U.S. Department of Education: Promoting Educational Excellence for all Americans

A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Demonstration of Comprehensive School Reform

Goal 8: To enable low-performing students to improve their achievement to meet challenging standards.
Objective 1 of 2: STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN CORE SUBJECTS GENERALLY WILL SHOW MARKED IMPROVEMENT IN COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL REFORM DEMONSTRATION (CSRD) PROGRAM SCHOOLS.
Indicator 8.1.1 of 1: State assessments: Increasing percentages of students in CSRD program schools will meet or exceed the proficient level of performance on state assessments in reading and math.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Reading
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Elementary Middle High
Elementary Middle High
2000
67 56 72
     
2001
75 77 64
Continuous Improvement 

Mathematics
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Elementary Middle High
Elementary Middle High
2000
62 74 61
     
2001
74 74 74
 Continuous Improvement
Status: Positive movement toward target. Target met for all areas except reading at the high school level.

Explanation: Data for this indicator represent 721 schools in 23 States for reading and 609 schools in 19 States for mathematics. One State that was included in last year's reporting could not be included this year due to changes in State assessments resulting in data that was not comparable to the baseline data. Two other States included last year could not be reported this year because 2000-2001 data were not yet available.   		Additional Source Information: Consolidated State Performance Reports.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002 - 2003.
Data Available: January 2003.
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.
The data for this indicator were self-reported by State Educational Agencies. A contractor assisted States in data collection and conducted the analysis for this indicator. The deadline for submission of the 2000-2001 Consolidated State Performance Report, the source of this data, was extended until March 31, 2002. Only States that voluntarily reported early could be included in this analysis.

Limitations: The data for this indicator were self-reported by State Educational Agencies. A contractor assisted States in data collection and conducted the analysis for this indicator. The deadline for submission of the 2000-2001 Consolidated State Performance Report, the source of this data, was extended until March 31, 2002. Only States that voluntarily reported early could be included in this analysis.

 

Objective 2 of 2: THE NUMBER OF SCHOOLS PROVIDING HIGH-QUALITY CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION AND IMPROVING STUDENT OUTCOMES WILL INCREASE EACH YEAR.
Indicator 8.2.1 of 3: Implementation: The number of CSRD program schools meeting objectives for implementation will increase annually.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of principals in CSRD schools reporting they are in the initial stage of implementation and professional development
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
26
 
2000
5
 

Percentage of principals in CSRD schools reporting that they had partially implemented their chosen model
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1998
25
 
1999
34
 
2000
15 

Percentage of principals in CSRD schools reporting that their reform model is mostly implemented
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1998
36
 
1999
59
 
2000
 85
Status: No current data but progress toward target is likely.

Explanation: The percentage of CSRD schools identified by their State as in need of improvement under Title I decreased. Current data represent 924 schools in 26 States. Data were not available for three States included in last year's report.   		Additional Source Information: National Longitudinal Survey of Schools

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002.
Data Available: January 2003.
Validated By: Experienced Public/Private Entity.


Limitations: The data are based on a small sample of schools in the second year of implementation at the time the data were collected. Another limitation is that the indicator depends on self reports from CSRD program schools amongst the level of implementation.

 
Indicator 8.2.2 of 3: School improvement: Decreasing numbers of CSRD program schools will be designated as schools in need of improvement.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of schools identified as in need of improvement under Title I
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
41
 
2000
33
 
2001
30
 
Status: Target met.

Explanation: The percentage of CSRD schools identified by their state as in need of improvement under Title I decreased. Data represent 924 schools in 26 states. Data were not available for three states included in last year's report.   		Additional Source Information: Southwest Educational Laboratory.

Frequency: Other.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Data supplied by SEA's.

Limitations: The data for this indicator were self-reported by State Educational Agencies. A contractor assisted States in collecting and submitting this data and conducted the analysis for this indicator.

 
Indicator 8.2.3 of 3: Impact on school improvement: The number of schools implementing comprehensive, research-based approaches to improve curriculum and instruction will increase annually.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of principals in Title I schools reporting that they are implementing a research-based school reform model
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
31
 
2000
46
 
2001
 
55
2002
 
60
Status: No current data but progress toward target is likely.

Explanation: Increasing numbers of Title I schools are implementing research-based school reform models to improve curriculum and instruction. The Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program is meeting its purpose of increasing awareness of and support for comprehensive school reform among states, districts and schools, and acts as a catalyst for how Title I funds can be used in schoolwide programs to support the adoption of research-based comprehensive school reform programs   		Additional Source Information: National Longitudinal Survey of Schools, 1999(baseline)/2000.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2001.
Data Available: January 2003.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Data collected by Westat, Inc., and validated by internal procedures.

Limitations: Data are taken from a nationally representative sample of Title I schools; no data are available on all Title I schools. Because data are based on self-reports, it is difficult to judge the extent to which reform programs are comprehensive and research-based. An examination of school documents on a subsample of Title I schools will allow some indication of the quality of comprehensive school reform efforts in Title I schools in general.

 

Return to table of contents