Paper

LSC Year Two Cross-Site Report

October 1997
Horizon Research, Inc.
111 Cloister Court - Suite 220
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-2296

0. Community Type for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 Schools
1. Student Race/Ethnicity for Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 Schools
2. Characteristics of Students in LSC Schools
3. Involvement of School Personnel in Addition to Classroom Teachers
4. Outreach to Groups External to the School
5. Composite: Quality of District Professional Development
6. Participants in Observed LSC Professional Development Activities
7. Major Disciplinary Content Areas of Observed Science Professional Development Activities
8. Major Disciplinary Content Areas of Observed Mathematics Professional Development Activities
9. Pedagogical Content Areas of Observed LSC Professional Development Activities
10. Components of Professional Development System
11. Teachers' Assessment of LSC Professional Development Activities
12. Professional Development Session Ratings-Design
13. Professional Development Session Ratings-Implementation
14. Professional Development Session Ratings-Disciplinary Content
15. Professional Development Session Ratings-Pedagogical Content
16. Professional Development Session Ratings-Classroom Culture
17. Professional Development Session Ratings-Capacity for Exemplary Instruction
18. Professional Development Session Ratings-Leadership Capacity
19. Professional Development Capsule Ratings of Observed Sessions
20. Schools Heavily Involved in Reform in Each Subject
21. Schools "well-along" in Improving their Program
22. Composite: Attitudes Toward Teaching
23. "I enjoy teaching science/mathematics"
24. "Students learn science/mathematics best with students of similar abilities"
25. Importance of Various Alternative Assessment Techniques
26. Level of Preparedness to Teach Science/Mathematics
27. "I am Well-Informed About National Standards in Science/Mathematics"
28. Composite: Preparation-Knowledge of Science/Mathematics Topics
29. Principal Concerns: Effect of Teacher Preparation on Science/Mathematics Instruction
30. Composite: Preparation-Pedagogical Content
31. Composite: Preparation-Instructional Strategies
32. Pedagogical Strategies: Comparison of Teachers Responding "Very Important" and "Very Well Prepared" to Use Various Strategies
33. Instructional Strategies: Comparison of Teachers Responding "Very Important" and "Very Well Prepared" to Use Various Strategies
34. Assessment Strategies: Comparison of Teachers Responding "Very Important" and "Very Well Prepared" to Use Various Strategies
35. Composite: Preparation-Equity and Diversity
36. Level of Preparedness to Involve Parents
37. Teachers Reporting Instruction in Each Subject on All 5 of the Last 5 days
38. Composite: Use of Student Centered Strategies
39. Composite: Investigative Culture
40. Composite: Use of Assessment Strategies
41. Class Size
42. Minority Enrollment in Observed Classes
43. Purposes of Science and Mathematics Lessons
44. Focus of Science Lessons
45. Focus of Cohort 2 Mathematics Lessons
46. Lessons with High Ratings For Design
47. Lessons with High Ratings for Implementation
48. Lessons with High Ratings for Content
49. Lessons with High Ratings for Classroom Culture
50. Lessons with High Ratings for Likely to Enhance Student Ability
51. Cohort 1 Teachers Feeling At Least Fairly Well Prepared
52. Cohort 1 Science Classes Engaged in Hands-on Activities At Least Once a Week
53. 1996 LSC Science Composites by Extent of Teacher Participation in Professional Development
54. 1996 LSC Mathematics Composites by Extent of Teacher Participation in Professional Development
55. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared to Teach Mathematics Topic
56. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared to Teach Each Science Topic
57. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared For Each Activity-Science
58. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared For Each Activity-Mathematics
59. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared in Aspects of Equity and Diversity-Science
60. Teachers Feeling Very Well Prepared in Aspects of Equity and Diversity -Mathematics
61. Instructional Strategies in Science Classes
62. Instructional Strategies in Mathematics Classes
63. Teacher Perceptions of Support from Colleagues
64. Composite: Administrative Support
65. Composite: Parent Support
66. Principal Knowledge of National Standards
67. Composite: Alignment of District Policies
68. Teachers Labeling Each a Major Problem
69. Principals Labeling each a Major Problem
70. Support for LSC Reform
71. Percent of Projects Where Evaluators Report Each Factor Facilitates Reform
72. Capacity to Implement High-Quality Professional Development
73. Resources to Support On-Going Professional Development
74. Structures for Sustaining High-Quality Professional Development

