AZ K-12 Education Needs in Rural and Remote Arizona: Analysis of Responses Reviewed by Board of Directors, May 31, 2013 ©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 1
Dec 14, 2015
AZ K-12 Education Needs in Rural and Remote Arizona: Analysis of ResponsesReviewed by Board of Directors, May 31, 2013
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 1
Context
• Needs Analysis of K-12 Education in Arizona’s rural and remote counties• Focus on: what is needed to implement Common Core• Focal Content Areas: Science and Math
Goal
• Online Survey. Special thanks to the AZ Department of Education for launching the survey.
Methods
• Teachers, Principals, Superintendents in Arizona’s 13 rural and remote counties• 10,613 Teachers• 503 Principals• 208 Superintendents• 11,314 invitations to survey sent: of these 1,436 were bounced back• 9,878 email invitations received
Participants
• Survey open April 18• Reminder #1: April 24• Final Reminder: May 2
Timeline
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 2
3.
For those not familiar with rural Arizona,this map will provide basic informationon those counties. For comparison, below are the same data for Maricopaand Pima Counties:
Maricopa:area:9,226 sq. mi.pop: 3.8 million# schools: 947# teachers: 29,711median income: $51k
Pima: area: 9,240 sq. mi.
pop: 980,263# schools: 287# teachers: 7,065median income: $44k
Special thanks to the Arizona Association of Countiesfor their assistance with this information
TEACHER RESPONSE
Navajo Apache Greenlee Graham Yavapai La Paz Yuma Pinal Mohave Gila Cochise Santa Cruz Coconino0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
38%36%
30%28%
27% 26% 26% 26% 25% 25%23%
19% 19%
TEACHER RESPONSE RATE BY COUNTY(IN DESCENDING ORDER)
320 226 28 90 321 38 404 532 275 103 218 86 172
Completed Surveys: 3032Overall Response Rate: 31%
N=
Highest Response Rates:Navajo and Apache Counties
Lowest Response Rates:Santa Cruz and Coconino
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 4
ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSE
Apache Coconino Cochise Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Mohave Navajo Santa Cruz
Pinal Yavapai Yuma0
5
10
15
20
25
30
11
15
9
11
4
2 2
11
16
11
21
25
11
2
54
2 2 23 3
6
4 4
10
3
PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT COUNTS BY COUNTY(IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER)
Principal
Superintendent
PRINCIPAL: 149 replies from 503 invitations, 30% response rateSUPERINTENDENT: 50 replies from 208 invitations, 24% response rate
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 5
SPED Breakout:
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 6
We saw no notable differences for SPED teachers when compared to all teachers on the majorcomponents of the survey including: teacher background, professional development hours in thelast three years, or indication of needs to teach math and science.
444 (16%) of teachers reported teaching SPED. 336/444 (76%) teach elementary school 114/444 (26%) teach high school (several teach both HS and elementary) 380/444 (86%) are female The distribution of age mirrors that of the entire sample # years taught also mirrors that of the entire sample 259/444 (58%) report teaching math or science PD in last 3 years mirrors that of entire sample Priorities for SPED teachers look similar to priorities of elementary teacher sample
SCHOOL REPRESENTATIONRESPONSES REPRESENTED 475 (84%) OF THE 565 SCHOOLS INVITED.
APACHE COCONINO COCHISE GILA GRAHAM GREENLEE LA PAZ MOHAVE NAVAJO SANTA CRUZ
PINAL YAVAPAI YUMA0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
4238
47
23
16
610
49
39
21
77
60
47
NUMBER OF SCHOOLS REPRESENTED IN RESPONSES
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 7
RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
FEMALE MALE NO REPLY0%
30%
60%
90%80%
18%
2%
RESPONSES BY GENDER
NO REPLY
UNDER 20
20-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61+0%
10%
20%
30%
2% 1%
14%
24%26% 26%
7%
DISTRIBUTION OF AGE
NO REPLY
NEVER TAUGHT
1-3 YEARS
4-6 YEARS
7-9 YEARS
10-19 YEARS
20+ YEARS
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
2% 1%
16%13% 14%
32%
23%
DISTRIBUTION OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE
Respondents were 80% female
The distribution of age was approximately normal
More than ½ of teachers and ¾ ofadministrators have taught for 10+ years
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 8
STUDENT FAMILY DEMOGRAPHICS
We asked educators to tell us about student family income and community income in their area.
Nearly ½ of educators reported student family income of less than $30k per year (23% + 25%)
One quarter (7% + 18%) of educators reported their community income of less than $30k.
