, the local government once had autonomous control
of school finance but the traditional basis of local control of school funding evolved
into more state-level centralization of finances (Hoxby, 1996). After the Serrano v
Priest case in the 1970s, on the national level, many schools across the United States
focused on more equitable access to funding. One major outcome from the Serrano
v Priest case was it endeavored to balance the revenue limits to all districts,
regardless of demographics, by adjusting for inflation over time for ceiling limits of
how much tax money is spent per pupil.

5
In the context of standards-based education reform, school finance initially
focused on fiscal equity but has now shifted towards fiscal adequacy (Odden, 2001).
Educational adequacy funding (Odden & Picus, 2008) is defined as the level of
funding that would allow each local education agency (LEA) to provide a range of
instructional strategies and educational programs so that each student is afforded an
equal opportunity to achieve the state’s education performance standards. The
federal standard-based education reforms of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act
of 2001 expect schools to implement higher standards when teaching the nations
students. School finance within this reform seeks to answer if adequate per-pupil
expenditures or revenues from schools and districts are used successfully in
educating students to standards that will lead to more desired levels of student
achievement (Odden, 2001).
The accountability goals have also shifted the education system from
focusing inputs to focusing on outcomes requiring more student achievement using
rigorous performance standards and an attendant of accountability focus at the school
sites (Odden, 2007). These finance issues have also advocated different spending
practices across the U.S. It differs from state to state for example, on average, public
school systems at the elementary and secondary school level receive almost half of
their revenues from state sources, at least ten percent comes from federal funds and
the remaining balance comes from local sources (U.S. Department, 2000).
The federal policy of the NCLB act has become a driving force behind
change within U.S. public schools (Hinde, 2003). At the school level, Federal policy

6
of NCLB has mandated that schools strive to ensure that performance levels among
all students be raised through a standards-and-accountability framework (Odden &
Archibald, 2000). This policy has challenged accountability standards for the
performance of both the teacher and students at the school level. The NCLB act
allows each state the discretion of setting its own adequate yearly progress (AYP)
targets in order to endorse school accountability. When schools are unable to meet
their AYP goals then sanctions are forced upon the school which influences the
accountability focus on the return on investment in education. At the state level, the
NCLB requires all students from all the states be proficient by 2014. Each state has
the capability of defining proficiency for its own school.
American Samoa
This section will introduce information of American Samoa’s distinguishing
historical, geographical, cultural, government and educational background. This
chapter will also review the ASDE’s financial situation; sources of funding; and
current infrastructure. Following the information of American Samoa will be equity
and adequacy shift in the U.S. The historical and geographical background will
enlighten information about the uniqueness of this South Pacific archipelago.
Geography of American Samoa
Nestled in the central South Pacific Ocean, the United States Territory of
American Samoa is the southern-most territory of the United States and the only one
located south of the equator. American Samoa lies in a strategic location and its vital
port was critical to the U.S. during the Second World War and continues to be a

7
main reason why the United States continues to keep its ties with the small island
territory.
The American Samoa Archipelago is comprised of five volcanic islands
(Tutuila, Aunu’u, Ofu, Olosega and Ta’u) and two atolls (Rose Atoll and Swains
Island) that lie about 2,400 miles south-west of the Hawai’i islands (NOAA, 2011)
and in the opposite direction is Aotearoa, New Zealand. These seven islands total
land mass are roughly 76 square miles which is about the size of Washington, D.C.
The population of American Samoa increased from approximately 62,000
inhabitants (U.S. Census Report, 2000) to approximately 67,242 people in 2010
(CIA, 2011) and about 95% of those inhabitants reside on the main island of Tutuila
which includes approximately 52 square miles of inhabitable area. Remarkably,
Tutuila is only about 18 miles long and about 6 miles wide at its widest which results
in its high population density per square mile.
Culture of American Samoa
The Samoan culture and people have been referred to as the aristocrats of the
South Pacific because oratories finesse of the talking chiefs and organizational
schema of the chieftain society. The Samoan culture is visible, practiced, strong and
an integral part of everyday life in American Samoa (PREL, 2011). The Fa’asamoa
(Samoan way of life) is based on the aiga (family). The term Fa’asamoa (Embree,
1934) includes the government by family and village matai’s (chief’s). The matai
system is practiced among the Samoan people. Members of the Samoan family
concede loyalty to the hierarchy of family matai leaders. The matai have great

8
responsibility as they are accountable for their respective aiga and advocate
protecting and apportioning their family communal lands. Communally owned lands
in American Samoa make up 90 percent of the land area and the family matai play
crucial roles in protecting their aiga’s prized possession. The concept of Fa’a Samoa
(GAO, 2011) extends to the authority structures in American Samoa and most high-
ranking government officials, including judges, are matai’s.
Government of American Samoa
Since the establishment of the United States presence in American Samoa
over a hundred years ago, the people of this territory have adhered to a government
system which, “bears the imprints of American democratic principles, providing for
executive, legislative and judicial branches of government” (Smith, 1985, as cited in
Annual Report 1952) interweaved with the cultural norms and values of traditional
Fa’a Samoa which confirms that there are two distinct political systems present in
American Samoa, the modern U.S. influenced government and the traditional matai
system that many times conflict one another.
Most of the economic activity and government operations for the American
Samoa islands are on the island of Tutuila in the Pago Pago Bay area. American
Samoa (GAO, 2008) is unique among the other U.S. insular territories because it is
an unorganized (no formally established relationship by Congress with the United
States and American Samoa), unincorporated (U.S. Congress has determined that
only selected parts of the U.S. Constitution apply) U.S. territory. American Samoa is
not subject to the U.S. Constitution; it has its own local government and constitution.

9
The United States Federal Government signed the deed of cession with local
high chiefs (matai) of the island Tutuila in 1900 fostering the beginning relationship
of the U.S. Role in American Samoa. Four years after, 1904, the island kingdom of
Manu’a ceded to the United States and in 1925, the Swain Island joined the territory
by an act of the Congress. The two deeds of cession were later ratified by the federal
government in 1929 (US Codes, 2011). Per the deeds of cession: “The United States
pledged to promote peace and welfare, to establish a good and sound government,
and to preserve the rights and property of the people.”
The Early Years of the Education System in American Samoa
This section will bring forth information of the beginning of the Education
System in American Samoa. When the U.S. officially invested its commitment to
American Samoa, the U.S. Navy was responsible for federal governance and the
education system of the territory. In 1911, United States Navy (USN) Commander
William M. Crose, the Governor of American, appointed the first Board of
Education. Later, the Education Regulation Act of 1914 issued by then Governor,
USN Commander Clark D. Sterns, established the beginning of the Department of
Education in American Samoa. During the naval era, funding for the newly
established American Samoa Department Education came from the local government
funds. The federal government did not participate in the funding of education in
American Samoa until after July 1, 1951 (American Samoa: Annual Report, 1952).
The presence of the U.S. Navy in American Samoa lasted for fifty-one years until it
was placed under the administrative jurisdiction of the Department of Interior on

10
July 1, 1951, by Executive Order No. 10264, of the President of the United States
(American Samoa: Annual Report, 1952).
The presence of the United States in the islands of American Samoa has
strongly influenced the direction of education issues such as: curriculum; policies;
resources; finance; teaching strategies; funding; grants; and much more. The United
States introduced the Americanization vision (Murray, 1981) of education to the
territory of American Samoa in 1904 by teaching its students the value of
competitiveness of American society while grasping tight onto the traditions of
Samoan society. The Americanization vision in American Samoa held the same
focus in school goals as other U.S. colonies and territories during this era such as:
Hawai’i, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Samoa (Beirne, 1975; Bogardus, 1923;
Carlson, 1975). The main focus of the Americanization goals was to prepare youths
to compete successfully in both traditional Samoan society and stateside American
society (Thomas, 1977).
The education of students in American Samoa has evolved immensely from
the inception of this Americanization approach to schooling when there were two
types of education present on the islands. The first was the village pastors’ schools
and the second was secular English language schools; public and private (Murray,
1981). The first public school on Tutuila island opened on April 11, 1904 (Wilson,
1929) and the first public school on Manu’a island opened on June 30, 1908. In
1914, the Education Regulation Act was issued by Governor, United States Naval

11
(USN) Commander Clark D. Sterns. This act established the duties of the American
Samoa Department of Education (ASDE).
Federal Role in American Samoa
This section offers evidence about the presence of the Federal government in
the territory of American Samoa. Federal governance, in 1951, was transferred to
the Secretary of the Interior, which continues to this present time. The Secretary
exercises broad powers with regard to American Samoa, including “all civil, judicial,
and military powers” of government in American Samoa.

American Samoa has had
its own constitution since 1960, and since 1983, the local American Samoa
constitution can only be amended by an act of Congress (GAO, 2008). In the 2004,
the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported, American Samoa relies on
federal funding to support government operations and deliver critical services. It
further stated the Secretary of the Interior has administrative responsibility for
coordinating federal policy in the territory. Under the Single Audit Act of 1996,
American Samoa is required to perform a yearly single audit of federal grants and
other awards to ensure accountability.
Since 1951, American Samoa has been classified as an unincorporated and
unorganized territory of the United States whose government is administered by the
Department of the Interior. American Samoa has been a territory of the United
States since 1900. As a U.S. territory, it has mirrored the trends of the United States
government through political, economic, social, and educational practice. For
example, in 1996 United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) report

12
stated that in 1963, American Samoa enacted legislation adopting the U.S. Internal
Revenue Code as its local income tax. Another example is in 1977, the Secretary of
Interior approved an amendment to the constitution of American Samoa to have
popular election of a governor. Prior to 1977, all of the governors of American
Samoa were appointed by the U.S. Federal Government and were not of Samoan
decent. American Samoa is not immune to the pressure and higher expectations by
the citizens of the territory and federal government. These pressures demand to see a
return of investment on its students and teachers achievements via results of
standardized assessments as large sums of federal and local funds are funneled
annually into the education system.
The United States Office of Insular Affairs gives American Samoa grant
funds to operate the judiciary and local government because ASG local revenues are
insufficient to fund the budget needs alone. “Budget needs” is defined by DOI as the
cost of maintaining current services and programs (GAO, 2010). The current
American Samoa Operations funding is approximately 11% of ASG’s General Fund
revenue and 29% of the LBJ Hospital’s revenue (GAO, 2010). Most of ASG raises
revenues come from local tax, import tax, the American Samoa Telecommunication
Agency, Department of Transportation and American Samoa Power Authority. Due
to the special circumstance of school funding by the Federal government and local
government in American Samoa, there is a great need for the local educational
system to focus on the education finance and resource allocation arena.

13
The federal government has consistently invested federal funds into
American Samoa Education and the funding has grown yearly over the last few
decades. From 1995 to 2001 (Hunkin, 2011) the United States Federal Government
provided approximately $105,654,890 into ASDE (See Figure 1.1). The Federal
Expenditures from the Federal Government are shared between ASDE and Higher
Education.

Figure 1.1. Federal expenditure to American Samoa for FY 1995-2001 (Hunkin,
2011)

Figure 1.1 shows the funding that the American Samoan Government has
received from the Federal Government during the Fiscal Year of 1995 which was
$11,056,846 to Fiscal Year 2001 which was $18,174,842. The figure shows a steady

14
growth of almost 8% per year. It would be expected that the investments would
accompany measurable gains if strategies but this is not the case in American Samoa.
The most recently published data of American Samoa’s results on national
assessments such as SAT10 scores of ASDE students of 2008-2009 did not reach the
desired levels of achievement (ASDE Territorial Report, 2009).
In reports of American Samoa student performance of grade 8 reading
assessment from the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) results an
average scale score of 198 for American Samoa during the year 2002. The NAEP
reading scale has a range from 0 to 500. An alarming fact of American Samoa’s
students that performed at or above the Proficient level was a mere 1 percent. The
United States national average of students at the same grade level who performed at
or above the Proficient level according to the NAEP assessment was 31 percent.
This example of low performance assessment data shows disparity between the
amount of money invested into the education of the students of American Samoa and
their actual performance on assessments.
Current Status of American Samoa’s Department of Education
Currently, ASDE continues to receive Federal funding to support the
operation of the government and education. The American Samoa delegate to
Congress, Hunkin (2004), stated that United States Department of Education
(USDOE) confirmed the fact that the territory of American Samoa receives more
federal aid per pupil on a per capita basis than any other State or Territory. Hunkin
(2011) informs American Samoa government receives approximately $2,800 per

15
student from the Federal government where most States receive less than $600 per
student. The per-pupil expenditure for American Samoa students is still far less than
per-pupil expenditure of U.S. students. The top five states (Lewis & Sharps, 2011, p.
119) in the U.S. in 2007 had per-pupil expenditure at approximately $14,553 over
$10,000 more than American Samoa per pupil expenditure. The remaining per pupil
expenditure for States is funded from State and local taxes which each State has to
raise on its own. Most states receive only 7% of per pupil expenditure from the
Federal government during the fiscal year while in American Samoa more than 76%
of per pupil expenditure is given to ASDE from the Federal government. ASG
receives a lot of Federal dollars for their students but the effectiveness of resource
allocation needs to be explored in order to measure the return of investment. To
ensure that desired levels of achievement is reached, accountability needs to include
focus on the return on investment in education (Odden & Archibald, 2000) not only
for schools of America but for public schools of the U.S. Territory of American
Samoa; who are recipients of federal funding.
The 2008-2009 Territorial Report (ASDE, 2011) was the first time in the
history of American Samoa Education where the department demonstrated its
commitment to track student achievement at each school and publically shared the
results with the community. The Territorial Report Card reported ASDE serves over
14,150 students in grades K-12, special education and early childhood education
programs. The schools of ASDE fall into five different divisions (East, Central,
Mid-West, West and Manu’a) spanning over five different islands. In 2008 – 2009

16
school years, there were six different public high schools from the five divisions
within ASDE. The high schools and divisions are: East Division – Faga’itua High
School that had an enrollment of 637 students; Central Division – Samoana High
School that had an enrollment of 1,200 students; Mid-West Division – Nu’uuli Voc-
Tech High School and Tafuna High School, this division did not have student
enrollment data; West Division – Leone High School, this division did not have
student enrollment data; and last, Manu’a Division – Manu’a High School, this
division did not have student enrollment data.

Table 1.1
American Samoa Demographics 2008-2009
Subgroups All Students: 14,071
Male 53%
Female 47%
Samoan 95%
Asian/Pacific Islander (A/PI) 2%
Other (White, Spanish, etc.) 1%
IEP (Students with disabilities) 7%
Limited English Proficiency (LEP) *Data unavailable
Free/Reduced Lunch (FRL) 100%

17
Table 1.1 shows the demographic of students in American Samoa during the
2008 – 2009 school years. The table depicts the total population of students from
both the elementary and secondary level. During this school year, there were 4,653
high school level students and 9,418 elementary students. The ethnic Samoans
represent 95% of the total students and 2% are Asian/Pacific Islands and 1% falls
under the other ethnic group. The male population at ASDE represents 53% of the
total population and the females represent 47% of total student population. The
territory of American Samoa was deemed by the United States Department of
Agriculture as 100% qualified for free-reduced lunch based on the average family
income of the territory being low. All of the public schools in ASDE are Title I
schools which the USDOE provide supplemental funding aimed to bridge the gap
between high risk, low-income and other students in America.
The American Samoa 2000 Census disclosed a high percentage of ASDE
students qualified for the free school lunch program, ergo; the United States
Department of Agriculture deemed 100% of American Samoa’s students eligible for
free breakfast and lunch. Public education in American Samoa (Hunkin, 2011)
receives more federal dollars per student than any other State or Territory. Whereas
states in the United States raise money by taxing individuals and businesses to fund
money spent on each student, the federal government funds approximately $2,800
per student in American Samoa while many states receive less than $600 per student
from the federal government (Hunkin, 2011). On average, States are paying
approximately 93% of the costs of the education of their children while the Federal

18
government appropriates approximately 7% of the costs for the same students. In
American Samoa, (Hunkin, 2011) the federal government pays more than 76% of
costs for the education of students in ASDE.
American Samoa Education Accountability Framework
American Samoa’s public school system is similar to the unique K-12 public
school system of the State of Hawai’i because both have only one district that is run
by the state or territorial government. The school district in American Samoa is led
by one governor-appointed director of ASDE who becomes director if only passed
for the post by the local Senate. Currently, for the sake of this study, there is no
director for the post in ASDE. The director is supported by five division
coordinators who head one of the five geographically based divisions of school.
There is no teacher union in American Samoa which means there are no negotiation
processes for teacher contracts. Teachers are paid by the teacher pay scale set by the
local government.
The public school system in American Samoa services over 14,150 students
in grades Kindergarten to grade 12. The department is comprised of 30 schools and
Early Childhood Education (ECE) centers. There are 24 ECE centers; 23 elementary
schools, and 6 high schools covering over a span of five islands (ASG, 2011). The
five islands consist of Tutuila, Aunu’u, Ofu, Olosega and Ta’u.
The 2008 Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that although
ASDE is not specifically required to comply with No Child Left Behind Act time
constraints of 2001, however, ASDE in 2003 stated “it has made the commitment to

19
utilize” five performance goals as a framework for improving education in the
territory (GAO, 2008) which are: (1) by 2013-2014, all students will reach high
standards; (2) all limited English proficient students will become proficient in
English and reach high academic standards; (3) by academic year 2005-2006, all
students will be taught by highly qualified teachers; (4) all students will be educated
in a learning environment that is safe, drug free, and conducive to learning and last
(5) all students will graduate from high school.
The results in the 2009 ASDOE Standards Based Assessment (SBA) and
national Stanford Aptitude Tests (SAT) showed that students of ASDOE scored far
below student counterparts nationwide (ASDE, 2009). The SAT, normative
assessment, results for ASDOE 12
th
grade students in 2009 yielded scores in reading
at 17 percentile and math 30 percentile in comparison with students across the
United States.
Figure 1.2 shows the results of the Standards Based Achievement (SBA)
subgroup scores of the 10
th
grade level students that took this assessment. The
breakdown of subgroups shows the gender of the students that were tested, the
ethnicity of the students and students that have an Individualized Education Program
(IEP) as stipulated by the Special Education program. The information clearly
shows that students in this particular grade level in American Samoa are not
performing at desired proficiency levels of math, reading or writing.

20

Figure 1.2. American Samoa SBA 10
th
grade subgroup scores – SY 2008-2009

Figure 1.3. ASDE Stanford Achievement Test – SY 2008-2009

21
Figure 1.3 represents a chart of the ASDE results for the Stanford
Achievement Test for the SAT10 during the school year 2008-2009. This national
normative assessment of the Stanford Achievement Test (SAT 10) has been
implemented by ASDE for many years to compare the local students performance in
Reading and Math with students in the same grade level in the United States. These
results clearly exhibit the low performance level of SAT10 content tested by students
of ASDE in comparison with student counterparts in the United States.
The education finance practices of ASDE represent a unique opportunity to
understand resource allocation. Some reasons why resource allocation study is
important for ASDE are: first, schools are uniquely funded in American Samoa;
second, the significant role the U.S. Federal government has great emphasis on
ASDE trends; and finally, because American Samoa’s isolated location; cultural and
government status offers an excellent opportunity to compare ASDE with other
schools in the United States.
In dire challenges of fiscal constraints, this study examines how the
Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) of fiscal adequacy for resource
allocation can be implemented in an environment that differs substantially from that
found in most US school systems and whether or not it can be easily adapted to
varying realities.
Statement of the Problem
The unique funding source of American Samoa’s Department of Education
has been under scrutiny for the last decade and the security of the funding source

22
remains questionable for the future of the territory. School finance is important in
the delivery of educational services in the U.S. as it is in the American Samoan
education system which mimics many education trends of the United States such as
meeting student performance requirements and accountability demands as set by
NCLB. However, resources are becoming scarcer, challenges and diversity of
students’ needs have increased, the accountability demands of student achievement
are increasing and student performance data has yet to reach desired levels of
achievement.
The level of fiscal funding adequacy is the amount of finance that is essential
for all students to achieve a high-quality education; there is no universal definition of
an adequate education. Further school site analysis is needed to inform policy
makers and practitioners of American Samoa’s single-school district on how to
determine the fiscal adequacy required to employing effective resource allocation
strategies to improve student performance.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to understand the unique school finance and
student performance challenges facing the single territory and education district of
American Samoa Department of Education by utilizing the Evidence Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation as a framework.
The framework will be used to analyze the current resource allocation patterns in the
six public high schools in the single district of American Samoa. Odden’s (2009)
Ten Steps to Doubling Student Performance will be utilized within each respective

23
public high school to align the relationship between current resource allocation
patterns and student achievement of American Samoa Department of Education to
best-practice strategies of doubling student performance as offered by Odden (2009).
It is anticipated from previous successful (Odden & Picus, 2008) research that the
analysis at the school-site level will support resource allocation and instructional
strategies of the evidence-based approach. This analysis will equip educational
leaders to successfully utilize strategies of the evidence-based approach for fiscal
adequacy and resource allocation to dramatically increase student performance of
ASDE to more desired achievement levels.
Research Questions
The following questions are the foundation for this study:
1. How much money is spent on each student in American Samoa
Department of Education?
2. What types of instructional improvement strategies are implemented at
school level in ASDE?
3. According to this research, are resources allocated in ways that lead to
high student performance in ASDE?
Significance of the Study
The results of this study will augment the present knowledge on how high
schools in ASDE can allocate resources strategically and effectively to increase
student academic performance and achievement. This study does not imply to make
direct links between resource allocation and student achievement but it implies how

24
evidence-based research, specifically the Evidence Based Model, and data from
successful schools about how they allocate resources can be utilized by decision
makers to improve practices in ASDE and to double student performance.
This study will identify how the high schools in ASDE are allocating
resources to maximize student performance. The collected data will be used to
analyze the EBM (Odden, 2008) and it’s implication on student achievement for
education in ASDE. This study will help the small district of ASDE understand its
exceptional challenges by employing the Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus,
2008) to analyze the resource allocation patterns in the high schools in the district of
American Samoa and the degree the Ten Strategies for Doubling Student
Performance (Odden, 2009) how these factors may convey the outcomes of
performance of each high school. These results of this study can be used as a tool
for policy-makers to be enlightened or informed on best practices for resource
allocation and student achievement as discussed earlier in this section.
Limitations
1. The limitations in this study include limited publicized data from ASDE
schools which is one district located throughout five islands in the U.S.
Territory of American Samoa was not readily assessable.
2. The unique funding of resources to ASDE may prevent properly
maximizing the Evidence-Based Model’s in ASDE schools to increase
student performance.

25
3. Although the researcher purposely selected the pool sample of volunteer
participants, there is the threat that self-elimination due to biases of
nonparticipants may occur.
Delimitations
The delimitations of this study are:
1. The opportunity of candidates for this study is limited to secondary
schools of one school district in an isolated chain of islands that is high
densely populated.
2. The collection of data for resource allocation was not longitudinal and
limited to 2011-2012 school years.
3. The researcher cannot control for any bias during interview nor can he
control the willingness of participants to engage in the interview.
Definition of Terms
Accountability: Systems that hold students, schools, or districts responsible
for academic performance (ASDE, 2011).
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): is a requirement under the No Child Left
Behind (NCLB) legislation that requires schools and districts to measure and report
students’ annual progress toward proficiency. AYP in ASDE criteria covers four
majors’ areas – participation rate, graduation rate, percent proficient and attendance
rate. By SY 2014 all students in ASDE should be at the proficient level (ASDE
Territorial Report, 2009).
Costs: expenditures incurred to produce a certain outcome (ASDE, 2011).

26
Evidence Based Model: School instructional improvement design grounded
in scientifically based research and widely documented effect practiced based on
resource allocation associated with achieving desired and required student
achievement outcomes (Picus, 2011).
NCLB: The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is the reauthorization of the
federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which requires states and
territories to report student achievement in the areas of Reading and Math for
elementary grades 3
rd
-8
th
and one secondary, 10
th
grade. The report card is required
under law to hold the territory of American Samoa and schools accountable for
student performance (ASDE, 2011).
Samoan Student: Students who self-identify themselves as being of Samoan
ancestry.
Standards Based Assessment (SBA): This criterion referenced test is locally
developed by the American Samoa Department of Education with input provided by
teachers, administrators, consultants, curriculum coordinators & specialists and other
ASDE staff. The first content areas worked on were: Reading, Writing, Math and
Science. Focused grade levels were: 3
rd
-8
th
, 10
th
in the areas of Reading, Writing &
Math with 11
th
the focused grade level for Science (ASDE, 2011).
Stanford Test (SAT 10): This normative assessment has been used by ASDE
for many years and the results are mainly used to compare local students’
performance in the areas of Reading & Math to students in the United States.
Percentile ranks are mainly used to compare these performances (ASDE, 2011).

27
Subgroups: A requirement by NCLB for accountability purposes to report
student performance by specific subgroups. ASDE is required to report on the
following subgroups (ASDE, 2011):
 Race/Ethnicity (3 categories: Samoan, Asian/Pacific Islander, Other)
 Gender
 Students with Disabilities (IEP)
 Economically Disadvantaged (Free-Reduced Lunch Program)

28
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
There have been many systematic approaches in education to ensure the
success of all students in the United States. Odden and Picus (2008) state that a goal
for many educators is to link funding to strategies that are successful in producing
high student performance. Reform efforts such as the NCLB (2001) have put
methods in place to increase student achievement through standards-based
accountability and standards-based reforms for educators (Hanushek & Raymond,
2005). The reforms of the reauthorization of the ESEA (1965) address the
achievement gaps of student performance in America at the school, district, state,
nation and global level with the intention of producing higher achieving and higher
performing students. In the 1990s, new attention began to focus on education
adequacy and productivity (Odden & Picus, 2004). These recent trends of standards-
based reforms added to the pressures of educational finance shifting from equity and
access of all students to focusing on best practices of adequate resource funding and
the accountability of performance and productivity for all students. The costly
reforms have been a priority at the different levels of local, state and federal
government. The reforms also advocate not only for focus on accountability, higher
performance, education finance and adequacy but also resource allocation and
effective strategies to improve the students of this nation.

29
The effectiveness of strategically allocating financial resources surfaced as a
critical component in education finance reform. The Evidence-Based Approach
(Odden, Archibald, Fermanich, & Gross, 2003) is based on the cost reporting
structure framework at the school-site level. The researchers (Odden et al., 2003)
state policymakers and educational leaders do not have sound decision power
because of the lack of an adequate fiscal reporting system. The general question of
how much money is necessary or what amount is adequate to afford students the best
opportunity to increase student performance has been mixed into the formula.
Odden and Clune (1998) argue that the prime school finance problem is to link
school finance to the strategies needed to accomplish the goal of teaching students to
higher standards. The American education system needs to initiate more focus on
adequacy and accountability for student performance (Rubenstein et al., 2008). The
financial system of education must therefore be redesigned for effectiveness and
efficiency (Odden & Busch, 1998) of resources to improve student performance.
The literature reviewed in this chapter attempts to explore the linkage of
effective resource allocation practices, efficient fiscal and educational adequacy of
resources for schools and the impact these factors can have on improving student
achievement in students of the United States Territory of American Samoa secondary
schools. This literature review has identified five sections to explore on financial
education adequacy. Section one will look at the scope of School finance in the
United States and American Samoa, which will distinguish the scale it has had in the
different levels of government. Section two will explore resource allocation inputs.

30
Section three covers the shift towards from educational equity to educational
adequacy in the United States. Section four describes the Evidence-Based (Odden &
Picus, 2008) adequacy model and review Odden’s (2009) Ten Strategies for
Doubling Student Performance as an organizational framework. The last section
covers the challenges of resource allocation in small rural school districts similar to
American Samoa.
School Finance in the United States
Government spending has increased throughout the history of American
public education and the evolution of the government’s role in policy making has
molded the system to what it is today. Current expenditures for both public
elementary and secondary schools in 2010-2011 school years were about $540
billion (NCES, 2011). The national average spent per student during 2010-2011 was
approximately $10,792, up from $10,297 in actual expenditures in 2007-2008
(NCES, 2011). Despite the substantial growth of U.S. spending in education in the
past half century, data results of standardized assessments uncovered that
achievement gap of student performance has not decreased and still the United States
lags behind those from global advanced countries (Odden, Monk, Nakib & Picus,
1995; Schneider, 2008).
Education policy has been shaped by court decisions, public referendums, or
state and federal acts and regulations. For example, in California, The Serrano v.
Priest (1971) decision was the result of observed disparities in educational equity.
The plaintiffs argued in order for their children to have access to equal education

31
opportunities the lower-wealth districts had to pay a higher tax rate than the higher-
income districts. At the time, expenditures among California districts varied due to
tax rates and property values (Kirst, 2006). The 1976 decision of Serrano v Priest
forced the policy makers of California to revisit the revenue limit formulas and
mandated equalization through adjustments to local education agencies (LEA)
budgets in order to close the equity gap, but Proposition 13, passed by voters in 1978
prevented this (Kirst, 2006).
NCLB has also increased accountability mandates forcing improvements in
all aspects of public school education. Such accountability mandates encourage
efforts to broaden understanding of the role of school finance into the direction of
adequacy and productivity. Decision makers have an enormous challenge to spend
fund more efficiently (Odden & Archibald, 2001; Picus, 2001; Picus & Fazal, 1995).
There is an expectation that the investment in education resources will have a
positive return on investment in terms of improved student performance.
School Finance In American Samoa
A territory of the United States of America, American Samoa’s finance
differs in sources of funding for the public education department when compared
with the fifty states of the United States. The federal government did not participate
in the funding of education in American Samoa until after July 1, 1951 (American
Samoa: Annual Report, 1952). The territory has only one school district which
currently services approximately 14,150 students in grades, K-12, early childhood
education and special education programs (ASDE, 2010). The only other state that

32
has one district is Hawai’i, which has approximately 180,000 students (HIDOE,
2010) and is the most similar in structure to the other entities of the Pacific region.
However, Hawai’i’s political and economic conditions are quite different than
American Samoa and the other Pacific entities; the Pacific entities do not have
statehood. American Samoa’s Government (ASG) relies heavily on Federal funding
to support government operations and the delivery of critical services (GAO, 2004).
There is no property tax in American Samoa. The administrative responsibility for
Federal policy in the territory lies with the Secretary of Interior. The Single Audit
Act of 1996 required American Samoa to perform a yearly single audit to ensure
accountability of federal awards and grants.
American Samoa Government received $32 million for fiscal year 2010 to
assist with operation funds from the Federal Government (Hunkin, 2009). ASG also
received $22.8 million to in operation funds from the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA)
for FY2010 under the H.R. 2996 appropriations bill. These funds were essential to
ASG services such as education, health care, public safety, and support for the
judiciary. ASG also received $9.3 million in Covenant Capital Improvement Project
(CIP) grants and an additional of $3000 from the previous fiscal year. CIP funds
address infrastructure needs of the territory such as schools, hospitals and wastewater
systems. The objective promoted self-sufficiency, therefore, the amount remained
constant throughout the years and ASG absorbed the costs of inflation associated
with the growing population in the territory (Manuatele, 2009).