0. Professional Development Providers in LSC Projects
1. Teacher Descriptions of District Professional Development
2. Major Intended Purposed of Observed LSC Professional Development Sessions
3. Major Activities at Observed LSC Professional Development Sessions
4. Continuum Ratings for Quality of LSC Professional Development
5. Teachers Reporting Participation in Various Types of Professional Development Activities in the Past 12 Months
6. Teacher Participation in Various Numbers of Hours of Structured Professional Development
7. Teachers Indicating Each Strategy is "Very Important" for Effective Instruction
8. Level of Preparedness Reported by Teachers in Various Science Content Areas
9. Level of Preparedness Reported by Cohort 2 Mathematics Teachers in Various Mathematics Content Areas
10. Teacher Perceptions of Their Preparation to Implement Standards-Based Instruction
11. Classes Participating in Each Activity at Least Once a Week
12. Activities Ever Occurring in Science and Mathematics Classes
13. Instructional Strategies Used at Least Once a Week
14. Assessment Activities in Science and Mathematics Classes Using Each Type of Assessment at Least Once a Month
15. Instructional Activities in Observed Classes
16. Lessons Rated 4 or 5 on Design Indicators
17. Lessons Rated 4 or 5 on Implementation Indicators
18. Lessons Rated 4 or 5 on Content Indicators
19. Lessons Rated 4 or 5 on Classroom Culture Indicators
20. Lessons Rated 4 or 5 on Indicators of Enhancing Student Ability
21. Overall Ratings of Observed Classes
22. Cohort 1 Science Teachers' Opinions About Science Instruction
23. Teachers' Perceptions of Principal Support for Science and Mathematics Reform
24. Principal Ratings of Importance of Various Instructional Strategies for Effective Instruction
25. Continuum Rating for Supportiveness of Context
26. Continuum Rating for Sustainability

Professional Development Session #1: "Learning Through Kit-Based Activities"

Professional Development Session #2: "Study Groups: Classroom Observation and Discussion"

Professional Development Session #3: "Exploring Student Assessments"

Professional Development Session #4: "Learning the Kit"

Lesson #1: Ineffective Science Instruction-Passive "Learning"

Lesson #2: Ineffective Mathematics Instruction-Activity for Activity's Sake

Lesson #3: Beginning Stages of Effective Mathematics Instruction

Lesson #4: Effective Science Instruction

Lesson #5: Effective Mathematics Instruction

The core evaluation of the Local Systemic Change Initiative requires the energy, efforts, and insights of a very large number of people.

Conrad Katzenmeyer in the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication; Joyce Evans, Susan Snyder, and Diane Spresser in NSF's Division of Elementary, Secondary, and Informal Education (ESIE); and Joy Frechtling of Westat, Inc. were instrumental in the design and implementation of the core evaluation system. Numerous other NSF/ESIE program officers provided valuable assistance throughout the process, as well.

Within HRI, in addition to the authors of this report, Joan Pasley, Ruth Pershing, Ben Kurgat, Eugene Soar, Scott Hanrath, Jarrod Jenzano, Alison Schaff, Carol McDonald, Susan Hudson, Claudia Templeton, and John Supovitz were responsible for various tasks essential to the production of this report, from instrument design, to data processing and analysis, to report production.

Most notably, this report would not have been possible without the efforts of the LSC project lead evaluators, who persevered as we attempted to fine-tune the core evaluation system. And special thanks are due to the thousands of teachers throughout the 121 participating districts who took time from their busy schedules to provide information about their science and mathematics teaching.