33
In 1994, the Pacific Region Educational Lab (Pacific REL) conducted a study
of School Finance and Facilities of the 10 American-affiliated Pacific entities:
American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI),
Federated States of Micronesia (Chuuk, Kosrae, Phonpei, and Yap), Guam, Hawaii,
Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Republic of Palau (Pacific REL, 1994). The
Pacific Resource for Education and Learning (PREL) are the contractors for the
Pacific REL and conduct research about the region on their behalf. PREL serves the
educational community of the Pacific region and collaborate routinely with the
governments of the region. The presence of PREL in American Samoa is great in
the education community. The information of finance in American Samoa and other
regions of the Pacific are limited to government contracted reports on economic
development for individual entities, descriptions of the economy and planning
documents (PREL, 1994). This study brought school finance to the foreground of
Pacific education issues.
The 1994 (Pacific REL) study of the ten Pacific islands found a wide range of
important information and disparities of school financing and facilities in the Pacific
region. In terms of school finance, the study found the need for support for school
finance and facilities would increase over time, monies for education in the region
continue to fall short of the need because 70% of the allocated funds go into the
salaries and benefits of employees in the education department. The budget to cover
the costs of all other instructional materials and staff development is a mere 30% of
allotted funding which is inadequate. The Per-pupil expenditure varied greatly in the

34
U.S. Pacific region for example, the per pupil expenditure for the 1991 fiscal year for
the islands in this study resulted in the following: American Samoa $3162; Chuuk
$584; Guam $4277; Hawaii $4311; Kosrae $900; Marshall $910; Palau $3737;
Pohnpei $1144 and Yap $1142. The formulae for per-pupil calculations because the
various structures of government finance in the region varied from entity to entity.
There is no comprehensive regional study of either school finance or facilities in this
Pacific region (Kawakami, 1994) but this study was designed to offer the region with
a status report of aspects in Pacific education.
Resource Allocation
In order to make quantum improvements in student performance, setting high
goals (Odden, 2009) is not the only answer but effective use of current resources
must be better utilized. Recent finance education trends have analyzed school level
data to find a linkage between resource allocation patterns and student achievement.
If this aspiring education reform goal of high student achievement is to be realized
then the practice of effective resource allocation must be visited. There is
considerable research on how dollars are distributed to schools but insufficient data
on how to effectively and productively use dollars (Picus & Fazal, 1995). There are
researchers who do not see the link between more spending in education and
increasing positive student performance. For example, Hanushek (1994) found an
increase in education funding did not complement improved student performance. In
a meta-analysis of per pupil expenditures Hanushek and Rivkin (1997), noted there
was an increase of 3.5 percent yearly but the allocation of resources was spent

35
mostly on compensation of teachers and expenses outside of the classroom rather
than spent directly on related resources to increase student performance. Hanushek
(1994) research found that many times, schools simply do not have autonomous
decision power to intentionally distribute money as desired. School finance analysts
point out that there are three commonly used criteria or objectives for informing
decisions for raising and allocating school resources: adequacy, equity, and
efficiency (Levin, 1995; Monk, 1990).
If schools had the authority over their budgets then there would be better
opportunity for school improvement efforts because they can direct money to support
priority goals and programs (NCREL, 2000; Odden & Archiabld, 2000). When
funding is not properly distributed it offers no effective strategy for instructional
purpose to improve student achievement. In other countries, most of the educational
budget on classroom instruction spends between 70 to 80% (Darling-Hammond,
2010) but the United States only spends about 60% or less. Districts usually allocate
resources in a regular manner (Miles & Darling-Hammond, 1998). Picus and Fazal
(1995) found instances where funding levels were high because of state assistance;
the monies were used by districts to fund mostly for teacher compensation and
smaller class sizes. There is great disparity in allocation of resources.
Educational Equity to Educational Adequacy
The subject of effectively and adequately allocating resources has surfaced in
recent research. Adequacy refers to the mobilization of sufficient resources to
support the desired level (in terms of both quantity and quality) of educational

36
services (Odden, 2001). In fact, Darling-Hammond’s (2010) found that for schools
to be successful with all of their students, they must be adequately resourced to do
so. Odden and Archibald (2001) found similarities in the practice of resource
allocation in successful schools who allocated resources where it was most needed.
Monk (1990) and Levin (1995) argue there are three objectives for informing
decisions for allocating school resources: adequacy being one and the other two are
equity and efficiency.
The Evidence-Based Model
The Evidence-Based Model (EBM) developed by Odden and Picus (2008) is
an approach that uses research findings to suggest how resources can be allocated in
schools in ways that should improve performance. This model is twofold: a review
of best practice and research in education; and a study of schools and districts that
have shown dramatic increase of student performance over a three to seven year time
period (Picus & Associates, 2011). The Evidence-Based Approach (Odden,
Archibald, Fermanich & Gross, 2003) is based on cost reporting structure
framework. The EBM in this context establishes an understanding of adequate and
efficient resource allocations linking to high student performance. Current
educational research and best practices depicted in Odden’s (2009) Ten Best
Strategies in Doubling Student Performances drives this model to effectively use
resources needed for all students to receive a high quality education (Odden, 2003).
This model (Odden, 2003) approach identifies educational strategies that produce
high student achievement and can assist in schools in using their resources

37
effectively. This model (Pittner et al., 2010) attempts to correct deficiency by
linking educational need and school funding.
The Evidenced-Based Model has been used by Odden and Picus (2008) as an
empirical approach proven to guide districts and schools in determining the
effectiveness of resource-use by putting a price on each component needed for a
high-quality instruction program and then aggregating the total cost. It has been
used successfully to estimate funding levels and model the distribution of funds to
school districts in Kentucky, Arizona, Arkansas, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Washington
and North Dakota (Odden et al., 2007). However, challengers of this model such as
Hanushek and Linseth (2009) interrogate the effectiveness of EBM. Loeb (2007)
finds weakness with the EBM by stating it does not offer enough conclusive
evidence to justify expenditures in education finance. Hanushek and Lindseth
(2009) undermine the Evidence-Based Model and state that it is difficult to measure
both the effectiveness and the success of the Evidence-Based Model. Hanushek
states the EBM avoids attempts to calculate the minimum costs of reaching any level
of achievement, but the consultants seek to maximize expenditures. Hanushek
further argues that the increased assessments scores of student performance in
Wyoming may have not been contributed to the recommendations made by the
consultants (Hanushek & Lindseth, 2009).
Figure 2.1 depicts the Evidence Based Model and shows how a model school
values smaller sizes in the Core classes. The recommended size of core classes is 15
students to 1 teacher (15:1) in grades Kindergarten to grade 3 (K-3) and 25 students

38
to 1 teacher (25:1) in grades 4 to grades 12. It requires more teacher specialists who
disseminate support for struggling students in the form of tutorials and extended
support, as well as expertise in technology and instructional materials.

Figure 2.1. The Evidence Based Model
Note: Adapted from Did increased flexibility in the use of categorical grants help
California schools and community colleges improve student performance? A
thematic dissertation proposal by Picus (2011). Adapted with permission.

39
Table 2.1
Adequate Prototypical Elementary & Middle School Resources
School Element Elementary Schools Middle Schools
School Characteristics
School configuration K-5 6-8
Prototypical school size 432 450
Class size K-3: 15 4-5: 25 6-8: 25
Full-day kindergarten Yes NA
Number of teacher work days 195 teacher work days (increase of 5
days)
195 teacher work days (increase of 5
days)
Percentage poverty (free & reduced
price lunch)
50% 50%
Percent ELL 10.6% 10.6%
Personnel Resources
1. Core teachers 24 18
2. Specialist teachers 20% more assuming a 6 period day
with each FTE teaching 5 periods: 4.8
20% more assuming a 6 period day with
each FTE teaching 5 periods: 3.6
3. Instructional facilitators 1/200 students: 2.2 1/200 students: 2.25
4. Tutors for struggling students 1/100 poverty students: 2.16 1/100 poverty students: 2.25
5. Teachers for ELL students An additional 1 teacher/100 ELL
students: 0.46
An additional 1 teacher/100 ELL
students: 0.48
6. Extended day 1.8 1.875
7. Summer school 1.8 1.875
8. Students with mild disabilities Additional 3 professional teacher
positions and 1.5 aide positions
Additional 3 professional teacher
positions and 1.5 aide positions
9. Students with severe disabilities 100% state reimbursement minus
federal funds
100% state reimbursement minus federal
funds
10. Resources for gifted/talented
students
$25/student $25/student
11. Substitutes 10 days/FTE 10 days/FTE
12. Pupil support staff 1/100 poverty students: 1.32 total 1/100 poverty students plus 1
guidance/250 students: 3.18 total
13. Supervisory aides 2 2
14. Librarians/LMC 1 1
15. Principal 1 1
16. School site secretary 1 secretary and 1 clerical 1 secretary and 1 clerical
Dollar per Pupil Resources
17. Professional development Included above:
Instructional facilitators
10 summer days
Additional:
$100/pupil for other PD expenses–
trainers, conferences, travel, etc.
Included above:
Instructional facilitators
10 summer days
Additional:
$100/pupil for other PD expenses–
trainers, conferences, travel, etc.

40
Table 2.1 depicts information from Odden & Picus (2008) on proposed
resource allocations to schools using the EBM. Figure 2.1 represents the approach
that was used in the Wyoming study. This prototypical model represents provisions
of resources for an elementary and middle school. The prototypical schools are
matched to the student numbers and demographics of each school. If there are
schools that have more students than provided in the prototypical school then they
will have to proportion or allocate more resources while they would do the opposite
for smaller schools. If schools do not match this prototypical school model, such as
K-6, K-8 or K-12 schools, then they are resourced using a different combination of
elementary, middle and high school formulas so it will be proportionately resourced
(Odden & Picus, 2008).
Centered around research-based strategies, the EBM utilizes evidence from
three primary resources: research with randomized assignment to the treatment,
research with other types of controls statistical procedures that can help separate the
impact of a treatment; and best practices either as codified in a comprehensive school
design or from studies of impact at the local district or school level (Odden & Picus,
2008). The EBM strategies are as follows and are discussed in this section: 1)
Understanding the Performance Problem and Challenge; 2) Setting Ambitious Goals;
3) Changing the Curriculum Program and Creating a New Instructional Vision; 4)
Committing to Formative Assessments and Data-Driven Decisions; 5) Investing in
Ongoing , Embedded and Intensive Professional Development; 6) Focusing Class
Time more Efficiently and Effectively; 7) Providing Multiple Interventions for

41
Struggling Students; 8) Creating a Collaborative, Professional Culture; 9)
Empowering Leaders to Support Instructional Improvement through Widespread
Distributive Instructional Leadership; 10) Taking Advantage of External Expertise
in Professional and Best Practices (Odden, 2009; also see Figure 2.1). The EBM
also include expenditure elements which consist of: core academic teachers, elective
teachers or specialists, extra help, professional development, other non-classroom
instructional staff, instructional materials and equipment, student support,
administration, operations and maintenance (Odden & Picus, 2008).
EBM Strategy 1: Understanding the Performance Problem and Challenge
Odden & Archibald’s (2009) research using the EBM strategies recommends
before making changes within the school environment that recognition of
performance problems first be identified by analyzing current data from state
assessments of the students’ performance levels. Schools that have proven to be
successful looked at data and acknowledged the weaknesses within the walls of their
own school before they tried to point fingers at reforms like the NCLB. When staff
members are fully able to understand what the data results represent for the student
and school then they are able to accept the distance between the desired performance
and the current situation they are at; achievement gaps. Schmoker (2006) states that
many district and school leaders use performance data to comprehend challenges
facing all stakeholders in exertions to improve education. Murnane and Sharkey
(2004 ) found in their study of New York State public school students that educators
can use student assessment results to adopt an instrumental approach to make

42
decisions about students best interest such as if the student should be retained in the
same level or attend summer school or adopt a conceptual approach by using
assessments to make instruction more effective for students to reach the
performance standard. The command of understanding what the performance
challenge is for the organization by the analysis of a wide range of performance data
will act as a catalyst for the ‘sense of urgency’ for change.
In American education, there is great need for change because of the many
pressures of producing higher student achievement and performance that meet state
standards-based reforms. The demands for the American education system to make
the changes needed to close gaps of low performing students have been identified as
problems that need immediate attention from the system. Odden and Archibald
(2009)revealed pressures for the school system to make changes come from various
directions such as: accountability for student performance from NCLB; AYP data
towards proficient achievement set by NCLB requirements; business community that
demands higher levels of skilled and knowledgeable students; business, economic
and political pressures for students to be more knowledge-based in the global
economy and moral drive to increase the performance of children of minority
backgrounds and low-income.
Organizational change such as change in the American education system is a
complicated mission. Kotter (2002) studied the dynamic process of change and
found eight common stages of successful change initiatives used by organizations: 1)
creating a sense of urgency; 2) pulling together a guiding team with the needed

43
skills, credibility, connections, and authority to move things along; 3) creating an
uplifting vision and strategy; 4) communicating the vision and strategy through a
combination of words, deeds and symbols; 5) removing obstacles, or empowering
people to move ahead; 6) producing visible symbols of progress through short-term
victories; 7) sticking with the process and refusing to quit when things get tough; and
8) nurturing and shaping a new culture to support the emerging innovative ways.
These strategies of change are similar to Odden and Archibald (2008) stages of
educational change process: laying the foundation for change; creating a new
educational strategy and implementing, monitoring and continuous improvement.
This first strategy of doubling student performance is a very important prerequisite to
the remaining strategies that will be discussed.
EBM Strategy 2: Setting Ambitious Goals
Once performance problems and challenges have been defined by data
analysis, it is imperative for schools to set ambitious goals. Marzano (2003) supports
this notion with the finding that schools that have a clear and established learning
objective with high student expectations improve performance on state assessments.
Everyone in the school regardless of administrators or teachers should set high and
ambitious goals for all students with the goal of improving student performance
(Duke, 2006; Elmore & Burney, 1999; Waters & McNulty, 2005). The student’s
demographics or current performance levels should not be taken into consideration
when setting high goals. When goals are set high, data will expose “quantum
improvements” in performance rather than marginal improvements (Odden, 2009).

44
Setting high goals regardless of student’s demographics have led to dramatic student
outcomes (Odden & Archibald, 2009; Duke, 2006; Marzano, 2003). The setting of
high goals is very important.
In setting the high goals for the students, it is important that the stakeholders
work together with the task of working towards a common goal; the students. In
fact, Robinson (2007) found that goal setting had an effective outcome when
teachers worked together. The stakeholders must share the core belief that all
students can learn at high levels (Odden, 2009; Odden & Archibald, 2009; Duke,
2006; DuFour et al., 2006). Research has shown that educational institutions often
do not share this belief. Some teachers have lower expectations on their students
especially demographics of minority, English language learners and Special
Education (Odden, 2009; Weinstein, 2002). This only underlines the importance of
holding accountability to the expected high levels of achievement and to lessen the
achievement gap. Goal setting with a purpose is vital in ambitious goals.
EBM Strategy 3: Change the Curriculum Program and Create a New
Instructional Vision
According to Odden (2009) curriculum and instructional programs are the
driving engines of all educational programs. Odden (2009) found that the schools
that used this educational strategy of adopting new curriculum and instructional
approaches were successful in dramatically improving student achievement.
Marzano (2003) finds curriculum and instruction very vital in learning opportunities

45
provided by a community or school. The single most influential school factor on
student achievement is having a guaranteed and viable curriculum (Marzano, 2003).
The ability to change the curriculum and vision of instruction is important
because educators have the control to do so if pursued (Odden & Archibald, 2009;
Duke, 2006; Marzano, 2003). The indication to change ineffective curriculum or
instruction that does not work is more ideal than to allow it to continue. In fact
Marzano (2003) found that many problems related to inadequate curriculum are
directly linked to the woes of teachers and students within the classroom setting.
This strategy affords schools the control of instructional programs and
curriculum to increase student performance. It also includes teacher’s assignment,
academic expectations and curriculum organization and instructional organization.
According to Odden’s (2009) research about this particular strategy, making the
collaborative decision to make the changes to curriculum and instructional programs
systemic across all classrooms and district proved to be very effective. He further
stated that it was agreed by participants in the research (2009) that the consistency
and systemic approach was a ‘professional’ approach. This is an essential component
of effective schools.
EBM Strategy 4: Committing to Formative Assessments and Data-Driven
Decisions
In the first step of the EBM (Odden & Picus, 2008) performance data is
solicited many times to make the concrete connection of challenges and problems
within the schools. This informational data found from formative assessments

46
allows educators to closely monitor what the students know or do not know. When
teachers monitor the students in this manner, it allows the teacher to make more
informed decisions based on data (Darling-Hammond et al., 2002). The assessment
data gives teacher more understanding of the skills and standards not attained by the
student (Odden & Archibald, 2009; Fermanich, et al., 2006; Duke, 2006).
The common formative and summative assessments serve as another
foundation for student achievement. This information allows teachers to
strategically assist students in reaching goals and objectives. These types of
assessments are an important education tool (Boudett et al., 2007). When
assessments are appropriately proctored and data is appropriately assessed then the
data becomes a valuable tool for the teacher to plan, learn and go over concepts that
students have not initially learned. This also assists teachers to adapt intervention
and offer them guidance in effective instruction. Decisions are data-based.
EBM Strategy 5: Investing in Ongoing, Embedded and Intensive Professional
Development
Odden (2009) found that the systematic, widespread, intensive, ongoing
professional development are very important for schools to dramatically increase
student performance. Marzano (2005) found that a common conception of most
individuals have about processes for instructional improvement in school-wide
efforts is the idea of having professional development for teachers. Professional
development should be intensive, continuing and connected to practice (Darling-

47
Hammond et al., 2009). Currently, many districts and schools do not practice
professional development in this fashion.
Odden (2009) found three rudiments needed for good professional
development: first, there was a need to have Pupil-free teacher days to receive
training; second, the school should have funds allocated for trainers and third, there
should be actual instructional coaches or instructional facilitators to implement this
strategy. These prerequisites are important for positive professional development but
he also summarized in his research (Odden, 2009) six features that he and other
analysts share common ideas in effectively implementing staff development ( as
cited in Odden & Elmore, 2002; Joyce & Showers, 2002; Odden & Arhibald, 2009;
Odden, Archibld,Fermanich & Galligher, 2002):
1. The Activity Form should be organized as workshops, teacher network,
study group, collaborative, committee or curriculum development group.
It should not be a one day workshop rather it should focus on current
curriculum taught at the school.
2. The duration of the activity should be continuous long-term professional
development hours totaling approximately 100 hours and closer to 200
hours.
3. There should be an emphasis on collective participation of teachers. The
organization of groups of teachers should include everyone in the school;
the entire faculty.

48
4. The professional development should have content focus activities on
improving teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogy about student
learning. This includes content of the curriculum, effective instructional
strategies for the content and common student problems about the
particular content.
5. There is a need for active learning for teacher engagement to be
meaningful. Teachers find professional development most effective when
teachers are able to work directly on integrating new techniques by the
guidance of instructional coaches or facilitators.
6. The professional development should promote coherence in teachers with
the alignment of professional development to other key parts of the
education system.
The districts and schools realize the value of offering ongoing, intensive
professional development in this reform process.
EBM Strategy 6: Focusing Class Time more Efficiently and Effectively
Odden (2009) defines this strategy as a fixed resource because it is
instructional time during the regular school day. He further explains that this is one
of the more dominant strategies for improving student outcomes. He finds that there
are some important factors that serve to be more effective if implemented in this
strategy: the extension of the school day and school year; better use of time with core
subjects, instructional time, extension of class time of core subjects, allotting time for
struggling students, reducing primary grade class sizes to 15, secondary schools

49
adopt a six-period day, reducing electives and doubling periods for some core
classes. Odden and Picus (2008) prescribed student levels of 15 in grades K-3 and
levels of 25 in grades 4-12.
The focus of this strategy will allow student performance in the United States
to double and make them more competitive for global competition. On average, the
United States has a shorter school year in compared to other countries (Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2005). Herbert and colleagues
(2005), as well as Schmidt (1983) found that curriculum of other countries are more
rigorous and more focused than the United States and attributes many the
incompetence of U.S. not being effective or efficient in this practice.
EBM Strategy 7: Providing Multiple Interventions for Struggling Students
In this strategy, school staff provides multiple opportunities for students to
accomplish goals and learn rigorous performance standards. Schools that have high
population of students from lower Social Economic Status or English language
learners need more assistance than what regular teachers can offer. Odden’s (2009)
research found that all the schools that were able to double student performance
specifically allotted time and focus on helping this student population to achieve
higher performance standards and closing the achievement gap. Odden (2009) assert
that when the student teacher ratio is smaller, students display and increase in
academic engagement.
By providing this population of students with extended time during the
school day and offering extra-help strategies such as extension of time can be

50
expensive but promising. Research has proven very effective when individual and
very small-group tutoring is offered (Cohen, Kulik & Kulik, 1982; Mathes & Fuchs,
1994). The impacts of tutoring sessions are only as good as the structure of the
tutoring program. There should be a definite alignment of tutoring and what is
taught in the regular instructional program (Mantiscopoulos, Morrison, Stone &
Setrakaian, 1992). These strategies are set into place so the schools can support the
needs of struggling students and improve proficiency achievement in the core class
subjects such as reading or math.
EBM Strategy 8: Creating a Collaborative, Professional Culture
This strategy can be evolved from the previous strategies or can be structured
by creating a collaborative school culture with distributed leadership from both
teachers and administrators (Odden, 2009). A common name for this is
“professional learning communities (PLC)” and is evolved from the previous
strategies. Newmann and associates (1996) define it as a “professional school
culture”. It does not occur through isolation. In efforts for education reform,
Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1999) detail the need for professional learning
communities. Other researchers also value the idea of collaborative PLC’s (DuFour
et al., 2006; Fullan, 2003, Newman and Wehlage, 1995; Odden & Archibald, 2009).
Teachers that belong to PLC’s share high expectations for students, examine
assessment data, and discuss ideas about instruction. Darling-Hammond and
Richardson (2009) argue that PLCs are the most powerful concept now for
improvement in school effectiveness. This strategy allows teachers who teach the

51
same subject to collaborate together and advocate for best practices for student
learning. In schools that Odden (2009) observed with high student performance, he
found that this strategy forced teachers out of the lonely profession theory. Teachers
were able to observe each other, examine student data and discuss common language
of good instruction. Everyone in the organization becomes involved in the process
of PLC which becomes beneficial to all involved. The instructional practices are
shared amongst the organization to help double student performance.
EBM Strategy 9: Empowering Leaders to Support Instructional Improvement
through Widespread Distributive Instructional Leadership
The development of partnerships with the community and family is an
important component necessary in education reform efforts (Marzano, 2003; Duke
2006). In this strategy, Odden (2009) exposed the uniqueness of this strategy
schools and districts reached outside of the professional community. Odden (2009)
points out that being a true professional organization includes the ability of the
organization to not only use the knowledge of the people within its organization but
to be willing to solicit knowledge, expertise and best practices outside of the
organization. These best practices, action research and using data driven decision
making are the cornerstone of their organizations (Odden, 2009; DuFour et al., 2006)
Marzano (2003) recognized three features that could lead to effective
involvement by parents: communication, governance and participation. Marzano
looks at good communication skills as involving two-way correspondence between
the school and home. He further expresses it is the responsibility of the school to

52
create a system for this effective open communication so parents feel the
genuineness of the effort. Partnership with the school and parent can be used to
improve the educational environment for both the student and school.
EBM Strategy 10: Taking Advantage of External Expertise in Professional and
Best Practices
In this last strategy, schools as professional organizations must behave in a
professional manner by actively seeking data-based information that will improve
schools and implement the current and best practices. Schools that are successful do
not become prosperous because they are isolated. It is important that they pursue
assistance in their undertakings of raising student performance. Odden and
Archibald (2009) found that the successful schools in their previous research used
evidence from other research, consulted with expert advice and worked
collaboratively to achieve higher student performance.
Conclusion
The literature review has outlined the history of education funding in
American Samoa and has provided an overview of the Evidence-Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008) and ten evidence-based strategies to double student
performance (Odden, 2009) that seeks to provide policy makers and practitioners a
better understanding of effective and adequate resource allocation. The purpose of
this study was to use the Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) of fiscal
adequacy and resource allocation and Odden’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling
Student Performance as a framework to align current strategies employed in the six

53
public high schools in American Samoa with the goal of improving student
performance to desired levels.

54
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the research questions that framed this study; the
selected sample and population process used in this study; the instrumentation for
data collection used in this study; the data collection procedures; and the data
analysis planned for the study. As outlined earlier, the shift from finance equity to
finance adequacy requires a thoughtful analysis of resource allocation. Hanushek
(2006) found that an increase in financial funding does not necessarily result in an
increase in student performance. The demand for accountability by local and federal
government upon the education department of American Samoa was explored
through return on investment data, defined here as standardized assessment results
for higher student performance.
The purpose of this study was to understand the unique school finance and
student performance challenges facing the single territory and education district of
American Samoa’s Department of Education by utilizing Odden’s (2009) Ten
Strategies for Doubling Student Performance, as well as the Evidence Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation as a framework.
The framework was used to analyze the current resource allocation patterns in the
three of the six public high schools in the district of American Samoa. Odden’s
(2009) Ten Steps to Doubling Student Performance was utilized within each
respective public high school to align the relationship between current resource
allocation patterns and student achievement of the American Samoa Department of

55
Education to best-practice strategies of doubling student performance. The study
was limited to the examination of the secondary level schools in the ASDE public
school system and the unique resource allocation challenges and opportunities that
ascended during the research in the sole education district of American Samoa.
Research Questions
This study was designed to address three basic research questions:
1. How much money is spent on each student in American Samoa
Department of Education?
2. What types of instructional improvement strategies are implemented at
school level in ASDE?
3. According to this research, are resources allocated in ways which lead to
high student performance in ASDE?
The Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) was used to analyze and
compare the three public high schools in American Samoa and to attempt to
understand how current resource allocation strategies aligned with the strategies
proposed in the EBM. Odden’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling Student
Performance was incorporated into the interviews with each principal of the six
public high schools.
The data collection in this study was analyzed with both a quantitative and
qualitative mixed methodology.

56
Sample Population
The geographical and isolated location of the archipelago chain of American
Samoa determined the purposeful sampling of all of the public high schools in
American Samoa Department of Education. The study focused on all public high
schools because of the similarity in student demographics and similar gains made in
student achievement as reported by the American Samoa Department of Education.
All but one of the high schools was located on the same island. Manu’a High School
was located on the island Ta’u. Manu’a Islands consist of three separate islands and
had a student enrollment significantly smaller than the high schools located on the
island of Tutuila. As defined by the United States Department of Agriculture, the
whole district of American Samoa had a hundred percent of their students
participating in the free and reduced lunch (FRL) program. All high schools had a
high population of English Language Learners as well as a high percentage of
Samoan students attending the school as reported by the American Samoa
Department of Education. All six schools received school-wide Title I funds for
their schools and multiple local and federal grants. The study was based on the
willingness of each of the six principals to engage in the research. Initially, all six
public high school principals agreed, either through electronic mail or phone
conversation, to participate in the study. However, only three of the six high school
principals were readily accessible, cooperative and able to complete the research in
its entirety.

57
Instrumentation and Data Collection
This study was one of seven similar studies about resource allocation in a
thematic dissertation process at the University of Southern California. The seven
researchers in the thematic group participated in a comprehensive eight-hour data
collection and best-practices training session conducted by Dr. Lawrence O. Picus in
the month of September, 2011. The intensive training included procedures of the
data collection protocol to record quantitative and qualitative information, codebooks
to identify data collection items and definitions of data and an online database to
input data. The inclusive training informed researchers about various collection
instruments, pre-interview collection of data, interpretation and analysis of the data
collected.
The mixed methodology of collecting both quantitative and qualitative data
was employed in this study. Quantitative data were collected based on the school’s
expenditure structure and the resource indicators that were developed by Odden et al.
(2003). The indicators collected information about the resource and structure
indicators as non-instructional expenditures and instructional expenditures.
The focus of student performance was used for qualitative data. The design
of the interview questions were open-ended questions. The intent of the open-ended
questions was to capture the strategies implemented at each school in order to
improve student performance. The questions were based on Odden & Picus (2008)
Evidence-Based Model.

58
After the training by Dr. Picus, the researcher followed research protocol and
applied to The University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB). The researcher
was granted the continuation of research process by the board and it was noted by
UPIRB this study was not a Human Subjects Research. Soon after the training, the
researcher contacted the interim director of American Samoa Department of
Education for support and exclusive access to contact the six principals of the six
public high schools in the study via electronic mail (e-mail). The researcher later
took a trip to American Samoa and had an opportunity to meet with the acting
Director of ASDE and the grants administrator for ASDE. After meeting the acting
director, a Research Agreement (Appendix A) was drafted and signed by both the
researcher and acting Director of Education of ASDE before any further steps in the
research. A mast e-mail was circulated to possible participants by the acting director
for support in the study. The agreement letter guaranteed the continuation of the
study between the researcher and ASDOE but did not guarantee voluntary
participation by the secondary principals. The interim director of ASDE furnished
the researcher with department expenditure for 2011-2012 (Appendix C and D). Due
to the distance of researcher and study groups, electronic mail and telephone
conversations were chosen as a medium of choice to contact the principals because
of its convenience and real-time response capability. The e-mail offered an
introduction of the researcher, a summary of the study and why the high school was
selected to participate in this study.

59
The participating principals were asked to provide the following documents
for this study: 1) School Plan for Student Achievement, 2) Master Schedule, 3) Staff
Roster, and 4) School Budget. This particular information would help in providing a
picture of the functionality of each school for the sake of this study. By using the
EBM as a framework for this study, a comparison was made between the current
allocation of resources at each school-site and the recommended resource allocation
to improve student achievement. A case study was then generated for each school-
site with information such as the description of the school-site, test scores for the
school and a comparison of resource allocation at the district and site levels to the
Evidence-Based Model, instructional improvement information and
recommendations for each school. Only three of the intended six public high school
principals completed the study from beginning to end.
Quantitative Data Collection
Quantitative data was collected and organized by the research questions
according to the Evidence-Based Model (Odden, 2009) framework. The data were
collected through interviews with school-site principals. A comparison was made
between the actual practices of resource allocation at each school-site with the
recommended resource allocation strategies from the EBM to improve student
achievement. The three research questions were addressed during interviews with
the principals.

60
The Odden, Archibald, Fermanich and Gross (2003) framework on evidence-
based approach was used for the quantitative gathering and categorizing of data. The
following list described the types of data that were collected from the interviews:
1. School profile data and contacts – identified items such as physical
address, state identification number, website, and the contact information
of the person at the school site.
2. School resource indicators – indicator such as school enrollment, grade
span, number of ELL students, length of school day, length of math class,
etc.
3. Core academic teachers – number of licensed grade-level teachers who
taught core subjects.
4. Specialist and elective teachers – number of special teachers such as art,
music, and physical education, who often provided regular classroom
teachers with planning and preparation time.
5. Extra-help staff - full-time equivalents (FTEs) consisted of licensed
teachers used in a variety of strategies to assist struggling students or
students with special needs.
6. Other instructional staff – number of staff members that supported a
school’s instructional program but did not fit in previous categories such
as consultants (excluding those related to professional development) and
permanent substitutes.

61
7. Professional development staff and costs – FTEs and other expenditures
elements related to providing professional development for a school.
8. Student services staff – school-based support staff such as counselors
along with positions and expenditures related to extra-curricular activities
and athletics.
9. Administrative staff – number of staff entered as FTEs dedicated to
administrative functions such as the principal, secretary, technology
coordinator, etc.
Qualitative Data Collection
The Qualitative data used the collection protocol of adequacy studies as used
by several USC dissertation cohorts in California in recent years (Odden, et al.,
2007; Odden, et al., 2005; Picus, et al., 2008). The Qualitative data were collected in
a series of open-ended interviews with school principals and school leaders. The
school decision makers were asked questions about key elements of instructional
improvement practices in the following areas: curriculum and instructional vision;
resource allocation; instructional leadership; and accountability.
After the interviews were conducted and notes transcribed, the researcher
used the organizational codebook and arranged data into the following categories:
Focus on Education all Students; Adopt a Rigorous Curriculum and Align to State
Standards; Use Data to Drive Instructional Decisions; Support Instructional
Improvement with Effective Professional Development; Restructure the Learning

62
Environment; Provide Struggling Students with Extended Learning Opportunities;
Professional Learning Communities; and Instructional Leadership.
After the researcher coded and organized the qualitative data a case study for
each school was written. The case study from each school captured the school’s
general background, data on the school’s Academic Performance Index (API) and
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) targets, and history of improvement. All of these
key elements allowed for a comparison of the school’s actual resource allocation to
the strategies of research-based best-practices of resource allocation strategies for the
EBM. The goal was to align and analyze the resource allocation practices of each
school and find lessons learned from the case studies.
Data Analysis
The Picus and Associates Evidence-Based Model was used for the conceptual
framework of this mixed methods quantitative and qualitative data analysis to
analyze the current practice of resource allocation patterns in the six public high
schools of ASDE and paralleled them to the degree to which the Ten Strategies for
Doubling Student Performance (Odden, 2009) were employed and relative student
outcomes. The resource allocation patterns for these public high schools in American
Samoa were framed within the following inquiry, “How do the schools’ resource
allocation and use compare to the Evidence-Based Model and Odden (2009)
strategies of doubling student performance?”
Analysis for the Quantitative data involved the use of frequency statistics
encompassing percentages and averages for instructional minutes and FTE staffing

63
ratios. All analytic procedures captured the current resource use in the six public
high schools. The staffing data was used to calculate percentages of FTE and
teacher-pupil data in order to analyze using ratios. The instructional minutes were
analyzed through percentages to determine how much of the instructional day was
allocated to particular academic subject.
Qualitative data were analyzed by using findings from Odden et al (2006)
Evidence-Based Model. The qualitative data was comprised of the strategies within
the instructional improvement plan, instructional vision, and professional
development plan. To determine if they aligned with the inquiry based instructional
strategies, the data were analyzed to determine if the school sites: focused on
educating all students; adopted a rigorous curriculum and aligned to state standards;
used data to drive instruction; supported instructional improvement with effective
staff development; restructured the learning environment; provided struggling
students with extended learning opportunities; implemented the use of instructional
leadership; and had a presence of professional learning communities. The
quantitative data analysis was limited to whether these “best practices” modules were
in existence at the school site and not whether these modules impact student
achievement.
Summary of Methodology
This chapter described the methodology used to conduct this mixed methods
study and assisted in answering the three research questions. The descriptive-
analytic case study research method was conducted to analyze and study three of the

64
six public high schools in American Samoa. The analysis for the diverse
instructional components and resource were obtained through interviews with the
school principals, analysis of school document master schedule, school staff list,
school improvement plan, general budgetary allocations for professional
development, master calendar and school vision and mission statements. The data
gathering instruments in this study were based on Picus and Associates’ data
collection instruments which have been successfully utilized in adequacy studies in
several U.S. states. The quantitative and qualitative data analyzed the comparison of
the Evidence-Based Model framework and Ten Strategies to Double Performance in
relations to the research questions used in this study.

65
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS
This study was conducted to study the resource allocation patterns in three of
six public high schools in the district of American Samoa Department of Education
(ASDE). The goal was to ascertain if the three public high schools, in this study,
implemented research-based instructional strategies that would increase student
performance by comparing the allocation and use of educational resources of each
sample school with the research driven Evidence Based Model (Odden & Picus,
2008) of school finance adequacy as a framework. Due to voluntary participation
and commitment from willing participants, the researcher was unable to include all
of the six public high schools in American Samoa. Only three of the intended six
public high school principals completed the study in its fullness. The findings of the
study are presented in this chapter, beginning with an overview of the characteristics
and performance data of the three public high schools that were studied. More details
of each of the school are provided in the Appendix section which includes case
studies on each of the three participating schools.
Three research questions served as a framework to review the findings from
the schools regarding : 1) monies spent on each high school student in American
Samoa Department of Education; 2) evidence of the types of instructional
improvement strategies implemented at the school level in ASDE and its alignment
with the suggested 10 strategies (Odden) that double student performance ; 3) the
way resources are allocated that lead to high student performance in ASDE and how

66
the resource-use patterns align with the resource use suggested in the Evidence-
Based Model (EBM).
This chapter is organized to: first, present a summary of the sample school
profiles; second, review and compare each school’s performance school wide and
across subgroups on the territory Standard Based Assessments; third, to examine per
student expenditure and evaluate each school’s implementation of instructional
strategies and their alignment with Odden’s strategies to improve student
performance; fourth, examine the resource allocation at each site and how it
compares to the recommendations laid out by the Evidence-Based Model (EBM);
fifth, determine how the allocation and use of resources may have changed in
response to budget limitations.
Summary of Study Schools’ Characteristics and Performance
All the sample schools that were analyzed, come from the United States
Territory of American Samoa, are Title 1 schools as defined by the NCLB (2001)
Act, non-charter public schools within the only public school district of the territory.
The total final budget for ASDE 2012 fiscal year was for $64,359,500. This budget
included two types of accounts. There was $20,266,000 of appropriated funds from
local money and $44,093,500 from grants (Appendix C and D) or federal money.
Both of the local and grant funding accounts were budgeted to be spent on personnel
services; material and supplies; contractual services; travel; all others; positions and
equipment for the school district. Through American Samoa Department of
Education (ASDE) website, documents and personnel, it was identified that there is

67
one school district in this territory and all of the schools in the district use the same
school report method. The Territorial Report Card was only implemented for public
access as far as 2008-2009 school years. These schools were identified having
similar student characteristics and demographics. These three sample schools were
all visited in 2012 by WASC and received accreditation for the next three school
years. The three sample schools had similar growth in meeting their AYP targets
since 2009.
The schools in this study were selected based on the following criterion;
100% participation in the free and reduced lunch program (FRL) and served over
90% Samoan students. The three high schools (Agamalu, Olioli, and Fa’atuatua) all
belong to the single district of American Samoa Department of Education (ASDE)
with a district enrollment of approximately 14,150 students for the 2011-2012 school
years. Enrollment of each school site varied from the smallest school Olioli High
School, 72 students to the largest school, Agamalu High School with 554 students
enrolled in this school year and Fa’atuatua High School enrollment was 345 students.
In Table 4.1 shows the characteristics of each sample school and Figure 4.1
shows the student enrollment differences between the three sample schools over the
last three school years. In Table 4.1, the characteristics of each sample school is
similar to one another as each school had a significant number of ethnically Samoan
students ranging from 95% and 100% respectively. All of the schools maximized
100% participation in the free and reduced lunch program as well as were classified
as having a significant number of Socially Economically Disadvantaged (SED)

68
households according to USDA. All of the schools, despite location, were comprised
by a majority of minority student population.

Table 4.1
Characteristics of Sample Schools
School
District
Grades
Enrollment
% Disabled (w/
IEPs)
% Poverty (Free/
Reduced) Lunch /
SED
Title I Funding
% English Learner
% Minority (non-
White)
% Samoan
Agamalu
High School
ASDE 9 12 554 11% 100% YES 95% 100% 95%
Olioli High
School
ASDE 9-12 72 18% 100% YES 100% 100% 100%
Fa’atuatua
High School
ASDE 9-12 345 9% 100% YES 95% 100% 95%

Figure 4.1. Student enrollment of sample schools

69
In Figure 4.1, a depiction of student enrollment comparison of the sample
schools have experienced a consistent decrease of student enrollment over the last
three school years. The possible factors attributing to the enrollment decrease have
been identified as: Agamalu HS states it could be family relocations to the western
more dense population of American Samoa and all three sample schools also state it
could be students transferring away from the territory to live with other relatives or
relocation of families to Independent Samoa or the United States.
Ethnic Background of Sample Schools
The ethnic backgrounds of the three sample schools were very similar in that
there were a large percentage of Samoan students. A representation of the ethnic
breakdown of the sample schools are found in Figure 4.2. Olioli High School had
the largest of 100% Samoan students and both Agamalu and Fa’atuatua High School
had 95% Samoan students. The entire three sample schools, including the other
three non-sample high schools within the school district, have a majority of student
population as minority students (Samoan) or non-white students.
The remaining three non-sample high schools within the ASDE district had
similar student demographics as the three sample high schools. For example,
Maoputasi High School, located in the central urban district of Pago Pago, in the
village of Utulei had an enrollment of 982 students for the 2011-2012 school years.
Maoputasi High School is a Title I school with 100% of the students participating in
the Free and Reduced School Lunch Program. Tualauta High School, recipients of
100% Free and Reduced School Lunch Program, is located in the central western

70
district of ASDE. Laloifi High School is located in the westernmost part of the
ASDE and is also a recipient of the 100% Free and Reduced School Lunch Program
for the school.

Figure 4.2. Ethnic breakdown of the sample schools

Teacher Information of American Samoa Department of Education
The most recent publication American Samoa 2010 Territory Report Card
available provided data on teacher credentials. Teacher information for the current
school year reflects similar data from the 2010 Territory Report. According to the
Territorial Report for the school year 2009-2010, there were 23% of the teachers
within the district that did not possess any form of degree, 32% of teachers possessed
an Associates level degree, 33% of teachers possessed a Bachelors level degree, 8%
of the teachers possessed a Masters level degree, 1% of the teachers had a Doctorate
level degree and 3% had some other form of education certificate or licensure from a

71
non-U.S. institution. This information indicates the college level of ASDE teachers
in the classroom that may not possess the proper pedagogy, certification or license to
deliver effective instruction to students and especially at-risk and struggling students.
This information also flags the concern of the level of teacher qualification in ASDE.

Table 4.2
American Samoa Teacher Credentials (2010)
Teaching Certificate
Secondary
Level
Highly Qualified
Teachers
Provisional 75 0
Professional Teaching Certificate 1 22 0
Professional Teaching Certificate II 22 0
Professional Teaching Certificate III 18 0
Professional Teaching Certificate III 2 1
Professional Teaching Certificate IV 2 2

Teachers are encouraged to obtain teaching certificates in accordance with
local policies. Table 4.2, from the 2010 Territorial Report Card, shows information
of teacher certification at the secondary school level as follows: there were 75
teachers with a Provisional Teaching Certificate and none of these teachers obtained
the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) status; there were 22 teachers with a
Professional Teaching Certificate I and none of them obtained HQT status; there

72
were 18 teachers with a Professional Teaching Certificate II and none obtained HQT
status; there were 2 teachers with a Professional Teaching Certificate III and 1 of
these teachers obtained HQT status; there were 2 teachers with a Professional
Teaching Certificate IV and both teachers obtained HQT status. Table 4.2 depicts
the alarming statistic of ASDE certificated teachers and is an indicator of the low
percentage of Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) as defined and required by the NCLB
(2001) Act.
A representation of the actual demographics of the sample schools data and
prototypical high school EBM of 600 enrolled students built around 30% FRL and
about 10% English Language Learner is found in Figure 4.3. The demographic
characteristics of students at each of the three high schools are similar in many
aspects. Each school has a very high number of Samoan students. All of the sample
schools have a significant number of Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED)
students which is supported by the data on the number of free and reduced lunch
(FRL) participants. In the 2010 American Samoa Census, it was revealed more than
90% of the families in American Samoa were low-income. According to the 2010
census, the United States Department of Agriculture deemed ASDE students 100%
eligible participants of the free and reduced lunch. This is an indicator of the high
population of SED and low annual income of the general population of American
Samoa. The SED percentage of students at a school site determines the funding of
Title I for the school.

73

Figure 4.3. Percentage of ELL & FRE students at the sample schools and EBM
prototype

All of the sample schools are 100% FRL and have 95% to 100% of ELL
population. In comparison to the EBM prototype school, the three sample schools
outweigh the EBM in challenging issues because of the soaring FRL and ELL
population.
Achievement Data
American Samoa, under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB), is required to
participate in Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for accountability. There are four
criteria covered in the AYP: graduation rate (determined by ASDE Instructional
Leadership Team), participation rate (requires 95% of student population
participates), percent proficient and attendance rate (determined by ASDE
Instructional Leadership Team). Presently, ASDE uses the SY 2008-2009
assessment data as its baseline data.

74
Performance Data of Sample Schools
This section begins with an exploration of the SBA scores for school years
2009 to 2011 for the study schools and for the significant groups. SBA data scores
from all of the sample schools have shown positive student performance in SBA
scores over three years despite the fact that students in each sample school is still
struggling to reach total proficiency in all SBA assessed content areas.
SBA results from 2009 to 2011 revealed that all three sample schools showed
both an increase in students scoring proficient or advanced in some of the content
areas tested as well as a decrease in some of the content areas throughout the last
three school years. However, more than half of the student population from all of the
sample schools did not score proficient or advanced and this directly discloses the
existing achievement gap of students who are advanced and proficient with students
who are not meeting proficiency in these sample schools from ASDE. The SBA
assessments are directly aligned with ASDE standards and benchmarks. The low
scores reflect of the gap of student scores of proficiency and possible instructional
methods of the standards. The non-proficient students represent more than half the
student population who took the SBA.
In Figure 4.4, the reading results of SBA scores showed the students that
scored proficient or advanced from each of the sample schools. The SBA results
from tenth grade reading show that Olioli HS scored 30% advanced/proficient in SY
2009 and had a slight decrease in SY 2010 when students scored 28% but in SY

75
2011, the reading scores soared up to 52% advanced/proficient which was an
increase of 24%.
The reading results for Agamalu’s HS SBA shows a proficiency level of 30% and
increases by 5% in SY 2010 to 35% and by SY 2011 there is another increase by 7%
which AHS reading results goes to 42% proficient. The reading results for
Fa’atuatua HS saw a range of growth when it had 26% proficiency in SY 2009 then
increases to 28% in SY 2010 and by SY 2011 it increases again by 5% to 33% for a
total growth of 7% for the three years.

Figure 4.4. Comparison of SBA reading scores for sample schools (Grade 10)

76
In the results from SBA writing during SY 2009 to 2011, the SBA scores
showed an increase for proficient or advanced students at Agamalu. The increase
ranged from 5% growth from 2009 to 12% in 2011 when the ending proficiency
increased from 30% to 45% for Agamalu High School. Fa’atuatua’s writing results
showed a steady growth of 7% from 26% in 2009 to and increased to 28% in 2010
and again saw another increase to 33% in 2011. At Olioli HS, the writing score
exhibited a drop from 30% in 2009 by 2% to 28% but then soared up by 24% by
resulting a 52% writing proficiency for OHS. Figure 4.5 shows the SBA results of
the Writing proficiency.

Figure 4.5. Comparison of SBA writing scores for sample schools (Grade 10)

77
In the SBA Science Scores for Grade 11 Sample Schools, Figure 4.6,
indicates Agamalu HS stayed steady for the three school years with 21% in both SY
2009 and 2010 and increases by one percent in SY 2011 at 22%. Olioli HS started at
16% in 2009 and increased by 1% in 2010 but then saw a drop of 3% when it scored
14% of the students were advanced or proficient. The last of the sample schools,
Fa’atuatua HS, scored similar to OHS when it began at 14% in 2009 and continued
with 14% in 2010 and increased in 2011 to 17% which was a 3% increase.

Figure 4.6. Comparison of SBA science scores for sample schools (Grade 11)

78
In Figure 4.7, the SBA math results have shown positive growth for Agamalu
and Fa’atuatua High School from 2008/2009 school year to 2010/2011 school year.
Agamalu’s SBA math scores have gone up 16 points from 2009 to 2011. Agamalu
High School has observed noticeable rising performance of the tenth graders in the
area of reading and math. The math scores went from 25% in 2009 to 41% in 2011.
At Fa’atuatua, the SBA math scores have gone up only 3 points from 2008/2009
school year to 2010/2011 school year but still, there is evidence that scores have
increased within three separate school years. The math scores went from 17% in SY
2009 to 19% in 2010 and in 2011 it went up one percent to 20%.

Figure 4.7. Comparison of SBA math scores for sample schools (Grade 11)

79
Olioli High School showed a score improvement from school year 2008/2009
to 5 points increase in school year 2009/2010 but in 2010/2011 the scores plumet by
6 points. The math scores went from 28% in SY 2009 and jumped to 33% in SY
2010 but in SY 2011 it dropped down 6% with student scoring at 27%.
Findings by Research Question
The remaining portion of this chapter will address the research questions
using data from the case studies found in Appendix I, J and K for each school. The
first question addresses expenditure per student at ASDE. The second question
examines how the resources of the schools compare to the Evidence Based Model.
The third question addresses the use of resources to implement strategies used by the
schools.
Research Question #1: How much money is spent on each student in American
Samoa Department of Education?
Due to the unique funding policies and practices of American Samoa
Department of Education, this is one question that an exact dollar figure was not
known by any of the site-principals at any of the sample schools at the school site
level nor could current per student expenditure be found in any accessible public
document. Funding for ASDE is heavily dependent on federal funding in the form of
grants and also local money from the local government. However, many of the local
government revenues are also generated by the Federal Government or Federal
Grants.

80
There are approximately 14,150 students in the K-12 American Samoa
Department of Education during the 2011-2012 school years. There was an
expenditure budget for the 2012 fiscal year of $64,359.500. At the Secondary Level,
a total approved budget for the 2012 fiscal year was $7,693,500 (Appendix D) for
personnel services, material and supplies, contractual services, travel, other expenses
and equipment. According to the provided data, the expenditure during the
collection of data per student is approximated at $4,548 for the current school year
used for the purpose of this study.
The central office of ASDE district administers all funding to all schools
within the district. Through interviews at the school site level, it was realized that
principals and administrators, as much as they communicated the need to have a
voice in school level allocation of resources, at the school level have very limited
input on how funding is utilized or allocated at the school site. The fact that school
site budgeting of funds has not been practiced in ASDE before made this year
momentous for the sample school leaders because this was the first year where any
of the school administrators were given the opportunity to request money to be used
for after school programs as a means of intervention for struggling students and
improving student performance. For the principals that did request money, they had
to write a proposal or program narrative and meet certain requirements such as
provide pre and post data of the program. The sample schools in this study did
receive money from their proposals and it came out to roughly a little more than
$200.00 per enrolled student at the three sample schools.

81
Research Question #2: What types of instructional improvement strategies are
implemented at the school level in ASDE?
Each principal and school implemented and practiced improvement strategies
according to the need of the school and available resources. It was also noted that
there was support and direction from the central office of ASDE and the Office of
Curriculum and Instruction (OCIA) of the central office, however, the assistance
may not have efficiently targeted the needs of the school. It was evident that at each
school, there was evidence of the beginning stages of Professional Learning
Community (PLCs) that was deemed as: Team Leadership Group; Curriculum &
Instruction Focus Group and Organization for Student Learning Focus Group. The
intentions for these groups were to implement and give supported direction for the
sample schools instructional improvement process from the direction of school
leadership.
Understanding the performance challenge and problem.
The indication of understanding the performance challenge and identifying a
problem is the first step in understanding the ‘sense of urgency’ to engage in the
improvement process. When these problems and shortcomings are identified, it
allows a starting point for vis-à-vis student performance and where and how the
schools need to improve (Odden, 2009). It must be an effort for the whole school,
which includes the leaders, faculty and staff to engage in curriculum standard audits.
According to Odden (2009), it is important for the staff to engage and fully
understand the problem and determine how far away a school is from its desired

82
outcome. The stakeholders, especially the staff, must engage in a variety of
activities like curriculum-mapping and data analysis as recommended by Odden and
Archibald (2009) for alignment of, not only, territory standards but to know what is
and how it is being taught inside the classroom.
The three sample schools leaders articulated the same performance challenge
and problem of their schools, which was low student performance on standardized
assessments. The three sample schools principals stressed the urgency of focus at
the school level for this current school year as student Reading Comprehension.
This emphasis was identified after close analysis of recent results of territory
assessments, the Standard Based Assessment (SBA) and the Stanford Achievement
Test, 10
th
Edition (SAT10). The SBA is given to all tenth graders in the content
area of math, reading and writing and eleventh graders in the area of science. The
SBA assessment is aligned to ASDE benchmarks and standards. The SAT10 is a
tool used by ASDE to compare the progress of the district with other districts on a
national level.
The leadership and faculty at the sample schools realized that in all the
content areas of the assessments, the students’ performance scores yielded below
average proficiency. It was a unanimous agreement for the leaders to implement
more concentration on Reading Comprehension as a gateway to improving other
content areas. Each school formed task groups to improve reading comprehension
and give support to both teachers and students. OCIA also assisted in support
through professional development to understand how to analyze assessment results.

83
Set ambitious goals.
The leaders, administrators and teachers should all set ambitious goals and
set them high regardless of the demographic of the students or current performance
levels (Odden, 2009). Each school did regularly analyze students’ performance
through data from SBA and SAT10 assessments, however, the level of goal setting in
the three sample schools varied. One school was content with improving assessment
scores regardless of how much of an increase as long as it was better than the
previous scores while another school set goals to improve assessment scores by 5%
more than previous assessments. All schools communicated the goal of improving
student reading comprehension.
In studies around the country (United States), there is anguish about the
difficulty of achieving AYP (adequate yearly progress) goals of the NCLB (No Child
Left Behind) program but it is unclear and uncommon for school leaders to set AYP
as district and school goals (Odden, 2009). The purpose of AYP is to ensure that
students are engaging in the learning progress with proficiency. It would be ideal to
set high goals for students to achieve AYP proficiency and then educate these
students to higher levels of achievement.
In summary, all school-site samples did believe that all students should be
accountable of their learning and were able to learn. The principals at the school site
shared similarities in their belief about student learning accountability and used this
as a vehicle to encourage staff to improve student achievement at each respective
school site.

84
Implementing an effective curriculum and instructional program.
The ASDE is very centralized in that it makes all of the decisions for the
schools in its jurisdiction. All of the sample schools including other schools in
ASDE are mandated by the Office of Curriculum, Instruction and Accountability
(OCIA) which gives direct requirements and courses offered at each school in the
territory. ASDE also relies on the education consultants of Pacific Regional
Educational Laboratory (PREL) who have helped ASDE to develop and implement
the SBA, which is specifically aligned to the local benchmarks and standards.
At the school site level, the administrators address their concern of their
ability of implementing effective instructional programs as very limited because of
directives received from the central office or OCIA but Odden (2009) states the
success of this strategy also depends on the ability of educators in the schools to
change the instructional program and curriculum. Although OCIA set the mandates
for standards and benchmarks, this strategy entails framing a new educational vision
for the district or school (Odden, 2009). The vision may call for each school to
conduct a redesign to their instructional program. Aside from a new curriculum,
adoption of new textbooks, effective instructional practices must also be
implemented to fit the new design. It should be important to implement ‘research
based’ systems that have been proven to work. It must be also be a collaborative
effort from administrators and instructors.

85
Using benchmarks and formative assessments data-based making.
At all of the sample schools, it was evident that direction of decision-making
for this current school year’s focus was heavily weighted on the SBA students score
results. Odden (2009), recommends that the implementation of more formative
assessments to provide concrete data on what students know and do not know. This
information allows for better decision-making and guidance for assisting students in
reaching the schools goals and objectives. For example, the principal of Agamalu
HS tasked a Leadership Team to use analysis of pre-Placement Exams for incoming
freshmen and SBA scores to assist in direction for teacher instruction because
student strengths and weaknesses can be identified through these assessments. The
pre-Placement Exams were also used for student course placements for AHS.
The similar process of tasking focus groups occurred at Olioli HS and
Fa’atuatua HS. At Fa’atuatua HS, they administered the DARI, Level 9 (Holt
Diagnositic Assessment for Reading Intervention, Level 9) to identify and get a
better grasp of student current reading level and comprehension for the student
population. The school then developed a School Wide Action Plan by implementing
the Home reading Class into the student schedule for forty minutes per week.
Students would report to a teacher with students of the same reading level and the
teacher would teach them reading strategies to improve reading comprehension.
The approach to data-driven decision making varied slightly across the three
sample schools but the rationale appeared to be the same and it was to improve
student reading comprehension skills. The school-sites did articulate the importance

86
to raise scores in all content areas such as Reading and Writing, Math and Science;
however, it was evident from current school wide initiatives at the school site level
that reading comprehension skills was the main focus for student improvement rather
than Math and Science skills.
Table 4.3, describes a snapshot of data-driven decisions used at each sample
school and the outcomes of the data used. For example, at all three schools, the SBA
scores for the 10
th
and 11
th
graders were used and it was identified that student
performed very low in the reading comprehension portions of these assessments. All
three school-site principals have stressed much emphasis and focus on reading
comprehension for each school because of these results.

87
Table 4.3
Summary of Data-Driven Decisions
School Data Set Used Data-Based Outcomes
Agamalu High School  SBA Scores (10
th
& 11
th

Grade)
 SAT10 Results
 Pre-Placement Exams
(incoming 9
th
grade)
 Benchmark assessments
 Classroom assessments
 Analysis of SBA/SAT10
results in identification of
low Reading
Comprehension of students
 Student placement for
incoming 9
th
graders
 Leadership Team
 OCIA initiated workshops
 Intervention and Support of
Tutorials for struggling
students
Fa’atuatua High School  SBA Scores (10
th
& 11
th

Grade)
 SAT10 Results
 DARI, Level 9
 Benchmark assessments
 Classroom assessments
 Analysis of SBA/SAT10
results in identification of
low Reading
Comprehension of students
 OCIA initiated workshops
 Schoolwide Reading
Action Plan (Homereading
Class) Implemented into
student regular bell
schedule once/week
 Intervention and Support
through Tutorials for
struggling students
Olioli High School  SBA Scores (10
th
& 11
th

Grade)
 SAT10 Results
 Benchmark assessments
 Classroom assessments
 Analysis of SBA/SAT10
results in identification of
low Reading
Comprehension of students
 OCIA initiated workshops
 Intervention and Support
through Tutorials for
struggling students

88
Ongoing professional development.
An important aspect of improving student performance is the continued and
ongoing professional development of the instructors. This involves the intensive
implementation of widespread, systemic, and ongoing professional development
(Odden, 2009). Professional Development is another effective way of improving
student achievement (Joyce & Showers, 2002; Odden & Picus, 2008). When
professional development is done properly, it increases the potential of the impact of
teacher effectiveness, which also affects how students perform in the classroom and
later on standardized assessments. The staff development programs should attempt
to bring about change; that is, change in beliefs and attitudes, change in the
classroom and especially change in learning outcomes (Elmore & Burney, 1999).
The EBM has ten days built into the teacher school year schedule for
intensive PD and it can be distributed throughout the school year. The EBM also
recommends the PD be pupil free days for the instructors; have funding to hire
trainers; and hire instructional coaches/facilitators. Professional Development from
OCIA and PREL is limited to when it was brought to the school level. Principals
have limited authority as to when PD is offered at the school-site.
ASDE has five days of instructional workshops done at the opening of every
school year prior to the first day of school for students. OCIA and PREL are the two
main groups that facilitate professional development throughout the school year for
various school sites and individuals.

89
The current schedule at all of the sample schools did not provide a time for
ongoing regular staff development, however, the principals at each school
implemented solutions to leverage resources and expertise from in-house and the
central office. For example, it was observed that at all sample schools, despite the
limited funding from the central office, instituted its own professional development
for the teachers done by other teachers and/or administrators. At Fa’atuatua HS, the
principal utilized faculty meetings as an opportunity to implement professional
development in which administration would facilitate mini-workshops.
Another strategy from the EBM is collaborative time during the regular
school day. This time is built into the bell schedule and there is collaboration among
teachers and instructional coaches on the instructional program. This collaborative
professional development happens when this group meets and discussion of
formative assessments, teaching strategies and instructional unit geared towards
addressing the needs of the students. In a study by Wei, Andree, and Darling-
Hammond (2009), they note that high-achieving countries build time for professional
learning into most teachers’ workday. Professional development is critical and must
be an ongoing practice in the district before large improvements on student
performance will be seen.
Using time effectively and efficiently.
The strategy of using time efficiently and effectively considers a fixed
resource. This fixed resource is the instructional time during the regular school day.
Instructional time at the school level is managed and monitored by administration.

90
In Odden’s (2009) study of schools that doubled the student performance by
following ten strategies also engaged in using time more efficiently and effectively.
The education communities realize a common conversation among policy
makers at local, state and federal levels is the question whether the United States
should extend the school day and school year as a means to improve student
learning. The idea behind the extended time is it will lead to more learning. In this
competitive world and global economy, this has been a very controversial topic but it
can also be an expensive implementation if adopted by schools.
In secondary schools that doubled performance following the EBM, they
implemented this strategy of better use of time and the school day by: adopting a
six-period day; reduced electives, doubled periods for some core classes, and
provided more collaborative time (for teachers) during the day. This was a policy
among administrations and communicated and honored by teachers in these
successful schools.
It was observed that Olioli High School and Fa’atuatua High School
implemented a six-period day schedule that aligns with EBM recommendation. The
principal at FHS changed the previous block schedule to the present six-period day
because of her observation of ineffective use of time in the last school year.
Agamalu HS which has the largest population of the three sample schools
implements a block schedule and the principal says it has been working well with the
student population. A block schedule is applicable in the EBM so long as the ‘core
subjects’ receive the most attention in this type of school day schedule. The EBM

91
attention towards the efficiency and effectiveness of time focus of ‘core subjects’
during the school year is one of the reasons the EBM requires 33% specialists to
assist in student performance improvement.
It was also observed that none of the schools invested in any type of fixed
schedule in the regular day for teacher collaboration sessions. Teacher collaboration
time is highly recommended as part of this strategy to be successful.
Providing interventions for struggling students.
This strategy was evident at all of the sample schools at varying levels of
implementation. In Odden & Picus (2008), tutoring for struggling students if
implemented with a certified teacher-tutor following the EBM suggestions provides
great benefits for students which can have an immediate impact on the students
overall performance within the classroom. The sample schools do not have the
financial resources to hire certified teacher-tutors so tutoring was based on teacher
availability and willingness to volunteer their own time to assist with struggling
students. The tutorial sessions at the sample schools are not consistent with Odden’s
(2009) strategy for struggling students. A summary of support from the sample
schools is found in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4, depicts all of the current intervention initiatives the sample schools
have engaged in to alleviate issues with struggling students. Most initiatives are in
the form of tutorial sessions as a strategy for struggling students. For example, at
Olioli High School, the implementation of providing intervention for struggling
students has been present for the last three school years with after school tutorials.

92
The school tutorials emphasize reading, writing and math, which are three of the four
content areas tested on the SBA. It was documented that these choice of tutorial
offerings were directed to improving standardized test scores and address the first
two of the Expected School-wide Learner Outcomes (ESLRs): Effective
Communicators and Critical Thinkers. The tutorial is a school-wide action plan
initiative and although it is done after school students are mandated to attend the
tutorials.

Table 4.4
Summary of Interventions for Struggling Students
Sample School Evidence of Intervention
Agamalu High School  Before School Tutorial
 After School Tutorial
 SAT Preparation
Fa’atuatua High School  Homereading Period Implemented
 Before and After School Tutorial
 Changed Bell Schedule to 6 period day
Olioli High School  After school Tutorial Session for Reading,
Writing and Math
 SAT Preparation

93
Creating collaborative culture and distributed leadership.
This strategy requires a “professional school culture” or “professional
learning communities” (PLCs) which are comprised of a team of teachers that work
collectively to improve instructional and curriculum program in order to boost
student learning. In this group, the teachers or instructors share a high expectation
for achievement of all students. This success of this strategy in enhancing student
performance employs: teachers that share a common value of high expectations;
collaborative work; moving from data to practice; schools to engage in ‘response to
interventions’ approach; differentiated strategies and rigorous performance
standards.
Another important part of this strategy is the use of distributed leadership. If
there is support from the central office to work together with schools for
improvement in student learning rather than schools trying to accomplish it on their
own then it can produce dramatic results. The central-office leadership is a vital key
to moving all schools within a district into a path of doubling student performance.
The principal at the school level cannot provide all of the needed instructional
leadership to change a curriculum or create and implement PD strategies or provide
classroom coaching to teachers. This requires an orchestrated effort from teachers
that are promoted into team coordinators, curriculum head, induction mentor or
instructional coaches to help with leadership at the school level.
In Table 4.5, it shows the summary of PLC evidence at the sample schools.
There was no strong evidence of an efficient collaborative culture or distributed

94
leadership in any of the sample schools. For the most part, there was evidence of
tasked leadership groups and focus groups that seemed to be in a beginning working
stage but not all components of a true PLC or professional learning culture was
observed present at the school level.

Table 4.5
Summary of Collaboration and PLC Elements
Sample Schools Evidence
Agamalu High School  School Leadership Team
 “Focus on Learning” Process
Fa’atuatua High School  Accreditation Leadership Team
 Curriculum & Instruction Focus Group
 Organization for Student Learning Focus Group
 Resource Focus Group
 Support Services Focus Group (Includes Student
Reps.)
Olioli High School  Organization for Student Learning (Includes
Student Reps)
 Curriculum and Instruction Focus Group
 Support for Student Personal and Academic Growth
(Includes Student Reps.) Focus Group
 Resource Management and Development Focus
Group (Includes Student Reps)

95
Using research-based and proven strategies.
All of the sample school principals encouraged all instructors and staff
members to utilize research-based and proven strategies as much as possible. With
limited resources, technology and equipment, the leaders are not against instructors
perfecting the profession and are very open to the use new strategies for instructional
purposes inside the class if it will improve student performance.
Limited funding at the school level prevents the principals the authority to
seek out best practices that may be costly. Publications are available but not without
a price. The leaders depend on the central office and OCIA to provide research-
based and proven strategies through workshops and professional development.
Some individuals take it upon themselves to research literature on the internet.
Addressing talent and human capital issues.
The financial support of all schools in the territory comes from the central
office of ASDE. The central office is responsible for distribution of funding to all of
the schools for services such as: personnel services; learning materials and supplies;
textbooks; contractual services; maintenance and renovations of school buildings;
and various education departments (directors’ office, instructional services,
elementary, secondary, vocational education, early childhood education, special
education, OCIA, testing, school transportation, library services, maintenance and
warehouse). The budget to pay for all of these services comes from local
appropriated funds and mostly federal grants.

96
At the school level, the principal and teacher is the key to improving student
performance (Odden, 2009). It was observed of leadership in the sample school’s
serious concern of limited local input from leaders at the school site as to how
resources are allocated at the school level. One principal pointed out that they were
just receiving equipment that was ordered in a previous school year. School levels
have limited input on how money is allocated and express the time it takes before
some decisions are made because of the organization schema of ASDE.
The three sample schools in this study implemented the 10 Strategies for
Doubling Student Performance (2009) in various increments. None of the schools
were able to employ certified instructional aides to help with improving student
achievement, struggling students or students with IEPs because of the unique
dynamics of district budgeting of school-site funds. All of the schools received
professional development and curriculum support from OCIA. None of the schools
were able to disclose any of the school-site categorical funding to support student
achievement because principals did not have jurisdiction on financial resources. The
following section and research question compares the Evidence Based Model (EBM)
with the resource allocation of the three sample schools.
Research Question #3: Are resources allocated in ways that lead to high student
performance in ASDE?
In this section, there will be a discussion of each element of expenditure in
comparison to the Evidence-Based Model (EBM). The EBM developed by Odden
and Picus (2008) is crucial to this study as it provides the flexibility to examine the

97
unique districts and student demographics of ASDE by applying a resource-based
expenditure structure for prototypic schools which can be adjusted to reflect the
needs to improve student performance. Odden and Picus (2008) have used evidence
of best practices to build the prototypical schools with high school student
enrollment of 600 with class sizes of 25 students. The allocation of staffing and
funding resources for each of the sample schools have been aligned with the
prototype EBM. The Full Time Equivalencies (FTEs) were used to report staffing
allocation. An important note, the prototypical high school for the EBM with an
enrollment of 600 students exceeded the population of all of the sample schools in
this study, therefore, calculations were configured and prorated according to actual
student enrollment of the sample schools in the study. The EBM recommendations,
for the sake of this research, have been adjusted accordingly by dividing a common
factor for each sample school and actual student enrollment.
Core class size.
The class size for core teachers is one of the most expensive decisions for
principals to make for allocation of resources. Research indicates that small class
size have an impact for students from low-income and minority backgrounds
(Krueger and Whitmore, 2001). Odden and Picus (2008) found evidence of the most
appropriate secondary class size from best practices to determine class sizes for
different grade levels. According to the prototype EBM, two of the three schools
had more students per core class size than recommended by the pro rata EBM. This

98
pattern can be expected to rise as a direct result of funding directives other than from
the school-site.
Core academic teachers.
Core academic teachers are teachers who are credentialed classroom teachers
who teach one of the school’s core academic courses including: English, Math,
Science, Social Studies, Foreign Language and Special Education. Data was
retrieved from each sample school’s master schedule and other documentation. In
Table 4.6, the Core Teachers and Elective/Specialist Teachers Allocation
Comparison are seen between each sample school and pro rata EBM as suggested
per the prototype school. It was interesting to find that all three sample schools had
exceeded resource allocation of Core Teachers than what is required by the EBM
prototype in accordance to each school enrollment.

Table 4.6
Core Academic Teachers and Elective/Specialist & EBM Comparison
Sample
Schools Enrollment
Core Teacher FTE
Elective and Specialist Teachers
FTE Allocations
Actual at
School EBM Suggested
Actual at
School EBM Suggested
AHS 554 27 22.7 (AHS has
more 4.3 than
EBM)
13 7.46 (AHS has 5.54
more than EBM)
FHS 345 23 13.8 (FHS has 9.2
more than EBM)
13 4.55 (FHS has 8.45
more than EBM)
OHS 72 8 2.88 (OHS has
5.12 more than
EBM)
4.0 1.32 (OHS has 2.68
more than EBM)

99
Specialist and elective teachers.
The elective and specialist teachers consist of those who teach non-core
academic classes such as but not limited to the following: Physical Education;
Career and Technical Education; Music; Health; Art; Drama; Technology or
Athletics. Fa’atuatua is a school with a focus on vocational and trade education. At
all three sample schools, it was founded that each school had allocated more elective
and specialist teacher resources based on student enrollment than the EBM
prototype.
Tutors for struggling students.
In Odden and Picus (2008), the impact of tutoring programs was found to be
the most effective strategy to assist struggling students to meet state standards by
individual one-to-one tutoring by licensed teachers (Wasik and Slavin, 1993). The
EBM recommends the need for certified teacher tutors to help work with students
who lag behind and to help the student get back on track with the rest of the
curriculum.
In Table 4.7, all three sample schools indicate there are no current
employments of certified teacher Tutors for Struggling Students to promote higher
student performance for the at-risk students. The EBM prototype strategy for
struggling students solicits the amount of tutors by the numbers of at-risk students at
the school-site level. For example, the EBM staffs one FTE tutor for every 100
students eligible for free and reduced-price lunch. All of the sample schools are
100% eligible for free and reduced-price lunch. The pro rata of the prototype EBM,

100
in conjunction to actual student enrollment, suggests 5.5 certified tutors are needed
for Agamalu HS, 3.5 certified tutors are needed for Fa’atuatua HS and 1 certified
tutor is needed for Olioli HS. Odden and Picus (2008) have found it is crucial that
certified tutors are hired because these tutors are able to provide effective and
powerful one-to-one tutoring to help students, especially struggling students, meet
state standards.

Table 4.7
Tutors, Extended Day and Summer School Programs – Actual vs. EBM
Tutors for Struggling
Students
(1 for every 100
poverty students:
1.95)
Extended Day FTEs
(3.0)
Summer School
FTEs
(3.0)
School Enrollment
Actual
Tutors
EBM
Suggests
Actual
Tutors
EBM
Suggests
Actual
Tutors
EBM
Suggests
AHS 554 0 5.5 (EBM
suggests
more tutors)
0 4.6 (EBM
suggests
more)
0 EBM
suggests
4.6 more
FHS 345 0 3.5 (EBM
suggests
more tutors)
0 2.88
(EBM
suggests
more)
0 EBM
suggests
2.88 more
OHS 72 0 .07 0 0.6 (EBM
suggests
more)
0 EBM
suggests
0.6 more

101
Summer school.
In Odden & Archibald (2009), research has shown that a summer without
instruction in mathematics and reading, especially among students from low-income
backgrounds, can cause a backward slide in knowledge (Borman & Boulay, 2004).
The pressure for students to achieve higher standards should be a reason to offer
struggling students the additional help to master content. A summer program that is
well-developed with a sequenced set of connected and structured programs and
properly executed can be effective for at-risk students. None of the sample schools
had allocated resources for summer school because all funding is authorized from the
central office for ASDE. Table 4.7 highlights data for an EBM Summer Program
and actual data at each school site. Based on the pro rata calculations of the EBM in
comparison to the actual student enrollment of each of the sample schools, it can be
implied that the sample schools have not generated enough allocation of resources
towards certified teachers for a summer program.
Extended day programs.
For this study, the use of an extended-day program would offer a safe
environment for adolescents after the school day ends a means for academic support
(Odden and Picus, 2008). This type of program , if well-designed and well-
administered, yields great outcomes for student academic achievement and student
behavior (Tierney, Grossman, and Resch, 1995). The allocation of resources would
help the student throughout the school year, however, the program would occur after
the normal school day. Its purpose would be to support student academic

102
performance. Although all of the three schools offer teacher-initiated volunteer
tutoring before or after school, none of the three sample schools employ credentialed
teachers for the sole purpose of an extended-day program at the school-site level.
Support staff.
The Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) includes resource
allocation for additional staffing needs such as support staff for student support;
librarians and secretaries. The more disadvantaged the student body, the more
comprehensive the strategy needs to be (Odden & Picus, 2008) with reference to
level of resources. For example, the general standard for the prototypic school is one
licensed professional for every 100 students with low-income background. The
sample school-sites did not have any allocated resource for support staff despite
being identified as 100% eligible for Free-Reduced Lunch students. The model
suggests resource allocation of one teacher-level position for every 100 students
eligible for free or reduced-price lunch and 2.4 guidance counselor positions
respectively, based on the American School Counselor Association (ASCA). The
ASCA suggests one counselor for every 250 secondary students (Odden & Picus,
2008).
Table 4.8 details Support Staff, Librarians and Secretaries at each of the three
sample schools and comparison to EBM configuration of what the sites should have
in order to create and deploy adequate resources to improve student performance.

103
Librarians.
In the prototypical high school of 600 students, the EBM suggests a staff of
one librarian and one library media technician because staff resources need to be
capable of operating the library and incorporating appropriate technologies in the
library system. The support staff for the EBM prototypic high school focuses on
assisting both parents and students to effectively assist in the academic pathway for
the student. The model allow schools and districts to allocate FTE staff such as
guidance counselors, nurses and social workers to address the needs of each school
(Odden & Picus, 2008). All of the sample school-sites had a librarian but none of
the sites had a library media technician.
Secretaries and clerical Full Time Equivalence (FTE).
The EBM prototypical high school includes three secretary positions of 1
FTE secretary and 2 FTE clerk or typists. The senior secretary holds a 12-month
position while the clerks are 9-month positions (Odden & Picus, 2008). Each school
site requires the support of the secretary and clerks to provide administrative
assistance to teachers and administrators. These individuals perform essential daily
operation at a school-site such as greeting parents and visitors, answering phone
calls, paperwork and other clerical duties. Table 4.8 depicts the actual clerical
support at each school-site in this study and comparison with the EBM. Each sample
school had one secretary and no clerks.

104
Table 4.8
Support Staff, Librarians and Secretaries – Actual vs. EBM

Secretaries & Clerical FTE
(1.0 secretary, 2.0 clerical)
Librarian & Librarian
Tech
(1 Librarian, 1 Lib Tech) Support Staff FTEs
School
(Actual
Student
Enrollment) Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests
AHS (554) 1.0
Secretary
2 (EBM
suggests 1
more Clerk)
1 1 more
Librarian
Tech
0 5.5 more and
2.25 Guidance
FHS (345) 1.0
Secretary
2 Clerks 1 1 more Lib
Tech
0 3.45 more and
1.5 Guidance
OHS (72) 1.0
Secretary
2 Clerks 1 1 more Lib
Tech
0 .72 more and
1 Guidance

Substitutes.
In more recent years, states with newer adequacy-based systems have
included provisions for substitute teachers into the school finance formula. The
EBM suggests allocating resources of 10 days of substitute teacher financing for
each teacher currently employed. The idea for substitute teachers’ allocation is
because of needed classroom coverage when teachers are sick, absent for other
reasons or on leave for maternity or long-term illness. In Table 4.9, it can be seen
that none of the three sample schools allocate resources for certified substitute
teachers or any type of substitute teacher. It is a common practice in ASDE for
teachers to utilize their own preparation time to cover classes of teachers within the

105
department that are absent from school on any given day. It was found there is no
current funding for substitute teachers at any of the sample school-sites in ASDE.
Professional development.
There is a consensus among educators and policymakers that the core
classroom teacher is the most important element in the education system (Odden and
Picus, 2008). To build the strength of the classroom teacher, professional
development has become a top policy concern. The EBM recommends allocation of
approximately $450 per pupil and this covers 10 days of intensive training over the
school year; the placement of instructional coaches in schools; and $100 per-pupil
for trainers (Odden & Picus, 2008). A professional development fiscal and program
“audit” should also be initiated by the district before deciding additional funding for
reallocation of expenditures to improve teachers’ instructional practice for core
contents.
School districts that have been successful have embedded professional
development within the school day at the school site so collaboration among teachers
of the same content area are able to analyze, develop and refine standards-based
curriculum and assess student performance which also indicates how well both the
students and teachers are performing (Odden, 2009).
It was found, in the study, all three sample schools, professional development
is conducted and spearheaded by the Office of Curriculum and Instruction of the
central ASDE office. At the beginning of each school year, ASDE has five days of
instructional workshops done prior to the first day of school for students. OCIA and

106
PREL are the two main groups that facilitate professional development throughout
the school year for various school sites and individuals. The current schedule at all
of the sample schools did not provide a time for ongoing regular staff development,
however, the principals at each school implemented solutions to leverage resources
and expertise from in-house and the central office.

Table 4.9
Substitutes and Professional Development – Actual vs. EBM

Substitutes
10 Days Per
Teacher
Professional Development
10 Days of Intensive PD
Included above:
Instructional Facilitators
Planning and prep time
10 summer days
Additional: $50/pupil for
other PD expenses – trainers
conferences, travel, etc.
Number of Teacher Work Days
200 Teacher Work Days, including
10 days for intensive PD
Additional: $50/pupil for other PD
expenses / trainers, conferences,
travel, etc.
School Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests
AHS
(554)
0 10 days/
Teacher
5 PD 5 more PD
Days
$27,700
185 Work Days,
180 Instructional
Days, 5 PD days at
the beginning of
the year
5 more PD
days, 10
more work
days
FHS
(345)
0 10 days/
Teacher
5 PD 5 more PD
Days
$17,250
185 Work Days,
180 Instructional
Days, 5 PD days at
the beginning of
the year
5 more PD
days, 10
more work
days
OHS
(72)
0 10 days/
Teacher
5 PD 5 more PD
days
$3600
185 Work Days,
180 Instructional
Days, 5 PD days at
the beginning of
the year
5 more PD
days, 10
more work
days

107
Table 4.9 shows comparison of the prototype EBM suggestion for
professional development and substitutes with actual data from the school sites. All
of the three sample schools lack five more days of intensive professional training
than the prototype EBM suggests. None of the schools have professional
development embedded into the school day. All of the sample schools do not
employ any instructional coaches. Principals have articulated the need to be able to
have more professional development training in areas upon the request of the needs
from each school site rather than no input from the school site level.
Administration and instructional facilitators.
The administration or leadership team in the prototypical high school consists
of the principal and 3.0 instructional coaches. Principals have indirect influence of a
schools success (Hallinger & Heck, 2003). Table 4.10 shows the instructional
leadership of the administration at all of the sample school-sites. All of the sample
school-sites have one principal, two of the school-sites have 2 assistant or vice
principals and one school had no vice principal.
Instructional facilitators are another resourcing strategy necessary to assist in
coordinating the instructional program at a school-site and offer critical ongoing
instructional coaching and mentoring to teachers to improve instructional practice
(Odden & Picus, 2008). The instructional facilitators are also known as mentors,
lead teachers, literacy or numeracy coaches or curriculum specialists. The EBM
prototype formula requires one instructional coach FTE position for every 200
students. As noted in Table 4.10, none of the sample schools utilize or have

108
allocated resources for instructional facilitators. Multiple teachers could divide the
responsibility of an instructional facilitator despite the fact that it is identified as FTE
positions.

Table 4.10
Administration and Instructional Facilitators – Actual vs. EBM

Principal
1 Principal Assistant Principal
Instructional
Facilitator / Mentors
3.0 (1 for every 200
students)
School Enrollment Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests Actual
EBM
Suggests
AHS 554 1 1 (EBM has
been met)
2 2 (EBM has
been met)
0 2.75 (EBM
is more)
FHS 345 1 1 (EBM has
been met)
2 1.5 (EBM
needs .50
more)
0 1.73 (EBM
is more)
OHS 72 1 1 (EBM has
been met)
1 0 (EBM is
1.0 less then
OHS)
0 .4 (EBM is
more)

Student enrollment, class size, disabilities, free-reduced lunch.
Policymakers often want to know how much money is needed and adequate
to educate students to higher standards. Money is often allocated into education
institutions but effective distribution among schools, students, districts and programs
to assist in raising student performance and achievement should also be of great
concern.

109
The Evidence-Based Adequacy Model (EBM) for allocation of school-level
resources uses current evidence at school-sites in configuration against prototypical
schools of what has been proven to work. Table 4.11 depicts the actual data of the
sample school-sites population in actual student enrollment, students with
disabilities, school class size and students classified as free-reduced lunch
participants that were used in this study. This data was also used to compare present
allocation of school level-resources at Agamalu HS, Fa’atuatua HS and Olioli HS as
prorated from the prototypical high schools of the EBM.

Table 4.11
Student Enrollment, Class Size, Disabilities, Free Reduced Lunch – Actual

Student Enrollment

Class Size
Grade 9-12
# of Student
w/Disabilities
(IEP)

# of Students – Free
Reduced Lunch /
Poverty

School Actual

Actual

Actual

Actual
AHS 554 21 59 or
11%
100%
FHS 345 15 30 or
9%
100%
OHS 72 6 13 or
18%
100%

110
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to understand the unique school finance and
student performance challenges in the single territory and education district of
American Samoa Department of Education by utilizing the Evidence Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation as a framework.
This framework further offer districts and schools a medium to track resource use –
staff and dollars – by implemented educational strategies at the site level (Odden &
Picus, 2008). There were nine expenditure elements and six instructional elements
analyzed in this study.
Through analysis of the allocation levels for each sample school as compared
to the prototypical high school through the Evidence-Based Model based on the
characteristics of expenditure and instructional elements, ASDE had various
discrepancies in many areas. For example, due to the enrollment size and 100%
Free-Reduced Lunch recipient at the sample schools, the schools should have
generated more resources but in reality, none of the schools had adequate allocation
of resources or had implemented in an effective manner, evidence-based strategies to
support a dramatic increase of student achievement or performance. The EBM
prototypical schools can be used as a starting point for schools to examine ways of
improving student performance. The EBM prototypical school suggests a baseline
for principals or decision-makers to begin efforts in increasing student performance
but each school must prorate calculations according to actual student enrollment and
characteristics at one’s school site. There were various differences between the

111
prototypical school and actual sample schools that could attribute to various
implications but were either unknown attributions or sample schools had no control
of these variables during this study.
The sample schools ranged from 72 students at the remote Olioli High School
which was five times smaller than the prototype to 345 students at Fa’atuatua High
School which is a little more than half the prototype enrollment to 554 students at
Agamalu High School which was most similar to the prototype school.
All of the sample schools in this study, as well as all of the other public
schools in ASDE are deemed 100% eligible for free and reduced lunch. This status
of 100% FRL, high SED, minority and ELL students in the three sample schools
exceeded the prototypic high school of the EBM. All of the sample schools had far
below the suggested number of teachers and tutors to work with English Language
Learners and struggling students according to the EBM. Although the schools were
95% or more ELL and 100% SED, there were no additional certificated teachers
employed to assist or use as a means of intervention with this population of students.
Although there were certificated teachers, according to the 2010 ASDE Territorial
Report Card, none of the teachers in ASDE with a degree lower than a Master’s level
degree received certification as a Highly Qualified Teacher as defined by the
requirements of the NCLB. This means all the sample schools lacked “highly
qualified” classroom teachers as defined by the federal policy of NCLB even though
many teachers have teaching credentials based on local hiring policies of ASDE. In
terms of professional development, all three sample schools lack five more days of

112
intensive training for each school year. None of the sample schools have
instructional coaches as recommended by the EBM. None of the sample-schools had
allocation for certified substitute teachers.
The unique funding practice in the American Samoa Department of
Education for all of its school-sites and specifically the three sample schools in this
study found difficulty of procuring an actual dollar amount of per-pupil expenditure
for the current school year. All of the school-site sample principals did not have any
input on resource allocation nor did they have evidence or knowledge of per-pupil
expenditures at the school-site level. There were too many uncontrollable factors
such as student enrollment, lack of local revenue, Free and Reduced Lunch
participation, English Language Learners, Fa’aSamoa, low amount of resources
available at the school-site, locale and others that may have attributed to the current
student performance at each sample school. There was an extreme lack of power at
the school-site level. The principals did express personal interest in one day having a
voice on allocation of resources at his or her school-site but all agreed that it was a
common practice that has existed prior and currently in their reign as school-site
principal. Chapter 5 will offer further discussion, conclusion and suggestion for
future research in ASDE.

113
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION
This final chapter will begin with an overview of the study, a summary of the
findings and implications, limitations of the study, and recommendations for future
research.
Overview of the Study
Students, specifically high school students, in American Samoa Department
of Education (ASDE) have consistently showed low student achievement and
performance on local and national standardized assessments in comparison to their
counterparts throughout United States. The heavily federally funded ASDE has
been scrutinized because resources are becoming scarcer; the accountability demands
of student achievement are increasing. States and local governments (even
territories) demand a return of investment in education (Odden, 2000). Educators are
prompted to examine methods used to increase student and school productivity,
however, in American Samoa, student performance data has yet to reach desired
levels of achievement.
This study used a purposeful sample of three out of six public high schools
located in the American Samoa Department of Education with similar demographics
and characteristics. The framework of this study was based upon the Evidence-
Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) and Odden’s (2009) 10 Strategies for Doubling
Student Performance. The framework was used to examine the present school-site
resource allocation and levels of implementation of strategies for the improvement of

114
student performance. This framework allowed analysis of research-based best-
practice strategies present at each school-site for this study. Data collected included
documents from the school-sites, websites of sample school-sites and ASDE as well
as interviews with school-site principals. The ten research based strategies that were
assessed included:
 Analyzing Data and Understanding the Performance Problem and
Challenge
 Setting Ambitious Goals
 Implementing Effective Curriculum and Instructional Programs
 Using Benchmarks and Formative Assessments Data-Based Making
 Ongoing, Intensive Professional Development
 Using Time Effectively and Efficiently
 Providing Interventions for Struggling Students
 Creating Collaborative Cultures and Distributed Leadership
 Using Research-Based and Proven Strategies
 Addressing Talent and Human Capital Issues
The Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance (Odden, 2009) were
utilized to provide a framework for the analysis of instructional strategies at each
school-site. This book (Odden, 2009) was the end product of research-based general
strategies that have been used by schools and districts that have been successful in
producing significant and desired student performance achievement. The strategies
were compiled from aggregated research conducted in the United States on best-

115
practices and studies by an array of sources. Some of these sources ranged from
school finance adequacy by academic researchers and practitioners to the
Consortium for Policy Research and Education (CPRE).
This study employed the Evidence-Based Model developed by Odden and
Picus (2008) to evaluate how resources were allocated at the school-site level. This
prototypical model was developed according to resource-based expenditure
structures for schools at the elementary, middle and high school level. A prototype
model of the EBM allowed for adjustment to reflect the unique needs of a school’s
demographic or characteristic profile. The EBM seeks to identify, at the school-site
level, the school improvement efforts, school-based programs and research-based
education strategies present at the sample school-sites in this study. The EBM was
used compare improvement efforts alignment between a prototypical model to that of
school-site’s actual student demographic, characteristic and enrollment.
The central office of ASDE controlled all monies and allocation of resources
at each of its schools. The unique funding source, highly centralized district, high
population of socio-economically disadvantaged students and resource allocation
practices of American Samoa Department of Education did not deter school-site
principals from continued efforts of improving student achievement at each school
despite all of the funding challenges. The school-site principals have no control of:
school funding; human capital or hiring of teachers; providing effective intervention
programs for struggling students; ongoing, intensive professional development;
implementing effective curriculum and instructional program; using research-based

116
and proven strategies and curriculum or instructional programs which includes
student materials and any expenditure. All of the school-site principals voiced their
concern of the long time policy and practice of funding in ASDE with the argument
that each leader knew his or her school-site and the needs of students better than the
central office. The fact these leaders are at the frontline justifies their concern of
wanting to have the authority and power of decision making to meet the individual
needs of their students.
The findings indicate that these sample school-sites had far fewer resources
than recommended by the EBM for school enrollment. Regardless of the outdated
policy practices of allocating resources within American Samoa Department of
Education, there were some similarities of implemented 10 strategies (Odden, 2009)
at all of the school-sites such as: the degree of schools to analyze data and
understand the performance challenge; using benchmarks and formative assessment
data for decision making; and a slight degree of creating collaborative cultures and
distributed leadership. The next section discusses the research questions and
findings of instructional improvement strategies used by the schools in comparison
to the Evidence-Based Model.
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to understand the unique school finance and
student performance challenges facing the single territory and education district of
American Samoa by using the Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) of
finance adequacy and resource allocation as a framework to analyze the current

117
resource allocation patterns and evidence of best-practice strategies to raise student
performance at each school-site. The Ten Steps to Doubling Student Performance
(Odden, 2009) offers ten strategies of best-practiced or evidence-based strategies
proven to double student performance. In addition to the Evidence-Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008), the ten evidence-based strategies (Odden, 2009) for
doubling student performance was used to examine current strategies implemented at
each sample school. These ten evidence-based practices or strategies helped analyze
collected data and align the relationship between current resource allocation patterns
and current student achievement data at the school-site.
The schools that participated in the study were all from the same district and
shared similar demographics and characteristics. Olioli High School shared similar
characteristics and demographics as the other two sample school-sites despite the
fact it is located on a separate outer island. The Evidence-Based Model prototype
high school has student enrollment of 600 students. None of the sample-schools had
an enrollment of 600 or more, however, configuration of the EBM was applied to pro
rata of each school. One school had an enrollment of 554 students and the smallest
school with the least student enrollment had 72 students. All of the schools were
high-poverty, Title 1 schools as evidenced by United States Department of
Agriculture deeming the whole school district 100% eligible for free and reduced
meals program. All of these schools had 95% or more students who were English
Language Learner (ELL) students with a very high socio-economically
disadvantaged percentage. All of the non-sample schools in this district have similar

118
demographic and characteristics of student population as the sample schools in this
study.
The following research questions guided this study and findings are presented
in this chapter:
 How much money is spent on each student in American Samoa
Department of Education?
 What types of instructional improvement strategies are implemented at
school level in American Samoa Department of Education?
 According to this research, are resources allocated in ways that lead to
high student performance in American Samoa Department of Education?
The first research question inquired about per-pupil expenditure at each
school-site, however, the unique practices of resource allocation for the sample
schools, practices of disseminating information and highly controlling, centralized
district made it difficult to conclude an actual dollar amount for per-pupil
expenditure. It was found that at each school-site level; this question could not be
answered by school-site principals and after analysis of data, this important
information is still unknown because of lack of public accessible documents.
However, documents (Appendix C and D) received directly from the interim
Director of ASDE approximate per-pupil expenditure at $4,548 for the current
school year during this study. This current per-pupil expenditure in ASDE during
this study is still far less than the national average per-pupil expenditure of 2011
which was approximately $10,792 (NCES, 2011).

119
The second question described the current instructional improvement
strategies in practice at each school site. The framework for doubling student
performance (Odden, 2009) the 10 Strategies for Doubling Student Performance was
used to analyze the effectiveness of improving student achievement at each of the
sample school-site by the degree of implementation of each of the ten strategies.
In reviewing the analysis of the implementation of Odden’s (2009) strategies
to improve student performance, it became clear that not all of the schools
experienced steady positive growth evident by data of student performance results of
the local Standard Based Assessment (SBA) and Stanford Achievement Test 10
th

Edition (SAT10) assessments for the last three school years. In the content area of
SBA Reading, two schools, Agamalu and Fa’atuatua High Schools experienced
positive growth with an average of ten points between these two schools over the last
three school years. In the SBA content of Math, Agamalu and Fa’atuatua High
Schools again experienced positive growth with an average of 12 points growth
between the two schools over three school years. Interviews of the principals and
analysis of these interviews was used to indicate the number of Odden’s (2009) ten
strategies that were currently being implemented at the school to improve student
performance change. Agamalu High School had average levels of implementation
in three of the ten strategies and Agamalu, Fa’atuatua and Olioli High Schools had
below average and far below average levels of implementation in the remaining
seven of ten strategies.

120
The area in which all schools had lower than average levels of
implementation for Odden’s (2009) strategies were: setting high ambitious goals;
implementing effective curriculum and instructional program; ongoing, intensive
professional development; using time effectively and efficiently; providing
interventions for struggling students; using research-based and proven strategies and
addressing talent and human capital issues. A principal at the school-site with no
access to monies faces many struggles and challenges in effectively supporting
efforts of increasing student performance. These principals were forced to encourage
teachers and staff to engage in innovative and creative ways to support strategies to
assist the students at the expense of the teachers own time.
The third research question offered an understanding on how each school site
essentially allocated resources. After reviewing data from the sample schools in this
school district of American Samoa, this study not only showed the unique funding
practice of resource allocation of the district for each sample school but it had a lack
of resources, local revenue and low power-control at the school-level. It became
evident that all sample school-sites were ardent to finding effective ways to improve
student achievement despite limited access of funding at the school-site level.
Resource allocation was handled from the central office of ASDE and filtered
into the sample school-sites. The Evidence-Based Model of Odden and Picus (2008)
suggests educational adequacy and resource allocation at the school-site level to
improve student performance was far from achievement at all of the sample schools.
The EBM allocation resources offered school-sites the perfect opportunity to

121
improve student achievement in areas such as: providing ongoing, intensive
professional development for teachers and staff; school effective curriculum
offerings; adequate staffing for the core programs taught at each school; staffing
(instructional coaches, certified tutors, and substitute teachers) for extra students’
needs; extended day programs and summer school. The sample school-sites fell
short of the EBM suggestions and implementation of the 10 strategies for improving
student performance but one reason was the fact that school-site principals and
leaders had no authority on per-pupil expenditures or any expenditures.
Limitations of the Study
The limitations in this study were as follows:
1. ASDE is heavily dependent on federal grants and some local grants.
Monies are controlled centrally and are allocated to school-sites under the
directives of the central office. The lack of consistent methods of
identification of allocation of spending may have prevented accuracy of
financial expenditures. School-site principals neither have direct input of
allocation of resources at their school site nor did participating school-site
principals, during data collection process, have any knowledge or
evidence-at-hand of per-pupil expenditures at each of the respective
sample schools.
2. Information collected from school-site principal interviews was resultant
from perceptions of the three principals and may not establish a
representative sample of the other principals in the district. Qualitative

122
findings are highly case dependent and contextual and demonstrate
sampling limitations (Patton, 2002).
3. The data collection method was based on qualitative and quantitative
methods where the qualitative methods may have resulted in subjectivity
of each school-site principal.
4. External factors that have not surfaced into the study but presence is
known is the influence of the Fa’aSamoa (Samoan Way) culture upon the
daily operations and decision making of the American Samoa
Government and American Samoa Department of Education.
5. Public documents of ASDE were not always accessible, current or made
available for the public. Only Agamalu High School had updated, current
data and made assessment scores available on the school-site’s website.
6. The sample-schools were based on the willingness of the school-site
principals to participate in the study.
Implications of the Study
There is a myriad of future implications for this particular school district if
this research can ignite change of current practices in allocation of resources for
improving student performance. One particular area that needs to be addressed is
that ASDE authority should have a better mechanism in place for resource allocation
at the school-site level. At the school-site level, there should be more local input that
is taken into great consideration from the central office.

123
The results of this study provide information on how to allocate resources to
improve student performance and increase desired outcomes of student achievement
by allocating resources and implementing best-practiced strategies such as: ongoing
and intensive professional development; human capital and talent; strategies and
interventions for struggling students; and using time efficiently and effectively.
Recommendations for Future Research
The focus of this study was three schools within one highly centralized rural
school district in the territory of American Samoa. The study adds to the body of
research on school-level resource allocation strategies to improve student
performance by using the Evidence-Based Model (Odden and Picus, 2008) of
finance adequacy of school-level expenditure framework. The study analyzed
school-level resource allocation practices and implementation of effective strategies
to improve student achievement from these three high schools. This study further
emphasized the similar characteristics and demographics by aligning student
achievement to current school-site resources used to support student achievement by
comparing Odden and Picus’ (2008) Evidence-Based Model and school-site strategy
implementation of Odden’s (2009) 10 Strategies for Doubling Student Performance.
There is a need for more school-site studies in this district to pull out larger
implications and better inform practice and policy for American Samoa Department
of Education. Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations
for future research are:

124
 Expand the study with a larger and more longitudinal sample of high
schools within this district with similar student demographics and student
and teacher characteristics or with other United States Territories similar
to American Samoa Department of Education. It would be helpful to
study schools that have evident data of success in student achievement to
determine what instructional strategies and resource allocations have
contributed to their success. Although the study showed progress of
students towards proficiency in some content areas of reading, writing
and math in the local Standard Basic Assessment scores and other
standardized assessment scores, overall student performance was still far
lower than proficiency for every single subgroup and content area.
 It will be advantageous to revisit the Evidence-Based Model of finance
adequacy and resource allocations data collection protocol to find a
common ground of understanding the unique per-pupil expenditure
practices of the ASDE. The EBM model can be configured for ASDE.
The highly centralized district and local policy-makers may want to
explore other means of distribution of monies and effective allocation of
resources at the school-site level. The leaders and principals at each
school-site advocates to have the power to allocate resources according to
their knowledge and understanding of student and school-site needs at
their immediate school.

125
 It would be appropriate to further this research by studying the influence
of Fa’aSamoa (Samoan Way) of life and culture and its influence on
decision making within the American Samoa Government and American
Samoa Department of Education.
 It would be beneficial to research the need to address the lack of Highly
Qualified Teachers and the impact of HQT teachers and non-HQT
teachers on the effectiveness of student performance.
 It would be beneficial to further this research by studying the
effectiveness of the principals as an instructional leader and how they
directly impact student achievement at each respective school.
Conclusion
The researcher of this study recommends the leaders of American Samoa’s
Education, stakeholders of the education of students in American Samoa, school-site
principals or any school leader who is focused on improving student achievement at
their school or within their district to consider using Odden’s (2009) 10 Strategies
for Doubling Student Performance as a framework to guide the improvement process
of their school. After analyzing each school-sites implementation levels of each of
the ten strategies, the schools involved in this study implemented many of these
strategies at extremely low levels in comparison of what Odden (2009) defines as
data-driven strategies. The sample schools did not show implementation of most of
these strategies at the school-site level through no fault of their own. The unique
funding sources, under-funded, lack of school-level or local input, lack of proper

126
resource allocation practices at the school-site level suggests probable reasons for
current student performance at each school in this study.
In looking at the strategies, the researcher believes that each school-site could
benefit in the improvement of student performance by effectively implementing most
of the 10 strategies as suggested by Odden (2009) for doubling performance of
students. The current resource allocation practices causes incapability of school-site
leaders to allocate resources as needed in order implement these 10 strategies and has
been observed it will be an arduous challenge that needs to be overcome and requires
the support of advocates, stakeholders of American Samoa education system, policy-
makers of American Samoa and the leaders of the American Samoa Department of
Education. It is dire that these parties realize the need to change its current practices
of allocation of resources at the school-site level. Authority needs to have better
mechanism and practice of resource allocation. Until this is done, student
performance and achievement will continue to be impacted with unwanted
achievement levels because the school-site lacks the needed implementation of these
strategies such as: 1) intensive and ongoing professional development for teachers
and staff; 2) providing intervention for struggling students; 3) using research-based
and proven strategies; 4) addressing human capital issues and talent; 5)
implementing effective curriculum and instruction; 6) using time effectively and
efficiently; and last 7) setting high and ambitious goals.
Initially, the researcher believed there was an education gap for the students
of this district because of the Fa’aSamoa (Samoan Way) culture and remoteness of

127
thousands of miles between this district and the next nearest district of the United
States. After the study, the researcher realized that geographical location was far
from being the only factor but it was also contributed by unique funding sources and
lack of effective resource allocation policy and practices of American Samoa
Department of Education that may have contributed to undesired student
performance on standardized measurements.
Finally, the researcher requests school-site leaders, ASDE, policy makers and
stakeholders of American Samoa’s education system to become sincere supporters
for student learning and advocate the urgency for change in the current resource
allocation practices and policies at American Samoa Department of Education. If
this is realized and the EBM and supporting 10 strategies for doubling student
performance are implemented at the school-site level then opportunities to see
desired student performance and achievement may finally be realized in American
Samoa.

128
REFERENCES
American Samoa Department of Education. (2011). Territorial Report Card 2009.
Retrieved from http://www.doe.as/ourpages/auto/2010/10/22/59906390/
Territorial%20Report%20Card.pdf

Beirne, C.J. (1975) Problem of Americanization of Catholic Schools in Puerto Rico.
San Juan: Universidad da Puerto Rico

Borgardus, E.S. (1923) Essentials of Americanization. Los Angeles: University of
Southern California.

Boudett, K. P., City, E. A., & Murnane, R. (2007). A step-by-step guide to using
assessment results to improve teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Education Press.

Carlson, R.A. (1975). Quest for Conformity: Americanization Through Education.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011). The World Fact Book – American Samoa.
Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/geos/aq.html

Chenoweth, K. (2007). It’s being done: Academic success in unexpected schools.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring:
A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2),
237-247.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1993). Reframing the school reform agenda. Phi Delta
Kappan, 4(10), 53-761.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). The current status of teaching and teacher
development in the United States. Background paper prepared for the
National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, Washington, D.C.

Darling-Hammond, L. (in press). Beyond bureaucracy: Creating incentives for “high
performance” schools. In S. Fuhrman & J. O’Day (Eds.), Incentives and
Systemic Reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

129
Darling-Hammond, L., Alexander, M., & Price, D. (2002). Redesigning high
schools: what matters and what works. 10 features of good small schools.
Stanford, CA: School Redesign Network, Stanford University.

Darling-Hammond, L., Chung Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orpanos, S.
(2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report of
teacher development in the United States and abroad. National Staff
Development Council: Stanford University.

DeYoung, A. (1987). The status of American rural education research: An
integrated review and commentary. Review of Educational Research, 57(2),
123-148.

Duke, D. L. (2006). What we know and don’t know about improving low-
performing schools. The Phi Delta Kappan, 87(10), 728-734.

Elmore, R. F., & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teacher learning: Staff
development and instructional improvement. In L. Darling-Hammond & G.
Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and
practice (pp. 263-291). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Embree, E. R. (1934). A new school In American Samoa. The Journal of Negro
Education, 3(1), 50-56.

Fermanich, M., Mangan, M. T., Odden, A., Picus, L. O., Gross, B., & Rudo, Z.
(2006). Washington learns: successful district study. Analysis prepared for
the K-12 Advisory committee of Washington Learns. Retrieved from
http://www.lopassociates.com/PDFs/Picus%20and%20Assoc%20Successful
%20Dist%20Report%209-11-06%20_e_.pdf

Guthrie, J. W., & Springer, M. G. (2004). A nation at risk revisited: Did “wrong”
reasoning result in “right” results? At what cost? Peabody Journal of
Education, 79(1), 7-35.

Hanushek, E. A. (1989). Expenditures, efficiency, and equity in education: The
Federal government’s role. The American Economic Review, 79(2), 46-51.

Hanushek, E. A., & Lindseth, A. A. (2009). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and
statehouses: solving the funding-achievement puzzle in America’s public
schools. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

130
Hunkin, E. F. (2004). Press release: Faleomavaega meets with U.S. Department of
Education regarding their upcoming visit to American Samoa. Washington,
D.C.

Hunkin, E. F. (Congressman). (2011). Summary of Federal expenditures to
American Samoa for FY 1995-2001. Retrieved from
http://www.house.gov/faleomavaega/historical.shtml

Kotter, J. P. (2002). The heart of change: Real life stories of how people change
their organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Mantzicopoulos, P., Morrison, D., Stone, E., & Setrakian, W. (1992). Use of the
search/teach tutoring approach with middle-class students at risk for reading
failure. Elementary School Journal, 92, 573-586.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research in action.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Murnana, R. J. & Sharkey, N. S. (2004). Learning from Student Assessment Results:
Lessons for New York State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Newmann, F., & Associates. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools
for intellectual quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Odden, A. R. (2009). 10 strategies for doubling student performance. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Odden, A. R., & Archibald, S. (2001). Reallocating resources: How to boost
student achievement without asking for more. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Odden, A. R., & Archibald, S. (2009). Doubling student performance and finding the
resources to do it. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Odden, A. R., & Busch, C. (1998). Financing schools for high performance:
Strategies for improving the use of educational resources. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2000). School finance: A policy perspective. Boston,
MA: McGraw Hill.

Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2000). School finance: A policy perspective (2nd
edition). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

131
Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2004). School finance: A policy perspective (3rd
edition). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Parrish, T. B., & Hikido, C. S. (1998). Inequalities in public school district
revenues. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.

Picus, L. O. (2001). In search of more productive schools: A guide to resource
allocation in education. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational
Management, University of Oregon.

Picus, L. O., & Fazal, M. B. (1995). The $300 billion question: How do public
elementary and secondary schools spend their money? In W. J. Fowlers, Jr.
(Ed.), Developments in school finance (pp. 79-96). Washington, D.C.:
National Center for Education Statistics.

Pittner, N. A., Carleton, M. M., & Casto, C. (2010). School funding in Ohio: from
DeRolph to the Evidence-Based Model (EBM) and beyond. Journal of
Education Finance, 36(2), 111-142.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2007). School leadership and student outcomes: Identifying
what works and why. Retrieved from http: http://www.acel.org.au

Schmidt, W. H. (1983). High school course-taking: A study of variation. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 15(2), 167-182.

Snyder, T. D., Dillow, S. A., & Hoffman, C. M. (2008). Digest of Education
Statistics 2007. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Thomas, R. M. (1977). Scheme for assessing unmet educational needs: American
Samoan Example. International Review of Education. 23:59-78.

United States Government Accountability Office. (2004). American Samoa –
accountability for key Federal grants needs improvement. [GAO-05-41].
Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0541.pdf

United States Government Accountability Office. (2008). American Samoa – issues
associated with some Federal court options. [GAO-08-1124T]. Retrieved
from http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d081124t.pdf

US Codes 45 Stat. 1253. (1929). [Codified at 48 U.S.C. § 1661]. Retrieved from
http://vlex.com/source/us-code-territories-insular-possessions-
1047/section/13

132
U.S. Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
(2011). Regional portal: American Samoa. Retrieved from
http://coris.noaa.gov/portals/samoa.html

133
APPENDIX A
LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN SAMOA DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION

134

135
APPENDIX B
EMAIL INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE

Dear Principal _________,

My name is Akenese E. Nikolao-Mutini and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier
School of Education at University of Southern California.

I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation, focusing on the
relationship between the finance adequacy of resource allocation patterns and student
performance in public high schools throughout American Samoa by utilizing the
Evidence-Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) and Odden’s (2009) Ten Steps to
Doubling Student Performance as a conceptual framework.

You are invited to participate in the study. If you agree, you are invited to participate
in a focus group interview. The focus group interview is anticipated to last
approximately 2.0 hours and may be audio-taped.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study. Your relationship with will not be
affected whether or not you participate in this study.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at (808) 499-
5445 or via email at nikolaom@usc.edu.

Thank you for your participation,

Akenese E. Nikolao-Mutini
University of Southern California

136
APPENDIX C
FINAL BUDGET – FY 2012 APPROPRIATED FUNDS ACCOUNTS AND
GRANTS ACCOUNT

137
APPENDIX D
FINAL BUDGET – FY 2012 OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS ACCOUNT

138
APPENDIX E
QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL
Pre-Visit Document Request List
All of these documents should be for the current 2011-2012 school year.

1. Staff List (School)

This list will likely include any person who works in the physical space of the
school. It is necessary to understand the full-time equivalent (FTE) status of each
employee, as well as what their job entails (for a principal or classroom teacher, this
may be obvious, for special education staff or student support staff, this is not readily
clear).
 Some staff are paid to work less than 1.0 FTE with the school, yet are housed
at the school full-time. Only the portion of the day that the staff person
provides services to the individual school should be recorded.
 Special education and ELL staff, especially, may be dedicated to more than
one project (e.g. 0.5 FTE reading coach, 0.5 FTE resource room).
 Distinguish how special education and ELL staff provide support (e.g. do
they work with an individual child or a classroom, etc.).
 Individuals who serve the school may not be listed and instead are based out
of the district or regional education agency (e.g. speech therapy, visiting
coaches) so you will need to ask them about these people—see below.

2. Staff List (District)

A list of all district employees who do not appear on school staff roster, but who
provide direct services to schools (guidance counselors, psychologists, special
education diagnosticians, etc.) and which schools they provide services to, expressed
in FTE units. For instance, a special education diagnostician who works with 3
schools might be listed three times on this sheet (0.5 FTE, 0.3 FTE, 0.2 FTE)
depending upon the number of days she is allocated to the various schools. Note:
You will only be recording the proportion of FTEs that she spends providing services
to the individual school you are studying.

3. School Schedule (School)

It is helpful to have a copy of the bell schedule to talk through the amount of
instructional time for reading, math, etc.

139
4. Consultants (School, District, and State)

Budgeted dollar amount for all other consultants other than professional
development contracted services.

5. Class Sizes

You want a copy of the master class schedule to enter this data. Make sure to enter
the class size for every class that is taught at the school.

6. Funds for Daily Substitutes

Daily rate for substitute teachers who replace sick teachers. (This is not for
substitutes who replace teachers who are participating in professional development.)

7. Professional Development Budget

 Substitutes and Stipends (teacher time): Dollar amount for substitutes and
stipends that cover teacher time for professional development.
 Trainers/Consultants: Dollar amount for outside consultants who provide
training or other professional development services.
 Travel: Dollar amount of the costs of travel to off-site professional
development activities, and costs of transportation within the district for
professional development.
 Materials, Equipment, and Facilities: Dollar amount of the materials for
professional development including the cost of classroom materials,
equipment needed for professional development activities, and rental or other
costs for facilities used for professional development.
 Tuition & Conference Fees: Dollar amount of tuition payments or
reimbursement for college-based professional development, and fees for
conferences related to professional development.
 Other Professional Development: Dollar amount for other professional
development staff or costs.

140
APPENDIX F
OPEN-ENDED DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL SCHOOL SITES
Following are open-ended questions intended to capture each school’s strategies for
improving student performance. Ask the questions in the order that they appear on
this protocol. Record the principal’s answers as s/he gives them and focus on getting
the key elements of the instructional improvement effort with less emphasis on the
process aspect.

I. Tell me the story of how your school improved student performance.

A. What were the curriculum and instruction pieces of the strategy?

1. What has the content focus of your improvement process been?
(E.g. Reading, Math, Reading First, Math Helping Corps, etc.)

2. What curricula have you used during your instructional improvement
effort? (E.g. Open Court reading, Everyday Math, etc.)
 Is it aligned with state standards?
 How do you know it is aligned? (E.g. District recent review for
alignment)

3. What has been the instructional piece of your improvement effort?
 Does your staff have an agreed upon definition of effective teaching?

4. What is the instructional vision for your improvement effort?
(E.g. Connecticut standards or the Danielson Framework)

5. Have assessments been an integral part of your instructional improvement
process?
 If so, what types of assessments have been key? (E.g. formative,
diagnostic, summative)
 How often are those assessments utilized?
 What actions were taken with the results?

6. What type of instructional implementation has taken place as a part of
your reform efforts? (E.g. Individualized instruction, differentiated
instruction, 90 minutes of uninterrupted reading instruction)
 Were teachers trained in a specific instructional strategy?
 How did you know that the instructional strategies were being
implemented?

141
B. What were the resource pieces of the strategy? How long have the
resources been in place?

1. Early Childhood program: Is it half or full day? Number kids? Staffing
ratios? Eligibility?

2. Full Day Kindergarten
 If yes, how long have they had full day kindergarten?

3. Class Size Reduction
 Reduction Strategy (E.g. 15 all day long Grade 9-12 or reading only
with 15)

4. Professional Development:
 When are the professional development days scheduled for? (E.g.
Summer Institutes, Inservice Days)
 What is the focus of the professional development?
 Do you have instructional coaches in schools? Were there enough
coaches? (Did they need more but couldn’t afford it?)

5. “Interventions” or Extra Help Strategies for Struggling Students:
 Tutoring: Specify 1:1, in small groups (2-4), or in medium groups (3-
5)
 Extended day: How frequently (Number minutes & Number of times
per week), Academic focus, Who instructs (certified teachers or
aides), Who participates
 Summer school: How Frequently (Number hours a day, Number
weeks), Who instructs (certified teachers or aides), Who participates
 ELL
 Scheduling: (E.g. double periods in secondary schools)

6. Parent outreach or community involvement

7. Technology

C. Was the improvement effort centrist (central office orchestrated) or
bottom up?

D. What type of instructional leadership was present?

142

E. Was there accountability built into this improvement plan? (E.g. School
Board report which helped solidify focus)

F. What additional resources would be needed to continue and expand your
efforts?

143
APPENDIX G
DATA COLLECTION CODE BOOK
This Codebook is intended to be used solely for EDUC 790 and 792 (Picus) – School
Resource Use and Instructional Improvement Strategies. It identifies data collection
items and their definitions. This document is organized according to the
corresponding Data Collection Protocol and the web portal for data entry
(www.lopassociates.com).

I. School Profile
Each data item has a place for notes. This section is meant to be used for any
notations that you would like to record as a personal reminder. Notes fields
will not be used in data analysis.

A. School Name: In your training binder, there will be a group of schools for
which you are responsible. The school name and contact information are
located under the Schools tab.
B. School State ID: This is the identification number that the state has
assigned the school. You do not need to enter this; it has been entered for
you.
C. Address Line 1: Street address of the school.
D. Address Line 2: (optional) Second line of street address of the school.
E. City: City of the school.
F. State: “CA” is automatically entered for you.
G. Zip: Postal zip code of the school.
H. Phone: Main office phone number for the school.
I. Fax: Main office fax number for the school.
J. Website: School’s official website.

II. School Contacts
This section is for recording the contact people at the school. This will
include the principal, and most likely the secretary. Anyone else you
interview should also be recorded here. Any notes you’d like to make about
this person (E.g. phonetic spelling of their name) should go in the notes
sections, as well as what the data source is.

A. Title: The job title of the person who you interview from the school.
B. Honorific: Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr., Rev., etc.
C. First Name: Formal first name of school staff member (E.g. Michael
instead of Mike).
D. Initial: (optional) Middle initial of school staff member.
E. Last Name: Surname of school staff member.

144
F. Suffix: (optional) Jr., etc.
G. Phone #: Direct phone number to the school staff member.
H. Fax #: Fax number for the school staff member.
I. Email Address: Preferred email address of the school staff member.
J. Mail Address: Street address of the contact person.
K. Address Line 2: (optional) Second line of street address of the contact
person.
L. City: City of the contact person.
M. State: “WY” is automatically be entered for you.
N. Zip Code: Postal zip code of the contact person.
O. Zip + 4: Four digit extension of the zip code.

III. District Profile

A. District Name: This is the name of the district where the school is located.
B. District State ID: This is the identification number that the state has
assigned to the district within which the school resides.

IV. District Contacts
This section is for recording the contact people at the district office. This will
include the superintendent, and possibly an assistant superintendent and/or
director of curriculum and instruction. Anyone else you interview should
also be recorded here. Any notes you’d like to make about these individuals
(e.g. phonetic spelling of their name) should go in the notes sections, as well
as what the data source is.

A. Title: The job title of the person who you interview from the school.
B. Honorific: Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr., Rev., etc.
C. First Name: Formal first name of school staff member (E.g. Michael
instead of Mike).
D. Initial: (optional) Middle initial of school staff member.
E. Last Name: Surname of school staff member.
F. Suffix: (optional) Jr., etc.
G. Phone #: Direct phone number to the school staff member.
H. Fax #: Fax number for the school staff member.
I. Email Address: Preferred email address of the school staff member.
J. Mail Address: Street address of the contact person.
K. Address Line 2: (optional) Second line of street address of the contact
person.
L. City: City of the contact person.
M. State: “WY” is automatically be entered for you.
N. Zip Code: Postal zip code of the contact person.
O. Zip + 4: Four digit extension of the zip code.

145
V. School Resource Indicators
School resource indicators should be collected for the 2009-2010 school year.
Enter personal notations pertaining to the data in the yellow notes fields.

A. Current Student Enrollment: Headcount of students enrolled at the school
on the day of the site visit minus any pre-kindergarten students.
B. Pre-kindergarten Student Enrollment: Headcount of students enrolled in
any pre-kindergarten programs at the school on the day of the site visit.
These students should not be included in the previous category, Current
Student Enrollment. Make sure to also ask this question at secondary
schools.
C. Grade Span: Range of grades that the school provides instruction in.
(E.g. K-5)
D. Number of ELL/Bilingual Students: As of the day of the site visit, the
number of students eligible for services as an English language learner
(ELL) as defined by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
E. Number of Students Eligible for Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL):
Number of enrolled students who are eligible for the federal free- and
reduced-price lunch program.
F. Total number of Special Education Students (IEPs): As of the day of the
site visit, number of students in the school with an Individualized
Education Program (IEP) indicating their eligibility for special education
services. (This will most likely be a larger number than the number of
students who are in a self-contained special education classroom.) Does
not include gifted and talented students.
G. Number of Special Education Students (self-contained): Number of
students in the school with an Individualized Education Program (IEP)
indicating their eligibility for special education services.
H. Total Length of School Day: Number of minutes per day that students are
required to be present at school. If multiple grade spans are present for
different amounts of time, report the average length. (e.g. If the school
day begins at 8:30am and ends at 3:15pm, then the total length of the
school day is 405 minutes.)
I. Length of Instructional Day: Number of minutes per day that students are
present for instruction. This information should be available from the
school bell schedule or a school staff member. Subtract recess, lunch,
and passing periods time from the total minutes in the school day. This
calculation is different from how the state measures the “instructional
day.” (E.g. If the length of the school day is 405 minutes, and the
students have 20 minutes for lunch and 25 minutes for recess, then the
length of the instructional day is 360 minutes.)

146
J. Length of Mathematics Class: Number of minutes of mathematics class
periods per day. These include periods when students are specially
grouped for extended mathematics instruction. Report an average per
day length.
K. Length of Reading/English/LA Class: Number of minutes of reading,
English, and language arts (LA) class periods. These include periods
when students are specially grouped for extended literacy instruction.
(E.g. reading, writing, comprehension) Report an average per day
length.
L. Length of Science Class: Number of minutes of science class periods per
day. These include periods when students are specially grouped for
extended science instruction. Report an average per day length.
M. Length of Social Studies Class: Number of minutes of social studies and
history class periods per day. These include periods when students are
specially grouped for extended history or social studies instruction.
Report an average per day length.
N. AYP: This is a measure as to whether the school made Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) during the previous school year (2007-08). Enter “Y” or
“N” or “NA.”
O. API.

VI. Core Academic Teachers
The classroom teachers primarily responsible for teaching a school’s core
academic subjects of reading/English/language arts, mathematics, science,
history/social studies, and foreign language. In elementary schools, core
academic teachers consist of the teachers in the self-contained regular
education classrooms. Some elementary schools may also departmentalize
certain core subjects such as math or science, especially in the upper grades.
These teachers are also to be included as core teachers. In middle schools,
high schools, or any other departmentalized school, core teachers consist of
those teachers who are members of the English/language arts, mathematics,
science, social studies, and foreign language departments along with special
education or ESL/bilingual teachers who provide classes in these subjects.
The teachers should be entered as full-time equivalents (FTEs), which may
include decimals. (E.g. a half-time teacher would be entered as 0.5) If
teachers are assigned to multiage classrooms, divide up the FTEs weighted
by students per each grade. Enter each teacher’s name that corresponds to
the FTEs entered in the corresponding notes fields. Indicate in parentheses if
the teacher is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

Example:
Grade 1: Matthew Perry (0.5), Lisa Kudrow, Jennifer Aniston;
Grade 2: David Schwimmer (0.25), Courtney Cox (0.33), Matt LeBlanc.

147
A. Grades K-12: Number of FTE licensed grade-level teachers who teach the
core subjects. The FTEs should not duplicate those in the individual
subject categories.
B. English/Reading/LA, History/Social Studies, Mathematics, Science, and
Foreign Language: Number of FTE licensed subject-specific teachers
who teach the core subjects. The FTEs should not duplicate those in the
grade categories.

VII. Specialist and Elective Teachers
This expenditure element consists of teachers who teach non-core academic
classes, and usually provide planning and preparation time for core academic
teachers. The teachers should be entered as full-time equivalents (FTEs),
which may include decimals. In the notes sections, enter each teacher’s name
that corresponds to the FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in
parentheses if the teacher is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Art/Music/PE: Number of FTE specialist teachers, such as art, music, and
physical education (PE) teachers, who usually provide regular classroom
teachers with planning and preparation time.
B. Drama/Technology/Health: Number of FTE teachers who provide
instruction in a subject area that represents a special academic focus.
C. Career & Technical Education: Number of FTE vocational education
teachers.
D. Driver Education: Number of FTE drivers education teachers.
E. Study Hall: Number of FTE teachers who monitor study hall.
F. Athletics: Number of FTE teachers who coach an athletic team during the
school day. This does not include time spent as an athletic director,
which would be captured under the Administration section.
G. Other: Number of FTE specialist teachers who are not specifically listed
above.
H. Other Description: Indicate the subject area that the “Other” specialist
teacher(s) instruct.

VIII. Library Staff
Library staff should be entered as full-time equivalents (FTEs), which may
include decimals. Enter each staff member’s name that corresponds to the
FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in parentheses if the staff member
is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Librarian/ Library Media Specialist: Number of FTE licensed librarians
or media specialists who instruct students.
B. Library Aide: Number of FTE library aides who help instruct students.

148
IX. Extra Help Staff
This category mainly consists of licensed teachers from a wide variety of
strategies designed to assist struggling students, or students with special
needs, to learn a school’s regular curriculum. The educational strategies that
these teachers deploy are generally supplemental to the instruction of the
regular classroom. Extra help staff should be entered as full-time equivalents
(FTEs), which may include decimals. Do not include volunteers in the FTE
counts. Enter each staff member’s name that corresponds to the FTEs entered
in the related fields. Indicate in parentheses if the staff member is not a 1.0
FTE in that category.

A. Certified Teacher Tutors: Number of FTE tutors who are licensed
teachers and provide help to students one-on-one or in small groups of
2-5.
B. Non-Certified Tutors: Number of FTE tutors who are not licensed
teachers and provide help to students one-on-one or in small groups of
2-5.
C. ISS Teachers: Number of FTE licensed teachers who monitor/teach In-
School Suspension (ISS) students.
D. ISS Aides: Number of FTE Title I funded aides who monitor/teach In-
School Suspension (ISS) students.
E. Title I Teachers: Number of FTE non-special education teachers who
provide small groups of students with extra help as a function of the
Title I program.
F. Title I Aides: Number of FTE non-special education aides who provide
small groups of students with extra help as a function of the Title I
program.
G. ELL Class Teachers: Number of FTE licensed teachers of English as a
second language (ESL) who work with non-English speaking students
to teach them English.
H. Aides for ELL: Number of FTE aides of English as second language
(ESL) classes who work with non-English speaking students to teach
them English.
I. Gifted Program Teachers: Number of FTE teachers who instruct
students in the gifted program.
J. Gifted Program Aides: Number of FTE aides who instruct students in
the gifted program.
K. Gifted Program Funds: Dollar amount budgeted for the gifted program
for the 2008-09 school years.
L. Other Extra Help Teachers: Number of FTE teachers who provide
supplemental instructional assistance to students to learn the school’s
curriculum. (Use this category sparingly.)

149
M. Other Extra Help Teachers Description: Indicate what the “Other” extra
help staff do.
N. Other Extra Help Classified Staff: Number of FTE classified staff who
provide supplemental instructional assistance to students to learn the
school’s curriculum. (Use this category sparingly.)
O. Other Extra Help Classified Staff Description: Indicate what the
“Other” extra help classified staff do.
P. Special Ed. Teacher (Self-contained for students with severe
disabilities): Number of FTE licensed teachers who teach in self-
contained special education classrooms and work with “severely”
disabled students for most or all of the school day. These teachers may
teach a modified version of a school’s curriculum or other learning
goals required by their students’ Individualized Education Programs
(IEPs).
Q. Special Ed. Inclusion Teachers: Number of FTE licensed teachers who
assist regular classroom teachers with mainstreamed students who have
physical or mental disabilities, or a learning problem. These students
generally have “less severe” disabling conditions.
R. Special Ed. Resource Room Teachers: Number of FTE licensed special
education teachers who provide small groups of students in special
education with extra help in specific areas.
S. Special Ed. Self-contained Aides: Number of FTE aides who assist in
self-contained special education classrooms and work with “severely”
disabled students for most or all of the school day.
T. Special Ed. Inclusion Aides: Number of FTE aides who assist regular
classroom teachers with mainstreamed students who have physical or
mental disabilities, or some learning problem. These students generally
have “less severe” disabling conditions.
U. Special Ed. Resource Room Aides: Number of FTE special education
aides who provide small groups of students in special education with
extra help in specific areas.
V. Number of Extended Day Students: Number of students who participate
in the extended day program.
W. Minutes per Week of Extended Day Program: Number of minutes per
week that the extended day program is offered.
X. Teacher Contract Minutes per Week: Number of work minutes per
week in the teacher contract.
Y. Extended Day Teachers: Number of FTE licensed teachers who provide
students with extra instructional time to achieve to the standards in the
regular curriculum after school.
Z. Extended Day Classified Staff: Number of FTE staff who provide
students with extra instructional time to achieve to the standards in the
regular curriculum after school.

150
AA. Description of Extended Day Classified Staff: Description of classified
staff’s role in the extended day program.
BB. Minutes Per Week of Summer School: Number of minutes per day
multiplied by the number of days per week that students attend summer
school.
CC. Length of Session: Number of weeks that summer school is in session.
DD. School’s Students Enrolled in the Summer School Program: Number of
students from the individual school who are enrolled in the summer
school program (a subset of the following item).
EE. All Students in Summer School: Total number of students enrolled in
the summer school program.
FF. Summer School Teachers: Number of FTE teachers who provided
students with extra instructional time to achieve to the standards in the
regular curriculum during summer 2008.
GG. Summer School Classified Staff: Number of FTE classified staff who
provided students with extra instructional time to achieve to the
standards in the regular curriculum during summer 2008.

X. Other Instructional Staff
Included here are instructional staff members that support a school’s
instructional program, but do not fit in the previous categories. Other
instructional staff should be entered as full-time equivalents (FTEs), which
may include decimals. Enter each staff member’s name that corresponds to
the FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in parentheses if the staff
member is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Consultants (other than PD contracted services): Dollar amount for all
other consultants other than professional development contracted
services.
B. Building Substitutes: Number of FTE permanent substitutes.
C. Other Teachers: Number of FTE teachers who instruct, but were not
included in previous categories.
D. Other Instructional Aides: Number of FTE aides who assist instruction,
but were not included in previous categories.
E. Funds for Daily Subs: Daily rate for daily certified teacher substitutes
who replace sick teachers. (This is not for substitutes who replace
teachers who are participating in professional development.)

151
XI. Professional Development Staff & Costs
This expenditure element includes spending on the professional development
of a school’s staff and the staffing resources necessary to support it.
Professional development staff should be entered as full-time equivalents
(FTEs), and cost figures should be entered as a dollar amount, both of which
may include decimals. Enter each staff member’s name that corresponds to
the FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in parentheses if the staff
member is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Number of Professional Development Days in the Teacher Contract:
Number of days the teacher contract specifies for professional
development.
B. Substitutes and Stipends (teacher time): Dollar amount budgeted for
substitutes and stipends that cover teacher time for professional
development. For time outside the regular contract day when students are
not present before or after school or on scheduled in-service days, half
days or early release days, the dollar amount is calculated by multiplying
the teachers’ hourly salary times the number of student-free hours used
for professional development. For planning time within the regular
contract, the dollar amount is calculated as the cost of the portion of the
salary of the person used to cover the teachers’ class during planning time
used for professional development. For other time during the regular
school day, including release time provided by substitutes, cost is
calculated with substitute wages. For time outside the regular school day,
including time after school, on weekends, or for summer institutes, the
dollar amount is calculated from the stipends or additional pay based on
the hourly rate that the teachers receive to compensate them for their
time.
C. Instructional Facilitators/Coaches: Number of FTE instructional
facilitators and coaches. This may include on-site facilitators and district
coaches (though only the FTE for the specific school should be recorded).
Outside consultants who provide coaching should be captured in an
estimated FTE amount depending on how much time they spend at the
school.
D. Trainers/Consultants: Dollar amount for outside consultants who provide
training or other professional development services. If trainers are from
the district, convert to a dollar amount.
E. Administration: Number of FTE district or school-level administrators of
professional development programs. (Again, only the FTE for the
specific school should be recorded).
F. Travel: Dollar amount of the costs of travel to off-site professional
development activities, and costs of transportation within the district for
professional development.

152
G. Materials, Equipment, and Facilities: Dollar amount of the materials for
professional development including the cost of classroom materials,
equipment needed for professional development activities, and rental or
other costs for facilities used for professional development.
H. Tuition & Conference Fees: Dollar amount of tuition payments or
reimbursement for college-based professional development, and fees for
conferences related to professional development.
I. Other Professional Development: Either FTEs or Dollar amount for other
professional development staff or costs. (Use this category sparingly.)
J. Other Description: Specify what the “Other” professional development is,
and indicate whether it is a FTE or dollar amount.

XII. Student Services Staff
This expenditure element consists of school-based student support staff, as
well as school expenditures for extra-curricular activities and athletics.
Student services staff should be entered as full-time equivalents (FTEs),
which may include decimals. Enter each staff member’s name that
corresponds to the FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in parentheses
if the staff member is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Guidance: Number of FTE licensed guidance counselors.
B. Attendance/dropout: Number of FTE staff members who manage
attendance and report dropouts.
C. Social Workers: Number of FTE licensed school social workers.
D. Nurse: Number of FTE registered nurses or nurse practitioners.
E. Parent advocate/community liaison: Number of FTE staff members who
serve as the parent advocate and/or community liaison, often working
with parents to get their children to attend school.
F. Psychologist: Number of FTE licensed school psychologists or
educational diagnosticians.
G. Speech/OT/PT: Number of FTE licensed speech, occupational (OT), and
physical therapists (PT) who provide services to the school’s students.
H. Health Asst.: Number of FTE health assistants.
I. Non-teaching aides: Number of FTE non-teaching aides. (E.g.
Lunchroom aides, Aides who help students board buses; DO NOT
include cooks – the defining difference is whether the staff member is
supervising students or not.)
J. Other Student Services: Number of FTE other student services staff. (Use
this category sparingly.)
K. Other Description: Indicate what the “other” student services staff
member does.

153
XIII. Administration
This expenditure element consists of all staffing resources pertaining to the
administration of a school. Administrators should be entered as full-time
equivalents (FTEs), which may include decimals. Enter each staff member’s
name that corresponds to the FTEs entered in the related fields. Indicate in
parentheses if the staff member is not a 1.0 FTE in that category.

A. Principal: Number of FTE licensed principals.
B. Assistant Principal: Number of FTE assistant principals.
C. Other Administrators: Number of FTE other administrators. (Use this
category sparingly.)
D. Other Description: Indicate what the “Other” administrators’ duties are.
E. Secretary: Number of FTE Secretaries.
F. Clerical Staff: Number of FTE clerical staff members.
G. Technology Coordinator: Number of FTE technology coordinators and IT
staff.
H. Security: Number of FTE security staff.
I. Custodians: Number of FTE staff who provide custodial services

XIV. Elementary Class Sizes (We are NOT collecting this data for middle and
high schools.)
Sometimes it is easiest to get this information when you get the staff list, but
other times the secretary can just copy the sheet that tells them how many
students are in each classroom (we don’t want student names). You want a
(preferably electronic) copy of the master class schedule to enter this data.
When entering the data online, make sure to enter the class size for every
class that is taught at the school. Click on the Class Size option from the
main menu and a new menu will be displayed on the left. This menu will
have options for grades Pre-8 plus Special Education. When you click on a
grade, the page with that grade's sections will be displayed where you can
enter the individual class sizes.

154
APPENDIX H
QUANTITATIVE DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL
School Profile
School Name School’s State ID Number
Address
City State Zip
Phone Fax
Website
NOTES:
School Contact (1)
Title
Honorific First Name Last Name
Phone # Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:

District Profile
District Name
District State ID
District Contact (1)
Title
Honorific First Name Last Name
Phone # Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
District Contact (2)
Title
Honorific First Name Last Name
Phone # Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
District Contact (3)
Title
Honorific First Name Last Name
Phone # Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:

155

School Resource Indicators
Current Student Enrollment
Pre-Kindergarten Student Enrollment
Grade Span
Number of At-Risk Students*
*Collect from district
Number of ELL/Bilingual Students
Number of High Mobility Students*
*Collect from district
Number of Students Eligible for Free- and Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)
Total Number of Special Education Students (IEPs)
Number of Special Education Students (self-contained)
Total Length of School Day
Length of Instructional Day
Length of Mathematics Class
Length of Reading or English/LA Class
Length of Science Class
Length of Social Studies Class
Length of Foreign Language Class
AYP
NOTES:

Core academic teachers (General Education Self Contained) FTEs
English/Reading/L.A.
History/Soc. Studies
Math
Science
Foreign Language
NOTES:

156
Specialist and Elective Teachers/Planning and Prep FTEs
Art
Music
PE/Health
Drama
Technology
Career & Technical Education
Drivers Education
Study Hall
Athletics
Other Specialist & Elective Teachers
Other Specialist & Elective Teachers Description:
NOTES:

Library Staff FTEs
Librarian
Library Media Specialist
Library Aide
NOTES:

Extra Help I
FTEs or
Dollars ($)
Certified Teacher Tutors
Non-Certified Tutors
ISS Teachers
ISS Aides
Title I Teachers
Title I Aides
ELL Class Teachers
Aides for ELL
Gifted Program Teachers
Gifted Program Aides
Gifted Program Funds
Other Extra Help Teachers
Other Extra Help Teachers Funded with Federal Dollars:
Other Extra Help Classified Staff
Other Extra Help Classified Staff Funded with Federal Dollars:
NOTES:

157

Extra Help II FTEs
Special Ed. Teacher (Self-contained for severely disabled students)
Special Ed. Inclusion Teachers
Special Ed. Resource Room Teacher
Special Ed. Self-contained Aides
Special Ed. Inclusion Aides
Special Ed. Resource Room Aides
NOTES:

Extra Help III
Number of Extended Day Students
Minutes per Week of Extended Day Program minutes
Teacher Contract Minutes per Week minutes
Extended day Teachers
Extended Day Classified Staff
Description of Extended Day Classified Staff
Minutes per Week of Summer School minutes
Length of Session (# of Weeks) weeks
School’s Students Enrolled in Summer School
All Students in Summer School
Summer School Teachers
Summer School Classified Staff
NOTES:

Other Instructional Staff
FTEs and
Dollars ($)
Consultants (other than paid contracted services) $
Building substitutes and other substitutes
Other Teachers
Other Instructional Aides
Funds for Daily Subs $
NOTES:

158
Professional Development
FTEs and
Dollars ($)
Number of Prof. Dev. Days in Teacher Contract
Substitutes and Stipends (teacher time) $
Instructional Facilitators/Coaches
Trainers/Consultants $
Administration
Travel $
Materials, Equipment and Facilities $
Tuition & Conference Fees $
Other Professional Development $
Other Professional Development Staff Funded with Federal Dollars:
NOTES:

Student Services FTEs
Guidance
Attendance/Dropout
Social Workers
Nurse
Parent advocate/community liaison
Psychologist
Speech/O.T./P.T.
Health Asst.
Non-teaching aides
Other Student Services
Description Of Other Student Services Staff:
NOTES:

Administration FTEs
Principal
Assistant principal
Other Administrator
Description of Other Administrator:
Secretary
Clerical staff
Technology Coordinator/ I.T.
Security
Custodians
NOTES:

159

High School Class Sizes
Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4
Special Education
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12

160
APPENDIX I
AGAMALU HIGH SCHOOL
Background on School
Agamalu High School is a ninth through twelfth grade school located in the
single school district of the United States Territory of American Samoa. American
Samoa’s Department of Education (ASDE) school district educates approximately
14,150 students from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade. The schools of ASDE
fall into five different complex divisions and span over five different islands within
the Samoan Archipelago. The student’s race or ethnicity in ASDE fall into 3
categories; Samoan, Asian Pacific Islander (A/PI) and Other. Ninety-five percent of
the total population of students in ASDE is Samoan or part Samoan, while 5% of the
students represent Asians/ Pacific Islanders and 0% for Others.
Agamalu High School’s vision demonstrates a commitment to excellence by
providing quality educational services and equal opportunity to A.L.L. (Always Love
Learning). The mission of Agamalu is the belief in sharing responsibilities and
making fair and caring daily decisions to improve the commitment to Always Love
Learning (A.L.L).
The Complex Division of this most eastern area of the coast of the island of
Tutuila includes 26 villages, seven feeder schools and a high school. The 2010
Census showed a decrease of the territory population as a whole but showed that the
complex division population where Agamalu High School locale has stayed
relatively the same since the 2000 Census. However, the population of student

161
enrollment at Agamalu has steadily decreased from school years 2009 until school
years 2011 by 77 students from the current enrollment of 554 students.
Agamalu’s students demographics are shown in Figure I.1 which exhibits
99% Samoans, 0% A/PI, 1% Other, 11% have IEP’s and 100% FRL. The United
States Department of Agriculture has deemed American Samoa 100% eligible for
Free Reduced Lunch (FRL) because of the economic disadvantages of most students
within the territory. According to the 2000 Census of American Samoa over 90% of
American Samoa’s families are considered as low-income. Alofa’aga High School
has 100% FRL participation, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED) and there are
59 students with Individualized Educational Plans (IEPs).

Figure I.1. Agamalu High School student ethnic demographic for SY 2011-2012

162
Agamalu High School’s opening enrollment for the 2011-2012 school years
was 554 students. The enrollment of students in Figure I.2 shows a slight rise in
student enrollment in SY 2008-2009 from 624 students to 631 students in SY 2009-
2010 but then it decreases to 601 students in SY 2010-2011. In SY 2011-2012, a
significant drop of enrollment by 77 students is visible. The possible factors
attributing to the enrollment decrease has been identified by Agamalu HS as:
family’s relocation to the western more dense population of American Samoa;
students transferring away from the territory to live with other relatives; relocation of
families to Samoa or the United States.

Figure I.2. Agamalu High School student enrollment from SY 2008-2009 to SY
2011-2012

163
In 2011-2012 school years, there were 35 regular classroom teachers at
Agamalu High School, 4 Special Education (SPED) teachers, 3 school
administrators, 3 counselors, 1 resource specialist, 1 librarian, 1 secretary, 1 security,
1 custodian, 6 food service handlers and 1 truancy officer for a total of 57 full time
employees (FTE).
Seventy-three percent of the professional staff has had 5 or more years of
teaching experience while the remaining seventeen percent have had less than 5
years of teaching experience. The Staff and Faculty Credentials are shown in Figure
I.3. There are 8 individuals that have a Master level degree, thirty individuals that
have a Bachelors level degree, 6 individuals with an Associates level degree and 1
teacher that has less than an Associates level degree.

Figure I.3. Agamalu High School credentials of staff and faculty SY 2011-2012

164
Assessment Data - Standards Based Assessment (SBA) and Stanford
Achievement Test 10
th
Edition (SAT10)
American Samoa Department of Education along with Pacific Regional
Educational Laboratory (PREL) consultants developed and implemented the
Standards-Based Assessment as a tool to measure the student achievement based on
the actual territory standards that are taught in ASDE. There are two grade levels
tested with this assessment in the secondary level. All grade 10 students are tested in
the area of reading, math and writing; and all grade 11 students are tested in
Chemistry and Earth Science. The 2011-2012 school years will be the first time
ASDE will pilot Social Studies assessment for the SBA.
The result of SBA for SY 2008-2009 was used by ASDE as a baseline to
measure the achievement and progress of each school’s Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP). The scores represent the percent of total students that have reached
Advanced or Proficient on the SBA test. As seen in Figure I.4, Agamalu High
School has observed noticeable rising performance of the tenth graders in the area of
reading and math. The math scores went from 25% in 2009 to 41% in 2011 and
reading scores of 30% in 2009 went up to 42% in 2011. The writing score went
from 27% in 2009 and dipped 8% in 2010 but went up2% in 2011 to 21%. The
scores for the grade eleven testers stayed steady from 2009 to 2010 with 21% and in
2011 increased by 1%.

165

Figure I.4. Agamalu High Schools – SBA results of students, percent proficient and
advanced on SBA

The Stanford Achievement Test 10
th
Edition (SAT10) is a normative
assessment utilized by ASDE to compare the group performances between peers in
the United States with the students from the local schools.
There are several identified factors by Agamalu High School for the results
of the students’ scores such as: some senior students do not value the importance of
the test; the scheduling of SAT10 coincides with Agamalu High Schools final
exams; the local curriculum taught at Agamalu does not fully align with the SAT10
curriculum.
The purpose of this case study is to analyze current resource allocation
patterns and identify effective instructional strategies that have been utilized at

166
Agamalu High School in attempts to raise student achievement. The Evidence Based
Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation will be
the framework to examine the current resource allocation patterns at Agamalu High
School. This study will also look for evidence of Odden’s (2010) 10 Steps to
Doubling Student Performance research-based strategies. The intent is not to
measure if Agamalu High School has doubled student performance by implementing
Odden’s 10 Steps but to assess whether any of these strategies are in place at the
school. These two (the EBM and the 10 Steps) will offer an account of Agamalu’s
improvement process.
Principal Fa’amaoni’s Story of School Improvement for Agamalu High School
Principal Fa’amaoni has been the principal of Agamalu High School since
2005. Principal Fa’amaoni was asked a battery of qualitative and quantitative
questions regarding his school improvement initiatives and strategies. The dialogue
procedure utilized the Interview Protocol Questionnaire as a guide for data
collection. The responses from Principal Fa’amaoni along with territorial and
school documents provided the quantitative and qualitative resource data for
comparison against the Evidence Based Model.
Setting Ambitious Goals
Principal Agamalu has successfully communicated the challenges facing the
entire school by the use of data presented in standardized testing. Reading
Comprehension for the student is a school wide initiative and main focus for the
current school year.

167
Implementing an Effective Curriculum & Instructional Program
The Office of Curriculum, Instructions and Accountability (OCIA) mandates
all the requirements and courses offered at each school in the territory. Principal
Fa’amaoni encourages teacher’s efforts in seeking research based strategies to
increase student performance. The SBA has been used as a tool to identify student
strengths and weaknesses of each assessed standard for tenth graders in the area of
Reading, Writing, Math and Science for eleventh graders. According to Agamalu’s
Self Study Report (2012), all teachers are well versed in analyzing the curriculum’s
coverage and gaps along with locating providing supplementary material when
necessary.
Using Benchmarks and Formative Assessments Data-Based Making
Principal Fa’amaoni, as a leader, demonstrates making informed decisions on
the direction of implementing goals based on data results from Standards Based
Assessment (SBA) scores and SAT10. The formation of a Leadership Team at
Agamalu HS in 2010-2011 has proven to be an asset for data-based decision making.
This team, through the use of available assessment scores of SBA and SAT10 has
identified a need to focus on student Reading Comprehension because of student low
scores in these areas.
Another assessment used to give direction to the Leadership Team is the pre-
Placement Exams given to incoming freshmen in the area of English and Math. This
exam allows teachers the opportunity to identify the skills this population may lack.
It also assists in the students’ transition into high school by placing students into

168
recommended course offerings. The idea for this pre-Placement Exam is to assist the
teachers, counselors and administrators a measuring tool to identify skills that
incoming students need to master or have mastered and better placement into proper
leveled courses.
Ongoing Professional Development
The practically non-existent budget for the school site hinders Principal
Fa’amaoni from offering ongoing professional development for the staff.
Professional development is offered from OCIA of the central office to improve
teacher content knowledge and pedagogy. OCIA solicits assistance from local and
visiting experts of the Pacific Regional Education Laboratory (PREL).
Principal Fa’amaoni tasks the department heads to collaborate with teachers
and identify needs of the departments to implement training. The schedule of the
school does not provide a defined time for ongoing regular staff development
although the principal has implemented solutions to leverage resources and expertise
from the central office. However, there are opportunities when professional
development and training are conducted by OCIA after regular work hours and
participant are compensated for these trainings.
Using Time Effectively and Efficiently
The administration monitors and manages the instructional time. One change
made by the principal in 2010 was to change the school traditional school schedule
to a block schedule. The idea for this change was to accommodate more

169
instructional time for students at each class meeting because both teachers and
students had consistently felt the need for the extra instructional time.
Providing Interventions for Struggling Students
Due to the fact that Principal Fa’amaoni does not have unconditional access
to financial resources, there has been great reliance for intervention for struggling
students on the shoulders of teachers volunteering personal time to afford learning
opportunities for this population.
A block schedule was implemented 2 years ago in order to allow more time
for struggling students.
Principal Fa’amaoni and teachers have acknowledged in Agamalu’s Self-
Study Report (2012) that the school will always find challenges in addressing all of
the students’ needs but the main goal of AHS is to continue to educate each student
to learn as much as she or he can. Although there were limited services and
resources available, AHS continued to educate each student to adapt and identify his
or her individual needs and goals they would like to achieve through life.
Creating Collaborative Cultures & Distributed Leadership
Agamalu’s principal has used the small school environment to create a
collaborative culture where teachers are comfortable participating in decisions and
assuming leadership positions when needed.
Using research-based and proven strategies
Principal Fa’amaoni does encourage teachers to practice proven and research
based strategies to improve student performance but providing the medium for

170
teacher’s access to such tools may not always be available. At Agamalu High
School, the Leadership Team for the Curriculum and Instruction Focus Group has
led the role into conducting research into effective learning and teaching strategies.
The Leadership Team has found resources from: OCIA; educational magazines;
literature; internet; and other staff and faculty leadership members.
Addressing Talent & Human Capital Issues
Principal Fa’amaoni does not have the authority to recruit necessary talent
and human capital to help improve student performance. The school site level lacks
many of the resources necessary to address human capital issues to the fullest extent
with most of the attention going to providing opportunities for professional growth
through staff development. The practice and employment policies are set by the
American Samoa Government. Another deterring factor that limits talent
management is the lack of qualified teacher applicants to realize the goal of
improving human capital issues. Until recently, principals have been given the
opportunity to offer input in teacher hiring at his school site.
Table I.1 is a summary of how Agamalu High School implements the 10
strategies to increase student performance as recommended by Odden (2010) for
doubling student performance.

171
Table I.1
Agamalu High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies to Increase Student
Performance
Instructional
Strategy
Degree of Implementation
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below
Basic
FEATURES EVIDENCE at Agamalu High School
Analyzing the
Data &
Understanding
the
Performance
Challenge
█
Analyze student
performance data from
state’s testing system
that measured student
performance
Recognize low student
performance based on
SBA and SAT10
assessment
SBA student results
SAT10 student results
Pre-Placement Exams on incoming ninth
graders
Setting
Ambitious
Goals
█
Standards must be set
high regardless of
student population and
demographics
While a common vision now exists across the
entire school along with goals for
improvement, the principal did not appear to
have set particularly ambitious targets or seem
to make an attempt to communicate the goals
for students and teachers
Implementing
an Effective
Curriculum &
Instructional
Program
█
Curriculum must be
aligned to new high
standards
Most influential to
student’s performance
Conduct curriculum
standard audits
Curriculum for ASDE according to OCIA
All teachers are well versed in analyzing the
curriculum’s coverage and gaps along with
locating providing supplementary material
when necessary.
Using
Benchmarks
and Formative
Assessments
Data-Based
Making
█
Principal Fa’amaoni demonstrates making
informed decisions on the direction of
implementing goals based on data results from
Standards Based Assessment (SBA) scores and
SAT10.
Leadership Team assists in decision direction
for school
Ongoing
Professional
Development
█
Training for teachers
to be proficient in
analyzing data to drive
the instructional
practices
Increasing
effectiveness of
teachers
OCIA initiates most professional development
for teacher content knowledge and pedagogy.
OCIA solicits assistance from local and visiting
experts of the Pacific Regional Education
Laboratory (PREL).
The schedule of the school does not provide a
defined time for ongoing regular staff
development although the principal has
implemented solutions to leverage resources
and expertise from the central office

172
Table I.1, continued

Degree of Implementation

Instructional
Strategy
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below
Basic
FEATURES EVIDENCE at Agamalu High School
Using Time
Effectively and
Efficiently
█
Make use of every
instructional minute
Increase allocation of
time to core content
areas
Instructional time is managed and monitored
by administration
School site is not authorized to allocate
resources where needed
Providing
Interventions
for Struggling
Students
█
Small class sizes
Rigorous curriculum
High-quality teachers
Credential teachers
provide tutoring
sessions
Due to the fact that Principal Fa’amaoni
does not have unconditional access to
financial resources, there has been great
reliance for intervention for struggling
students on the shoulders of teachers
volunteering personal time to afford learning
opportunities for this population.
A block schedule was implemented 2 years
ago in order to allow more time for
struggling students.
Creating
Collaborative
Cultures &
Distributed
Leadership
█
Collaborative school
culture
Role of teachers as
instructional leaders
Focus on student
learning
Agamalu’s principal has used the small
school environment to create a collaborative
culture where teachers are comfortable
participating in decisions and assuming
leadership positions when needed
Using
research-based
and proven
strategies
█
Seek research-based
and proven strategies/
practices
Professional behavior
by staff members and
teachers
Seek outside expertise
Teachers are encouraged to practice proven
and research based strategies to improve
student performance but providing the
medium for teacher’s access to such tools
may not always be available.
Addressing
Talent &
Human Capital
Issues
█ Acquire top teacher
and principal talent
Talent management to
execute improvement
strategies
The school lacks many of the resources
necessary to address human capital issues to
the fullest extent with most of the attention
going to providing opportunities for
professional growth through staff
development. This school was the only
school that utilized human capital of current
teachers to enhance the school’s website and
had continuous updates.

173
Comparison of School Resources to the Evidence-Based Model
Agamalu High School shows to a certain level, there are some existing
practices of strategies for improving student performance. However, the student
results of SBA and SAT10 scores continue to exhibit a learning gap in student
achievement that needs to be addressed.
Table I.2 shows a comparison between the suggested resources at a
prototypical high school, resource allocation at Agamalu High School and the
amount of resources that would be allocated to Agamalu High School if the
prototypical model was implemented in accordance with student enrollment at
Agamalu.

174
Table I.2
Agamalu High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison of Resource
Allocation
School Element
EBM Prototypical High
School
Agamalu High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between AHS &
EBM: EBM Resource Suggestions
School Characteristics
School Configuration 9-12 9-12
Enrollment 600 554 AHS has 6 students less than the
EBM prototype
Class Size 9-12: 25 9-12:14 9 students less at AHS: EBM
prototype has 23 students per class
Number of teacher work
days
195 teacher work days: 180
for students, 5 to open/close
schools, 10 for professional
development (14.5%)
200 days including 10 days
for intensive training
185 teacher work days –
180 intructional days, 5
for teacher professional
days profess; 180 school
days for students
10 teacher days less at AHS than
EBM, 5 professional development
days less than EBM
Number of students with
disabilities
12% 59 or 11% AHS has 1% less disabled
students
Number of poverty (free
& reduced lunch)
30% 100% AHS has 100% FRE
Percent English Language
Learner
~ 10% ~95% AHS has 85% more than EBM
Minority Students 30% ~95% 65% more minority students at
AHS
Personnel Resources
Teachers 24 per 600 39 15 more teachers at AHS
Specialist teachers 8 per 600 students
33% more: 8.0
1 EBM suggests 7 more specialist
teachers per AHS student
enrollment
Instructional
Facilitators/Mentors
3.0 (1 for every 200
students)
0 EBM suggests scbool level
resources allocation for 2.75 FTE
positions
Tutors for struggling
students
1 for every 100 poverty
students: 1.95
0 EBM suggests 5.5 FTE certified
tutors for AHS student enrollment
Teachers for ELL students Additional 1 for every 100
ELL students: 0.60
0 EBM suggests 5.5 FTE certified
ELL teachers for AHS student
enrollment
Extended day 3.0 0 EBM suggests 4.6 FTE positions
per student enrollment
Summer School 3.0 0

175
Table I.2, continued
School Element EBM Prototypical High School
Agamalu High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between AHS
& EBM: EBM Resource
Suggestions
School Characteristics
Learning & mild disabled
students
Additional 4 professional
teacher positions for 600
students
0 EBM suggests 4.6
Severely disabled students 100% state reimbursement
minus federal funds
0
Teachers for gifted students $25/student 0

Vocational Education Weight FTE voc ed by 0.29 and
provide $7000 per FTE voc ed
teacher for equipment
0
Substitutes 10 days / teacher 0 EBM suggests 10 days per
teacher
Pupil support staff 1 for every 100 poverty student
plus 1.0 guidance/250 students;
4.2
3 Counselors EBM suggests 5 plus
guidance is 2.2 more for a
total of 7.2. This is one per
hundred plus 1.0 for each
250
Noninstructional aides 3.0 0 EBM suggest 3.0
Librarians/media specialists 1.0 librarian
1.0 Library Tech
1 Librarian EBM suggests 1 Librarian
Tech
Principal 1 Principal 1 Principal and 2 Vice
Principals
EBM suggests 1
School site secretary 1.0 secretary, 2.0 clerical 1 secretary EBM suggests 2.0 clerical
more than school has
Dollar per Pupil Resources
Professional Development Included above: Instructional
Facilitators
Planning and prep time
10 summer days
Additional: $50/pupil for other
PD expenses – trainers
conferences, travel, etc.
0 EBM suggest 10 days PD in
summer and $27700 for
other PD expenses

Technology $250/pupil EBM suggests $138,500
Instructional materials,
equipment, student activities,
including textbooks
$175/pupil 0 $96,950 allocated resources
as suggested per EBM
prototype and current
student enrollment
Student activities $250/pupil 0 $138,500

176
Implications
At Agamalu High School, there is a strong belief that everyone shares the
responsibility of making fair and caring decisions to improve the commitment of
learning. Although evidence at Agamalu High School shows there are to some
degree some of Odden’s (2010) 10 strategies of doubling student performance, the
evidence in Table I.2 also indicates that allocation of resources as a catalyst for
increasing student performance is lower than what Odden and Picus (2008) EBM
suggests. The Evidence Based Model, which has been proven to work in many other
mainland states, suggests that if allocation of resources and the 10 strategies of
doubling student performance are utilized then SBA and SAT10 results will reflect
in higher student achievement.

177
APPENDIX J
FA’ATUATUA HIGH SCHOOL
Background on School
Fa’atuatua High School (FHS),first opened its doors as a vocational-trade
school in 1985, is a ninth through twelfth grade school located in the single school
district of the United States Territory of American Samoa. American Samoa’s
Department of Education (ASDE) school district is the only U.S. territory south of
the equator. ASDE educates approximately 14,150 students from pre-kindergarten
through twelfth grade. The schools of ASDE fall into five different complex
divisions and span over five different islands within the Samoan Archipelago. The
student’s race/ethnicity in ASDE falls into 3 categories; Samoan, Asian Pacific
Islander (A/PI),and other. Ninety-five percent of the total population of students in
ASDE is Samoan or part Samoan, while 5% of the students represent Asians/ Pacific
Islanders and 0% for others.
Fa’atuatua High School is the only public high school with a main curriculum
focus on vocational education and the mission statement of Fa’atuatua states it will
provide an academic foundation to fully prepare its students for vocational training
so they will successfully meet the challenges of life here (American Samoa) and
abroad. Fa’atuatua upholds strong beliefs that: each student is able to develop at his
or her own rate; each student is entitle to a quality education; each student can reach
his or her highest potential; education is a lifelong process and that the enhancement

178
of student learning is found through positive environment at home, school and the
community.
Fa’atuatua High School is located in the Midwest of the West Division of
ASDE. This division entails the largest amount of student population. In 2010, the
student enrollment for the Mid-West Division was 6448 students. This division has
two high schools and four elementary schools. Fa’atuatua High School, unlike the
other high schools, does not have limited student entry by geographical residency but
receives students from all of the villages across the territory of American Samoa
including neighboring Aunu’u Island and the Manu’a islands chain because it is a
vocational school. The various villages are divided into three groups: the Central,
the East and the West.
Fa’atuatua’s student demographics are shown in Figure J.1 which exhibits SY
2011-2012 95% Samoans, 0% Asian/Pacific Islander (A/PI), 0% Other, 10% have
IEP’s and 100% participate in the federal free or reduced price lunch program (FRL).
Fa’atuatua High School has 100% FRL participation, Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged (SED) and there are 27 students with Individualized Educational
Plans (IEPs). The United States Department of Agriculture has deemed American
Samoa 100% eligible for Free Reduced Lunch (FRL) because of the economic
disadvantages of most students within the territory. According to the 2010 Census of
American Samoa over 90% of American Samoa’s families are considered as low-
income. The high FRL is an indicator of the poverty status of the territory. Samoan
is the primary language for most of the students at FHS.

179

Figure J.1. Fa’atuatua High School student ethnic demographic for SY 2011-2012

Fa’atuatua High School’s opening enrollment for the 2011-2012 school years
was 400 students. Although the difference of student enrollment is not dramatic as
seen in Figure J.2, it shows an increase of one student from the 368 students
enrolled in SY 2008-2009 to 399 students in SY 2009-2010 but then it decreases to
387 students in SY 2010-2011. The possible factors attributing to the enrollment
decrease has been identified by Fa’atuatua HS as: students transferring away from
the territory to live with other relatives; and relocation of families to Samoa or the
United States. In SY 2011-2012, the enrollment had another decrease of student
enrollment to 345 students. Unfortunately, prior to SY 2009-2010, information of
student enrollment was not updated or recorded in the Chancery Student

180
Management System (Fa’atuatua HS Accreditation Report, 2011) because many of
the data burned in the 2009 administration building fire on campus.

Figure J.2. Fa’atuatua High School student enrollment

In 2011-2012 school year, the staff consisted of: Administration (1 Principal,
2 Vice Principals); 2 Counselors (1 for 9
th
and 10
th
grade, 1 for 11
th
and 12
th
grade); 1
Administrative Secretary; 1 Librarian; 1 Truancy Officer; 1 Custodian; 6 Food
Service Handlers; 29 Regular Classroom Teachers (4-English Department, 4-Math
Department, 3 Science Department, 4 Social Studies Department, 1 Samoan
Language/Culture, 2 Business Department, 1 PE & Health, 1 Agriculture, 1 Building

181
and Construction Technology (BCT), 1 Electricity, 1 Electronics, 1 Auto Mechanics,
1 Auto Body, 1 Small Engines, 1 Welding, 1 Family Consumer Science, 1
Information Technology (IT); 6 Special Education and 1 Resource Specialist. There
is a total of 51 Full Time Employees (FTE) at Fa’atuatua High School.
The information in Figure J.3 represents the credentialed regular teachers and
the type of credentials they have.

Figure J.3. Fa’atuatua High School credentials of teachers SY 2011-2012

182
Assessment Data - Standards Based Assessment (SBA)
American Samoa Department of Education along with Pacific Regional
Educational Laboratory (PREL) consultants developed and implemented the
Standards-Based Assessment as a tool to measure the student achievement based on
the actual territory standards that are taught in ASDE. There are two grade levels
tested with this assessment in the secondary level. All grade 10 students are tested in
the area of reading, math and writing; and all grade 11 students are tested in
Chemistry and Earth Science. The 2011-2012 school years will be the first time
ASDE will pilot Social Studies assessment for the SBA.
The result of SBA for SY 2008-2009 was used by ASDE as a baseline to
measure the achievement and progress of each school’s Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP). As seen in Figure J.4, Fa’atuatua High School has observed noticeable rising
performance of the tenth graders in the area of reading and math but in for eleventh
grade science the SBA scores stayed the same for 2009 and 2010. There was an
increase in science scores in 2011. The math scores went from 17% in SY 2009 to
19% in 2010 and in 2011 it went up one percent to 20%. The writing score increased
2% from 15% in 2009 to 17% in 2010 but dipped 6% to 11% in 2011. Despite the
obvious rising of student performance scores in SBA results for the last two years,
there is still the fact that majority of the tenth grade students perform below basic
proficiency in reading, math and writing and the eleventh grade students perform
below basic proficiency in science.

183

Figure J.4. Fa’atuatua High Schools – SBA results of students, percent proficient
and advanced on SBA

Assessment – Holt Diagnostic Assessment for Reading Intervention (DARI),
Level 9
The principal and the leadership team identified the consistent low student
performance in the SAT10 and SBA tests given to tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades
in previous school years. Although the SBA assessment is directly aligned with the
standards and benchmarks of ASDE, student performance scores were always below
average. FHS realized that reading is the key to excellent academic performance and
must be incorporated into the student curriculum to develop reading ability and
comprehension skills.

184
The administration and leadership team involved all teachers of Trades and
Academic Departments to teach reading classes. Students reading levels and
comprehension skills were identified by administering the Holt Diagnostic
Assessment for Reading Intervention (DARI), Level 9. This assessment was first
implemented in SY 2010-2011. All teachers were assigned a homeroom and
students were placed according to DARI results. Each teacher was expected to teach
reading strategies and skills to improve reading comprehension during the designated
Homereading Period that was built into the school’s bell schedule once a week for
forty minutes.

Table J.1
Reading Percent according to Grade Level (Holt – DARI, Level 9)
Grade Level
Proficient
(36-40)
Basic
(24-35)
Below Basic
(Below 24)
Test Not
Completed
12
th
Grade 2% 24% 71% 3%
11
th
Grade 0% 24% 76% 3%
10
th
Grade 4% 24% 64% 9%
9
th
Grade 0% 23% 68% 9%

In Table J.1, one can see the alarming truth of the need for intervention to
improve student reading comprehension and reading levels. According to the DARI:
there are only 2% of grade 12 population that are reading at a proficient reading

185
level; there are 24% of grade 12 population that have a basic proficiency in reading
and 71% of grade 12 population have a reading level far below basic. The pattern is
similar for the 9
th
, 10
th
and 11
th
grade population with the grade 12 population. The
chart in Figure J.5 exhibits the same information in Table J.1. The results of the
DARI reveal that the majority student population of FHS is below basic reading level
despite administering the same DARI, Level 9 test to all grade levels.

Figure J.5. Reading percent of FHS SY2010-2011 of Holt Diagnostic Assessment
for Reading Intervention (DARI), Level 9

The purpose of this case study is to analyze current resource allocation
patterns and identify effective instructional strategies that have been utilized at
Fa’atuatua High School in attempts to raise student achievement. The Evidence
Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation
will be the framework to analyze the current resource allocation patterns at

186
Fa’atuatua High School. This study will also look for evidence of Odden’s (2010)
10 Steps to Doubling Student Performance research-based strategies. The intent is
not to measure if Fa’atuatua High School has doubled student performance by
implementing Odden’s 10 Steps but to assess whether any of these strategies are in
place at the school. These two (the EBM and the 10 Steps) will offer an account of
Fa’atuatua High School’s improvement process.
Principal Lotolelei’s Story of School Improvement for Fa’atuatua High School
This current school year is Principal Lotolelei’s third year as a principal. She
began her leadership role in 2009 at Fa’atuatua High School. She has a background
as a business teacher and minimal working knowledge of trade or vocational
education. She taught for ten years and was a vice principal for eight years and was
once a recipient of the Teacher of the Year award in ASDE. In her first year as
principal, she focused on reorganizing student records and re-energizing the culture
at FHS as well as improving teacher motivation and ambition. In September 2009, a
tsunami hit the island and in November in that same year, a fire burned down the
administration building on campus. School records were completely destroyed in the
administration fire. A year later in December 2010, a new administration building
was dedicated.
With hard work, determination and collaboration from administrators,
faculty, staff and community, Fa’atuatua High School was granted a three year
accreditation from the Western Association of School and College (WASC) in July

187
2011. The school will be reviewed and revisited by WASC in spring of 2014. The
goal for the next WASC visitation is to be granted a six year accreditation.
Principal Lotolelei was asked a battery of qualitative and quantitative
questions regarding her school improvement initiatives and strategies. The dialogue
procedure utilized the Interview Protocol Questionnaire as a guide for data
collection. The responses from Principal Lotolelei along with territorial and school
documents provided the quantitative and qualitative resource data for comparison
against the Evidence Based Model.
Setting Ambitious Goals
The principal agrees there is a common vision that exists across the entire
school along with goals for improvement however, the principal did not appear to
have set particularly ambitious targets or seem to make an attempt to communicate
high goals for students and teachers. For example, the importance of student
assessment data shows performance level of student achievement and Lotolelei feels
that it is important for improvement every year but does not specify how high of a
target her goal is. The goals, as voiced by Lotolelei, should be to improve on the
scores from the last assessments. Lotolelei has shared the assessment scores of
Fa’atuatua have always been lower than most of the other high schools in the district
but her goal are to just for students to show progressive performance and improve
regardless by how much. In May of 2011, Fa’atuatua had their accreditation visit
and one of the recommendations was to improve on reading comprehension with
intervention programs so test scores would be enhanced.

188
Implementing an Effective Curriculum & Instructional Program
The Office of Curriculum, Instructions and Accountability (OCIA) mandates
all the requirements and courses offered at each school in the territory. Principal
Lotolelei states that all teachers follow the curriculum and instruction program of
ASDE as presented by the OCIA. The Standards Based Assessment (SBA) is a tool
that is used to assess tenth and eleventh graders on all the standards and benchmarks
taught to students. The SBA is directly aligned with ASDE standards and
benchmarks in the areas of reading, writing, math and science. The SBA has been
used as a tool to identify student strengths and weaknesses of each assessed standard.
According to FHS, teachers are well versed in analyzing the curriculum’s coverage
and gaps along with locating providing supplementary material when necessary.
Fa’atuatua High School recognizes that reading is the key to excellent
academic performance. The SBA student results and the SAT10 results have been
used as a driving force for the school to implement the Reading Program across the
Curriculum (RPAC). The RPAC is a school wide initiative endorsed by
administration and teachers.
Using Benchmarks and Formative Assessments Data-Based Making
Principal Lotolelei has tried to communicate some challenges facing the
entire school by the use of data presented in standardized testing and information of
FHS. She was able to articulate the main focus for the school for the current school
year is Reading Comprehension for the students as represented from the low reading
and writing scores of the territory Standard Based Assessment data.

189
Ongoing Professional Development
The practically non-existent budget for the school site hinders Principal
Lotolelei from offering ongoing professional development for the staff. Professional
development is offered from OCIA of the central office to improve teacher content
knowledge and pedagogy. OCIA solicits assistance from local and visiting experts
of the Pacific Regional Education Laboratory (PREL). The schedule of the school
does not provide a defined time for ongoing regular staff development although the
principal has implemented solutions to leverage resources and expertise from the
central office.
The principal, administrators and counselor attempt offering in-house
professional development with expertise and knowledge facilitated by members of
its own staff. There are also times when other professional agencies have conducted
workshops such as: ASDE Testing Office to explain how to analyze the SAT10
results and the SBA test results; the ASDE Voc-Ed Office; visiting professors from
University of Hawaii to assist with classroom assessment and the coordinator of the
ASVAB tests for the military.
Using Time Effectively and Efficiently
Instructional time is managed and monitored by administration. The first year
Principal Lotolelei became the new principal at FHS, she noted that the school bell
schedule was a block schedule. However, in the short time as principal, she realized
through observation the use of instructional time did not seem to be effective. She
observed in some classes where the block schedule seemed too long and instruction

190
ceased with at least half hour before the next bell. As a strong leader, she made the
decision to change the bell schedule to a six-period day schedule for the following
school year. Principal Lotolelei felt for many reasons it was a good decision to
switch the bell schedule because it helped alleviate student absenteeism and teachers
started to voice requests of shuffling certain periods. Some teachers wanted some of
the periods to rotate from the afternoon to the morning for some of the week days
because of the afternoon heat. The teachers felt it would assist on student
concentration with a cooler environment.
A weakness noted about using time effectively and efficiently is when a
teacher then other teachers are asked to cover the absent teachers load because
ASDE does not have a teacher substitute system in place. A teacher is forced to use
their preparation period to teach and therefore loses out on needed time to prepare
for their own lessons.
Providing Interventions for Struggling Students
The school lacks many of the resources necessary to address human capital
issues to the fullest extent with most of the attention going to providing opportunities
for professional growth through staff development. Due to the fact that Principal
Lotolelei does not have unconditional access to financial resources, there has been
great reliance for intervention for struggling students on the shoulders of teachers
volunteering personal time to afford learning opportunities for this population. One
prime example of an intervention is the implementation of the school wide Reading
Program across the Curriculum.

191
Fa’atuatua High School is fully staffed this school year in the academic areas,
however, the trades department still lacks a drafting teacher and has had this vacant
position for a year and half.
Creating Collaborative Cultures & Distributed Leadership
Principal Lotolelei has proven her leadership skills by trying to incorporate a
culture of collaboration at Fa’atuatua. She has used the small school environment to
create a collaborative culture where teachers are comfortable participating in
decisions and assuming leadership positions when needed.
Using research-based and proven strategies
Principal Lotolelei does encourage teachers to practice proven and research
based strategies to improve student performance but providing the medium for
teacher’s access to such tools may not always be available.
Addressing Talent & Human Capital Issues
The school lacks many of the resources necessary to address human capital
issues to the fullest extent with most of the attention going to providing opportunities
for professional growth through staff development.
ASDE has been working on assisting teacher to meet highly qualified and
teacher credential status by offering Teacher Quality Courses. The ASDE has a
Teacher Quality Office that works together with the University of Hawaii to offer
certification courses locally.

192
Table J.2
Fa’atuatua High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies to Increase Student
Performance
Instructional
Strategy
Degree of Implementation
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below
Basic
FEATURES
EVIDENCE at Fa’atuatua High
School
Analyzing the
Data &
Understanding
the
Performance
Challenge
█ Ability to recognize and
analyze data of low
student performance.
Meeting NCLB and AYP
mandates.
Accepting that change is
necessary.
This is Principal Lotolelei’s third
year serving as principal. She has
tried to communicate the challenges
facing the entire school by the use of
data presented in standardized
testing. She was able to articulate the
main focus for the school is Reading
Comprehension for the students. .
Setting
Ambitious
Goals
█ Steady improvement in SBA student
performance scores in reading
Implementing
an Effective
Curriculum &
Instructional
Program
█ Current curriculum must
be aligned with to new
high standards
Most influential
component on student
performance.
RPAC Implementation at FHS
The Office of Curriculum,
Instructions and Accountability
(OCIA) mandates all the
requirements and courses offered at
each school in the territory. The SBA
has been used as a tool to identify
student strengths and weaknesses of
each assessed standard. All teachers
are well versed in analyzing the
curriculum’s coverage and gaps along
with locating providing
supplementary material when
necessary.
Using
Benchmarks
and Formative
Assessments
Data-Based
Making
█ Use student data to
identify needs and drive
decisions
Use appropriate
assessment strategies in
the classroom to provide
appropriate instruction
Principal Lotolelei demonstrates
making informed decisions on the
direction of implementing goals
based on data results from Standards
Based Assessment (SBA) scores and
SAT10.
Ongoing
Professional
Development
█ Training for teachers to
be proficient in analyzing
data to drive instructional
practices
Increasing effectiveness
of teachers
OCIA initiated
Administration initiated and
conducted

193
Table J.2, continued
Degree of Implementation
Instructional
Strategy
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below
Basic
FEATURES
EVIDENCE at Fa’atuatua High
School
Using Time
Effectively
and Efficiently
█ Make use of every
instructional minute
comprising the 180-day
school year
Increase allocation of
time to core content
teachers/areas
Instructional time is managed and
monitored by administration.
Providing
Interventions
for Struggling
Students
█ Offer small classes
Tutoring with credential
teachers
Offer rigorous curriculum
Offer High-quality
teachers
Due to the fact that Principal
Lotolelei does not have unconditional
access to financial resources, there
has been great reliance for
intervention for struggling students
on the shoulders of teachers
volunteering personal time to afford
learning opportunities for this
population.
Creating
Collaborative
Cultures &
Distributed
Leadership
█ Fa’atuatua’s principal has used the
small school environment to create a
collaborative culture where teachers
are comfortable participating in
decisions and assuming leadership
positions when needed
Using
research-based
and proven
strategies
█ Principal Lotolelei does encourage
teachers to practice proven and
research based strategies to improve
student performance but providing
the medium for teacher’s access to
such tools may not always be
available.
Addressing
Talent &
Human Capital
Issues
█ The school lacks many of the
resources necessary to address human
capital issues to the fullest extent
with most of the attention going to
providing opportunities for
professional growth through staff
development.

194
Table J.3
Fa’atuatua High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison of Resource
Allocation
School Element
EBM Prototypical High
School
Fa’atuatua High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between FHS &
EBM: EBM Resource
Suggestions
School Characteristics
School Configuration 9-12 9-12
Enrollment 600 345 EBM suggests 600, FHS is 57%
of the size of the prototype
referenced or suggested student
enrollment of the EBM.
Class Size 9-12: 25 9-12: 9-12:
Number of teacher work
days
195 teacher work days: 180
for students, 5 to open/close
schools, 10 for professional
development (14.5%)
200 days including 10 days
for intensive training
205 Teacher work days:
200 for students, 5 for
teacher professional
development at the
beginning of the school
year

Number of students with
disabilities
27
Number of poverty (free
& reduced lunch)
30% 100% 70% more
Percent English Language
Learner
~ 10% ~95% 85% more than EBM
Minority Students ~95%
Personnel Resources
Teachers 24 per 600 15 more
Specialist teachers 8 per 600 students
33% more: 8.0
2 EBM suggests 7 more?
Instructional
Facilitators/Mentors
3.0 (1 for every 200
students)
0 EBM suggests 2.75 6
Tutors for struggling
students
1 for every 100 poverty
students: 1.95
0 EBM suggests 5.5 6
Teachers for ELL
students
Additional 1 for every 100
ELL students: 0.60
0 EBM suggests 5.5 6
Extended day 3.0 0 EBM suggests 4.6 3
Summer School 3.0 0

195
Table J.3, continued
School Element
EBM Prototypical High
School
Fa’atuatua High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between FHS
& EBM: EBM Resource
Suggestions
School Characteristics
Learning & mild disabled
students
Additional 4 professional
teacher positions for 600
students
EBM suggests 4.6 Why?
Severely disabled students 100% state reimbursement
minus federal funds
0
Teachers for gifted students $25/student 0
Vocational Education Weight FTE voc ed by 0.29
and provide $7000 per FTE
voce d teacher for
equipment

Substitutes 10 days / teacher 0 EBM suggests 10 days per
teacher
Pupil support staff 1 for every 100 poverty
student plus 1.0
guidance/250 students; 4.2
1 Counselors EBM suggests 5 plus
guidance is 2.2 more for a
total of 7.2. This is one per
hundred plus 1.0 for each
250
Noninstructional aides 3.0 0 EBM suggest 3.0
Librarians/media specialists 1.0 librarian
1.0 Library Tech
1 Librarian EBM suggests 1 Librarian
Tech
Principal 1 Principal 1 Principal and 2 Vice
Principals
EBM suggests 1 librarian
School site secretary 1.0 secretary, 2.0 clerical 1 secretary EBM suggests 2.0 clerical
more than school has
Dollar per Pupil Resources
Professional Development Included above:
Instructional Facilitators
Planning and prep time
10 summer days
Additional: $50/pupil for
other PD expenses – trainers
conferences, travel, etc.
0 EBM suggest 10 days PD
in summer and $ for other
PD expenses
Technology $250/pupil 0 EBM suggests $18,000
Instructional materials,
equipment, student activities,
including textbooks
$175/pupil 0 EBM suggests $12,600
Student activities $250/pupil 0 EBM suggests $18,000

196
Implications
At Fa’atuatua High School, the dedication of administration and staff has
demonstrated the strong belief of the school that each student has value and is able to
develop at his or her own rate. FHS believe that each student is entitling to a quality
education and students can even learn with limited financial support from ASDE and
the uncertainty of the district’s budget.
The administration, faculty and staff have initiated strategies and practices
with hope to improve student performance. The student assessment results have
shown in the last few years, Fa’atuatua High School has made consistent
improvement in increasing student performance in reading content of the SBA. The
collaboration of administration and faculty to implement the RPAC has proven to be
fruitful in their effort to improve reading comprehension.

197
APPENDIX K
OLIOLI HIGH SCHOOL
Background on School
Olioli High School (OHS) is a ninth through twelfth grade school located in
the single school district of the United States Territory of American Samoa. This
school was established in 1966 and remains the smallest of the six public high
schools of ASDE. In 1970, Olioli High School graduated its first class. Olioli High
School maintains a strong philosophy that all students can learn. At Olioli High
School, its vision is to elevate and maintain a culture of purposeful and passionate
learners. The mission of the school is to produce skilled and compassionate students.
American Samoa’s Department of Education (ASDE) school district educates
approximately 14,150 students from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade. The
schools of ASDE fall into five different complex divisions and span over five
different islands within the Samoan Archipelago. The student’s race or ethnicity in
ASDE fall into 3 categories; Samoan, Asian Pacific Islander (A/PI) and Other.
Ninety-five percent of the total population of students in ASDE is Samoan or part
Samoan, while 5% of the students represent Asians/ Pacific Islanders and 0% for
Others.
The milieu of OHS lies in the Manu’a island chains approximately 62 miles
due east of Tutuila. It is on the island of Ta’u and is settled atop ten acres of the
village hills of Ta’u. Ta’u Island is comprised of three villages; Faleasao, Fitiuta and

198
Ta’u. There are two other islands of the Manu’a islands group, Ofu and Olosega,
which lay due west of the island of Ta’u.
The daily life of youths in Manu’a thrives on the well-being of the
community; family; the village; church; the culture of fa’aSamoa and school. A
strong community is an important factor of the common regime in Manu’a. The
culture of fa’a Samoa is very much visible, applied and established in the
conventional lifestyle and community of the Manu’a people. The practical methods
of self-sustenance are daily farming and fishing.
According to the Department of Commerce (2012),, Manu’a Island groups’
population is about 1,143 individuals from which 70% of the residents live on the
island of Ta’u. The population of the village of Faleasao has 162 people; the village
of Fitiuta has 270 people and 358 people live in the village of Ta’u. The average
household size in Manu’a is between six to nine people. It approximated 51.4% of
the families earn $8,000 to $15,000 per annum. Another 20.8% of the families earn
$16,000 to $20,000 per annum and 16.6% earn more than $21,000 per year. There
were 11.2% of the families that did not disclose information of family annual
income.
Due to limited opportunity for employment, many of the parents of OHS live
on the main island of the American Samoa archipelago of Tutuila. There are
approximately 20-30% of students that live with guardians or grandparents while
their parents are employed on the island of Tutuila.

199
The Complex Division of this most eastern island includes three islands,
three villages, three feeder schools and one high school, however, for the school year
2011-2012 none of the students enrolled were from the neighboring two islands. The
2010 Census showed a decrease of the territory population as a whole but showed
that the complex division population where Olioli High School locale has stayed
relatively the same since the 2000 Census. However, the population of student
enrollment at Olioli steadily decreased from school years 2009 until school years
2011 by 10 students. The current enrollment of Olioli HS is 72 students.
The United States Department of Agriculture has deemed American Samoa
100% eligible for Free Reduced Lunch (FRL) because of the economic
disadvantages of most students within the territory. According to the 2010 Census of
American Samoa over 90% of American Samoa’s families are considered as low-
income. Olioli High School has 100% FRL participation, Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged (SED) and there are thirteen students with Individualized Educational
Plans (IEPs). Olioli’s student demographics are shown in Figure K.1, which exhibits
100% Samoans, 0% A/PI, 0% Other, 10% have IEP’s and 100% participate in the
federal free or reduced price lunch program (FRL). The high FRL is an indicator of
the poverty status of the territory. Samoan is the primary language for all of the
students at OHS. Unlike the other public high schools of ASDE, Olioli is the only
high school in the Manu’a chain and is detached approximately by 62 miles of ocean
while the other five high schools are all located on the main island of Tutuila.

200

Figure K.1. Olioli High School student ethnic demographic for SY 2011-2012

Olioli High School’s opening enrollment for the 2011-2012 school years was
72 students. Although the difference of student enrollment is not dramatic as seen in
Figure K.2, it shows an increase of one student from enrollment in SY 2007-2008
and SY 2008-2009 of 81 students to 82 students in SY 2009-2010 but then it
decreases to 76 students in SY 2010-2011. In SY 2011-2012, another drop of
enrollment of 72 students is noticeable. The possible factors attributing to the steady
enrollment decrease in the last three school years has been identified by Olioli HS as:

201
family’s relocation to the main island of Tutuila, American Samoa for schooling
opportunities; students transferring away from the territory to live with other
relatives; and relocation of families to Samoa or the United States.

Figure K.2. Olioli High School student enrollment

In 2011-2012 school years, there were 12 regular classroom teachers at Olioli
High School (2 Special Education (SPED) teachers); 3 school administrators (1
principal who teaches one English course, 1 vice principal that has dual
responsibility of administrator and counselor for all grades, 1 liaison manager who
also teaches English and music), 1 librarian, 1 office manager, 4 custodians, 5 food

202
service handlers and 2 student transportation for a total of 28 full time employees
(FTE).
Throughout the life of this particular school, it has always been a challenge to
staff this school with highly qualified and certified instructors. The turnover rate for
teachers at OHS is higher than the other public high school in ASDE.
Approximately 40% of the teachers will not return to OHS for the new school year.
There are also volunteers from the World Teach Volunteers who teach for only one
term and receive a stipend instead of a regular teacher salary. This high turnover has
proven to be a challenge for growth and continuity of certain programs such as
science and math. However, there seems to be a strong sense of dedication among
staff members on improving student work and learning.
There is more than eighty percent of the regular teaching staff having degrees
and most of this population is teaching in the field they have received their degree.
Approximately seventy five percent of the regular classroom teachers have had
teaching experience prior to the current school year. The other twenty-five percent
have had no teaching experience prior to the current school year. The Staff and
Faculty Credentials are shown in Figure K.3. There are ten teachers who are
certified per ASDE teacher certification requirements. There is one individual that
has a Master level degree, 7 teachers have a Bachelors level degree, 4 individuals
have an Associates level degree and none of the teachers have less than an
Associates level degree. Three new positions have been added to teacher and faculty

203
staff positions. Of the three administrators, two have a Bachelors level degree and
one has an Associates level degree.

Figure K.3. Olioli High School credentials of teachers SY 2011-2012

The purpose of this case study is to analyze current resource allocation
patterns and identify effective instructional strategies that have been utilized at Olioli
High School in attempts to raise student achievement. The Evidence Based Model
(Odden & Picus, 2008) of finance adequacy and resource allocation will be the
framework to analyze the current resource allocation patterns. This study will also

204
look for evidence of Odden’s (2010) 10 Steps to Doubling Student Performance
research-based strategies. The intent is not to measure if Olioli High School has
doubled student performance by implementing Odden’s 10 Steps but to assess
whether any of these strategies are in place at the school. These two (the EBM and
the 10 Steps) will offer an account of Olioli High School’s improvement process.
Assessments and Data - Standards Based Assessment (SBA) and SAT10
American Samoa Department of Education along with Pacific Regional
Educational Laboratory (PREL) consultants developed and implemented the
Standards-Based Assessment as a tool to measure the student achievement based on
the actual territory standards that are taught in ASDE. There are two grade levels
tested with this assessment in the secondary level. All grade 10 students are tested in
the area of reading, math and writing; and all grade 11 students are tested in
Chemistry and Earth Science. The 2011-2012 school years will be the first time
ASDE will pilot Social Studies assessment for the SBA.
The result of SBA for SY 2008-2009 was used by ASDE as a baseline to
measure the achievement and progress of each school’s Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP). The AYP is a requirement under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
legislation. There are four criteria covered in the AYP: graduation rate, participation
rate, percent proficient and attendance rate. As seen in Figure K.4, Olioli High
School has observed noticeable progress of the tenth graders in the area of reading,
writing, science but in math there was an increase and then drop. The math scores
went from 28% in SY 2009 and jumped to 33% in SY 2010 but in SY 2011 it

205
dropped down 6% with student scoring at 27%. The writing score, however,
exhibited a constant increase from 16% in 2009 to 17% in 2010 and then jumped up
7% in 2011 with students scoring 24%. In science, the scores had a dramatic
increase from SY 2009 when it was 13% and then jumped up to 30% in SY 2010.
Although the science score dropped to 23% in SY 2011 it still shows a 10% increase
since SY 2009. In reading, the SY 2009 students scored 30% and then had a slight
decrease in SY 2010 when students scored 28%. However, by SY 2011 the reading
scores soared up to 52% with an increase of 24%.

Figure K.4. Olioli High Schools – SBA Results of students, percent proficient and
advanced on SBA

206
SAT10 Results for twelfth graders
The Stanford Achievement Test 10
th
Edition (SAT10) is a normative
assessment utilized by ASDE to compare the group performance between students
from the local schools and peers in the United States in twelve different skill areas.
The student’s tests are sent to the United States and norm referenced to schools in the
United States. The percentile ranks are mainly used to compare group performance.
There is only one grade level tested in this area which is the current grade twelve
students within ASDE public high schools.
The SAT10 Stanine Scores are based on a scale of 1 to 9. The stanine scores
are as follows: a stanine score of 1 represents Far Below Average; a stanine score of
2 represents Well Below Average; a stanine score of 3 represents Below Average; a
stanine score of 4 represents Low Average; a stanine score of 5 represents Average;
a stanine score of 6 represents High Average; a stanine score of 7 represents Low
Advance; a stanine score of 8 represents Advanced; and a stanine score of 9
represents High Advance.
In Figure K.5, the SAT10 scores for Olioli High School school years 2008 to
2009 are represented. According to this graph, the Grade 12 Stanine Comparative
Graph of OHS do show evidence of positive growth in its scores for some of the
content clusters from stanine 3 to stanine 4. Although Olioli High School is located
in a territory of the United States, there is an unmistakable achievement gap of
student performance in American Samoa with comparison of student achievement of
students across the nation when looking at the SAT10 results. The SAT10 Stanine

207
scores puts OHS at stanine score of 3 which is below average and stanine score of 4
which is low average in comparison with other peers from the United States.

Figure K.5. Olioli High School SAT10 Stanine scores comparative graph

Elements and Themes of Principal Ma’ema’ea’s Improvement Process for Olioli
High School
This is Principal Ma’ema’ea’s first year as a principal. She is a seasoned
educator who has been working with ASDE for over fifteen years before being
appointed to be the leader of Olioli High School in 2011. She received the
prestigious Teacher of the Year award for the territory of American Samoa in 2009.
Principal Ma’ema’ea was asked a battery of qualitative and quantitative questions
regarding her school improvement initiatives and strategies. The dialogue procedure

208
utilized the Interview Protocol Questionnaire as a guide for data collection. The
responses from Principal Ma’ema’ea along with territorial and school documents
provided the quantitative and qualitative resource data for comparison against the
Evidence Based Model.
Analyzing the Data & Understanding the Performance Challenge
Principal Ma’ema’ea, as a first year principal, has exhibited some
understanding of the challenges of student performance and staff perceptions of
OHS. She has disclosed challenges for both the students and teachers that hinder
higher levels of achievement for student performance. Some of the challenges the
principal has shared is the remoteness of Olioli High School which prevents both
teachers and students to an array of resources that the other high schools have on the
main island of Tutuila. Another problem is securing certified and highly qualified
teachers have been difficult.
Principal Ma’ema’ea, administrators and faculty utilize the SBA student
results of OHS to guide their implementation of strategies.
Setting Ambitious Goals
Principal Ma’ema’ea did not communicate any ambitious goals for this
current school year but she did comment that a 5% increase in test assessments was
one of the goals. This year’s main goal was to improve student reading
comprehension evidenced by current test scores for this school year and following
school year.

209
Implementing an Effective Curriculum & Instructional Program
The Office of Curriculum, Instructions and Accountability (OCIA) mandates
all the requirements and courses offered at each school in the territory. Olioli High
School states they offer a challenging curriculum which has been designed to fulfill
the vision, mission and goal of the school. The courses offered at the school fulfill
requirements of ASDE. The school, regardless of its location and population, is
determined to offer students advanced courses for those who have high aptitude and
academic merit.
Principal Ma’ema’ea and staff realize that the small enrollment of students at
OHS allows for effective instruction because there is more interaction on a one-to-
one basis with students. The small population allows for a near personalized
program for each student and allows teachers more opportunity to monitor student
progress. The teachers and administrators have devised support plans for extra
assistance for students that have been identified to need this type of support.
Using Benchmarks and Formative Assessments Data-Based Making
Olioli High School has used SBA student scores for the last three years to
identify weaknesses and strengths in the student’s ability of academic proficiency.
The SBA scores are directly aligned with benchmark and standards of ASDE.
Assessments of benchmarks provide quicker feedback for teachers to give. There are
two grade levels that are assessed every year to analyze students’ needs. The
reading, writing and math content are assessed with the current tenth graders and the
science content is assessed by the current eleventh graders.

210
The principal encourages the use of data for teachers to drive instruction.
The data on student performance allows the teachers to enhance the art of
instruction. The consistent use formative and summative assessments by teachers
encourage improvement in the learning process for students. The more
measurements of student knowledge and achievement allows for teachers to be more
efficient and effective in student performance.
Ongoing Professional Development
At Olioli High School, professional development is not built into the teacher
contract but over the last two school years, the staff has participated in several
workshops and professional visitations. Professional development is offered from
OCIA of the central office to improve teacher content knowledge and pedagogy.
OCIA solicits assistance from local and visiting experts of the Pacific Regional
Education Laboratory (PREL). There has been evidence of in-service workshops
initiated not only by OCIA personnel but by staff and faculty of OHS.
The limited budget across ASDE does not give the opportunity to Principal
Ma’ema’ea and OHS staff to personalize professional development according to
OHS needs but it is OCIA and ASDE central office directed. The schedule of the
school does not provide a defined time for ongoing regular staff development
although the principal has implemented solutions to leverage resources and expertise
from the central office. Staff members engage in professional development at least
twice a month.

211
For the school year 2011-2012, these are some of the areas of what
professional development has entailed at OHS for all instructional staff who have
direct effect on student performance; SMART Board Education Training; New
Directions for Education Workshop from a former World Teach Volunteer; OCIA
workshop on lesson planning and standards and benchmarks; Content Area
Orientation and Technology Workshop; Guidance and Counseling workshop. There
is evidence of other professional development specific to certain participants such as:
sanitation and nutrition workshops for school lunch personnel at OHS; World Teach
Observation for the World Teach Volunteers; Joint Service Orientation Curriculum
and Information Technology Service for JROTC program and Teaching in American
History Workshop for history instructors only.
There are opportunities throughout the year where teachers will attend DOE
workshops on the main island of Tutuila. These representatives return to OHS and
conduct workshops for the staff of what they learned at Tutuila. The principal
encourages all of staff participation in development sessions to ensure everyone is
afforded equal opportunity for professional growth.
Using Time Effectively and Efficiently
The strategy of using time efficiently and effectively considers a fixed
resource. This fixed resource is the instructional time during the regular school day.
The bell schedule in Table K.1 shows the bell schedule for all of the periods during
the week. It represents one day where there are six periods in a day and four of the

212
days have six period times but actual periods like a block schedule for four of the
five instructional days of the week.
According to OHS Self-Study Report (2012), teachers turn in lesson plans to
respective administrators weekly. Each lesson plan should outline daily lessons and
objectives and also include the ESLR(s) that are addressed by the chosen lessons.

Table K.1
Bell Schedule at Olioli High School
Start
Time
End
Time Length Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
0745 0830 45 min Period 1 Period 4 Period 2 Period 5 Period 1
0835 0920 45 min Period 1 Period 4 Period 2 Period 5 Period 2
0935 1020 45 min Period 2 Period 5 Period 3 Period 6 Period 3
1025 1110 45 min Period 2 Period 5 Period 3 Period 6 Period 4
1110 1150 40 min Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch
1155 1240 45 min Period 3 Period 6 Period 1 Period 4 Period 5
1245 1330 45 min Period 3 Period 6 Period 1 Period 4 Period 6

Providing Interventions for Struggling Students
Olioli High School realizes the need to provide interventions for struggling
students despite the limited access to financial and educational resources. An on-
going component for the last three school years has been to offer after school
tutorials for the students in the areas of reading, writing and math. Teachers and

213
administrators have offered their own individual time to provide this opportunity for
the students without any more compensation other than their regular salary.
There are no curriculum coaches at the school site for struggling student
intervention.
Creating Collaborative Cultures & Distributed Leadership
OHS principal has used the small school environment to create a
collaborative culture where teachers are comfortable participating in decisions and
assuming leadership positions when needed.
Using research-based and proven strategies
Despite the geographical isolation and limited access to resources of Olioli
High School, Principal Ma’ema’ea does encourage teachers to practice proven and
research based strategies to improve student performance and refashion teaching
strategies but providing the medium for teacher’s access to such tools may not
always be available. OCIA conducted a workshop on benchmarks and standards
alignment to ensure teachers had a firm direction of the curriculum. PREL offered a
workshop on Learning Profiles that offered a lot of research-based strategies that
could be applied within the instructional classrooms.
Other evidence of available research-based and proven strategies
implemented at OHS is: professional workshops; guided counseling workshops;
local summit; Standards and Benchmarks workshops; and used of educational
websites.

214
Addressing Talent & Human Capital Issues
Due to the hiring process practices and policies of ASDE, hiring does not
occur at the school site level at any of the schools within the district. The Olioli
High School lacks many of the resources necessary to address human capital issues
to the fullest extent with most of the attention going to providing opportunities for
professional growth through staff development. However, the World Teach program
has been of prominent support in delivering teachers to OHS in an efficient manner.

215
Table K.2
Olioli High School Implementation of the Ten Strategies to Increase Student
Performance
Instructional
Strategy
Degree of Implementation
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below Basic
FEATURES EVIDENCE at Olioli High School
Analyzing the
Data &
Understanding
the Performance
Challenge
█ Recognizing low student
performance is necessary for
accountability NCLB
mandates and AYP
SBA student results for 10
th
and 11
th

graders are low
SAT10 results for 12
th
grade are low
Setting
Ambitious Goals
█ Standards must be high
regardless of student
population
Maintain high standards to
create a culture of success
Increase student motivation
While a common vision now exists
across the entire school along with
goals for improvement, the principal
did not appear to have set particularly
ambitious targets or seem to make an
attempt to communicate the goals for
students and teachers.
Implementing an
Effective
Curriculum &
Instructional
Program
█ Curriculum must be aligned
to new high standards
Most influential component
on student performance
Standards and Benchmarks aligned to
SBA
Expected Schoolwide Learning
Results (ESLRs)
Using
Benchmarks and
Formative
Assessments
Data-Based
Making
█ Use student data to identify
needs and drive decisions
Use appropriate assessment
strategies in the classroom
to provide instruction
SBA Test Scores (for tenth and
eleventh graders)
SAT10 Scores
Ongoing
Professional
Development
█ Training for teachers to
become proficient in
analyzing data to drive
instructional practices
Increasing effectiveness of
teachers
OCIA initiated.
Planning and Standards Benchmarks
Content Area Orientation Workshops
Technology Workshops
Using Time
Effectively and
Efficiently
█ Instructional time is managed and
monitored by administration.

216
Table K.2, continued

Degree of Implementation

Instructional
Strategy
Advanced
Proficient
Basic
Below Basic
Far Below Basic
FEATURES EVIDENCE at Olioli High School
Providing
Interventions for
Struggling
Students
█ Small class sizes
Credentialed and Highly
Qualified Teachers
Due to the fact that Principal
Ma’ema’ea does not have
unconditional access to financial
resources, there has been great
reliance for intervention for
struggling students on the shoulders
of teachers volunteering personal
time to afford learning opportunities
for this population.
Creating
Collaborative
Cultures &
Distributed
Leadership
█ Role of teachers as
instructional leaders
Intense focus on student
learning
Collaborative school culture
SBA student results
Teacher / Administration
collaboration
Ongoing PD
Using research-
based and proven
strategies
█
Addressing
Talent & Human
Capital Issues
█ Finding the right people to
carry out the new demands
of improving student
performance
Principal and teacher talent
The central office distributes funding
to school levels.
Principals have no authority of hiring
personnel.

217
Table K.3
Olioli High School and Evidence Based Model Comparison of Resource Allocation
School Element
EBM Prototypical High
School
Olioli High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between OHS
& EBM: EBM Resource
Suggestions
School Characteristics
School Configuration 9-12 9-12
Enrollment 600 72 EBM suggests 600; 8.3
times smaller
Class Size 9-12: 25 9-12: 6 OHS has 19 less students on
average than EBM suggests
Number of teacher work days 195 teacher work days: 180
for students, 5 to open/close
schools, 10 for professional
development (14.5%)
200 days including 10 days
for intensive training
185 teacher work days –
180 intructional days, 5
for teacher professional
development; 180 school
days for students
OHS has 10 less teacher
days and 5 less professional
development for teachers
Number of students with
disabilities (w/IEP)
14.5% 13 IEP
Number of poverty (free &
reduced lunch)
30% 100% (72 students) OHS has 70% more than
EBM
Percent English Language
Learner
~ 10% 100% OHS has 85% more than
EBM
Minority Students (non-
white)
100%
Personnel Resources
Teachers 24 per 600 12 15 more
Specialist teachers 8 per 600 students
33% more: 8.0
2 EBM suggests 7 more?
Instructional
Facilitators/Mentors
3.0 (1 for every 200
students)
0 EBM suggests 6
Instructional
Facilitators/Mentors
Tutors for struggling students 1 for every 100 poverty
students: 1.95
0 EBM suggests 6 certified
tutors for struggling students
Teachers for ELL students Additional 1 for every 100
ELL students: 0.60
0 EBM suggests 6 certified
teachers for ELL population
Extended day 3.0 0 EBM suggests 4.6 certified
teachers for extended day
Summer School 3.0 0

218
Table K.3, continued
School Element
EBM Prototypical High
School
Olioli High School
Current Resource Status
Comparison between OHS
& EBM: EBM Resource
Suggestions
School Characteristics
Learning & mild disabled
students
Additional 4 professional
teacher positions for 600
students
0 EBM suggests allocated
resources for 4.6 FTE
positions
Severely disabled students 100% state reimbursement
minus federal funds
0 0
Teachers for gifted students $25/student 0 0
Vocational Education Weight FTE voc ed by 0.29
and provide $7000 per FTE
voce d teacher for equipment
4 teachers EBM suggest $28,000 for
equipment
Substitutes 10 days / teacher 0 EBM suggests 10 days per
teacher
Pupil support staff 1 for every 100 poverty
student plus 1.0
guidance/250 students; 4.2
1 Counselors EBM suggests 5 plus
guidance is 2.2 more for a
total of 7.2. This is one per
hundred plus 1.0 for each
250
Noninstructional aides 3.0 0 EBM suggest 3.0
Librarians/media specialists 1.0 librarian
1.0 Library Tech
1 Librarian EBM suggests 1 Librarian
Tech
Principal 1 Principal 1 Principal and 2 Vice
Principals
EBM suggests 1 principal
sufficient for enrollment size
School site secretary 1.0 secretary, 2.0 clerical 1 secretary EBM suggests 2.0 clerical
more than school has
Dollar per Pupil Resources
Professional Development Included above: Instructional
Facilitators
Planning and prep time
10 summer days
Additional: $50/pupil for
other PD expenses – trainers
conferences, travel, etc.
0 EBM suggest 10 days PD in
summer and $3,600 for other
PD expenses
Technology $250/pupil 0 EBM suggests $18,000
Instructional materials,
equipment, student activities,
including textbooks
$175/pupil 0 EBM suggests $12,600
Student activities $250/pupil 0 EBM suggests $18,000

219
Implications
At Olioli High School, there is a strong belief that everyone shares the
responsibility of making fair and caring decisions to improve the commitment of
learning. Although evidence at Olioli High School shows there are to some degree
some of Odden’s (2010) 10 strategies of doubling student performance, the evidence
in Table K.3 also indicates that allocation of resources as a catalyst for increasing
student performance is lower than what Odden and Picus (2008) EBM suggests.
Evidence present at OHS also exhibits there are more teachers than what the EBM
prototypical suggests for resource allocation. The Evidence Based Model, which has
been proven to work in many other mainland states, suggests that if allocation of
resources and the 10 strategies of doubling student performance are utilized then
SBA and SAT10 results will reflect in higher student achievement.
At OHS, the budget is very limited and strictly allocated by the central ASDE
office and OCIA. There is limited opportunity for professional development
opportunities for faculty, staff and administrators.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to analyze American Samoa Department of Education (ASDE) and collect allocation of resources data and determine how the resources are used to increase student performance among a purposeful sample of three public high schools with similar demographics, challenges, fiscal constraints and funding sources located in the territory of American Samoa. Sample schools were non-charter, Title I, public schools with student populations of 95%-100% Samoan, 95%-100% English Language Learners, 100% eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch per USDA, 100% socioeconomically disadvantaged and produced similar assessment scores on the local SBA. ❧ The case studies collected data from school and government documents, performance assessment data of ASDE Standards Based Assessments (SBA) scores for the sample schools, and information from interviews to analyze the practice of resource allocation and implemented strategies to increase student performance at the school site level as well as compare it with the frameworks of the Evidence-Based Models (EBM) of resource allocation (Odden & Picus, 2008) and Odden's (2010) Strategies for Doubling Student Performance. ❧ The findings found ASDE: spent far below the national average for per-pupil expenditure

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Resource allocation strategies and educational adequacy: an examination of an academic & financial plan used to allocate resources to strategies that promote student achievement in Hawaii

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student learning: case studies of California schools

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student learning: case studies of California schools

PDF

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

PDF

Personnel resource allocations: a case study of one Hawaii complex

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: Case studies of non-title I schools

PDF

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

PDF

Maunalani complex: a resource allocation study

PDF

The allocation of resources at the school level to improve learning for struggling readers: What is adequate?

PDF

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

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Nikolao-Mutini, Akenese Epifania (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/03/2012

Defense Date 09/14/2012

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

Tag American Samoa,American Samoa Department of Education,double student performance,EBM,evidence-based model strategies,finance adequacy,OAI-PMH Harvest,resource allocation,Samoan,secondary schools,student performance

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Brewer, Dominic J. (committee member), Sundt, Melora A. (committee member)

Creator Email anikolaomutini@gmail.com,anikolaomutini@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-100128

Unique identifier UC11288911

Identifier usctheses-c3-100128 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-NikolaoMut-1221.pdf

Dmrecord 100128

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Nikolao-Mutini, Akenese Epifania

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