UNDER $20K $20K - $29K $30K - $39K $40K - $49K $50K + UNKNOWN0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
23%25%
13%
3%1%
35%
7%
18% 17%
8%
3%
47%
DISTRIBUTION OF INCOMESTUDENT FAMILY INCOME
COMMUNITY INCOME
County % Educators Reporting Student family income less than $30k
Apache 62%
Coconino 38%
Cochise 54%
Gila 54%
Graham 34%
Greenlee 40%
La Paz 76%
Mohave 49%
Navajo 58%
Santa Cruz
60%
Pinal 42%
Yavapai 40%
Yuma 47%©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 9
STATE SCHOOL GRADE
Apache
Coconino
Cochise Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Mohav
e
Navajo
Santa
Cruz
Pinal
Yavap
aiYuma
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
MISS-ING
A
B
C
D
F
APACHE
COCONINO
COCHISE
GILA GRAHAM
GREENLEE
LA PAZ
MOHAVE
NAVAJO
SANTA CRUZ
PINAL
YAVAPAI
YUMA
PERCENT OF GRADED AND F SCHOOLS (N)
50%(121)
14%(28)
18%(41)
40%(46)
13%(12)
80%(24)
7%(3)
12%(36)
23%(79)
3%(3)
10%(55)
4%(14)
9%(36)
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 10
80% of schools in Greenlee and 50%in Apache were gradedas D or F schools in2012.
AVAILABILITY OF INTERNET
UNDER 10% 10% - 24% 25% - 49% 50% - 74% 75% + DON'T KNOW0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
10%
19% 21%
13%
6%
30%
EDUCATOR REPORTS OF STUDENT HOME INTERNET
We asked educators to tell us about the availability of internet in their school and in theirstudent’s homes:
99% have internet accessat their school
96% have internet intheir classroom
56% reported their students have access to wireless internetat their school
50% reported that less than ½ of their students have the internet at home (10% +19% +21%)
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved.
11
AT SCHOOL IN CLASSROOMS STUDENT WIFI0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%99% 96%
56%
0% 4%
37%
0% 0%6%
PERCENT OF EDUCATORS REPORTING INTERNET ACCESS AT THEIR SCHOOL
YESNODON'T KNOW
STUDENT CHALLENGES
We asked educators to tell us about some of the daily challenges of their students:
DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH AT HOME BUS RIDE 40 MIN+ FREE/REDUCED LUNCH0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
31%
37%
1%
21%
17%
4%
12% 13%
10%9%
7%
21%
15%
6%
48%
12%
20%
15%
UNDER 10%10% - 24%25% - 49%50% - 74%75% +DON'T KNOW
24% reported that½ of their students do notSpeak English as a firstLanguage (15% + 9%)
13% reported that over ½ of their students ride the bus 40+ minutes toschool
Nearly ½ of educatorsreported that 75% oftheir students qualify forfree breakfast and/or lunch
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona.All Rights Reserved. 12
Apache
Coconino
Cochise Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Mohave
Navajo
Santa Cru
zPinal
YavapaiYuma
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
43%
23% 25%
41%
27%35%
56%
38% 36% 32% 36% 36% 36%
Percentage of Educators Reporting Less than 10% of Student Families Have a Parent Involved at School
PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT WITHSCHOOL ACTIVITIESWe asked educators to tell us how many students had a parent involved withschool activities:
More than 1/3 ofeducators reported that less than 10% oftheir students had aninvolved parent
Highest ratesof lack of parentalinvolvement are in La Paz, Apache,and Gila counties with 40%+ of educators reportingless than 10% ofstudents have an involved parent
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona.All Rights Reserved. 13
DON'T KNOW UNDER 10% 10% - 24% 25% - 49% 50% - 74% 75% +0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
15%
35% 31%
12%4% 2%
PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
TEACHER EDUCATION
Bachelor's degree (ed
focus)
Bachelor's degree (non-ed focus)
M.Ed. M.A. M.S. E.Ed. Ph.D. Missing0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
35%
9%
30%
14%
6%
1% 1%3%
Education Level for Arizona Rural Teachers, Principals, and Superintendents
52% report tohold a graduate level degree (30% + 14% + 6% + 1% + 1%)
66% report tohold a degree ineducation(35% + 30% +1%)
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 14
We asked AZ educators about their personal education.
TEACHING MATH AND SCIENCE
Apache Coconino Cochise Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Mohave Navajo Santa Cruz Pinal Yavapai Yuma0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
52%47%
53% 51%44%
60% 57% 56% 55%47%
53% 56% 57%
Percent of Respondents who Report Teaching Math or Science
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 15
Apache Coconino Cochise Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Mohave Navajo Santa Cruz
Pinal Yavapai Yuma0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
28%
17%
30%
22% 20%23%
55%
23%
36%
15%
26%31% 31%
Percent of Respondents Teaching Science or Math who Reported They are not Highly Qualified, per State Standards
44% - 60% of our survey respondents teachMath or Science.
There is a large discrepancy by countyin % of teachersreporting they do notmeet state standards tobe a Highly Qualified Science or Math teacher,ranging from 15% inSanta Cruz to 55% inLa Paz. We drill downinto this on the next slide.
SCIENCE AND MATH TEACHERSELF-REPORTED QUALIFICATIONS
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 16
Apache Coconino Cochise Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Mohave Navajo Santa Cruz
Pinal Yavapai Yuma
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Unqualified MathUnqualified Elementary ScienceUnqualified Natural ScienceUnqualified Physical Science
We asked if teachers were Highly Qualified (per state standards) to teach their subjects Across the 13 rural and remote counties Unqualified science and math teachers were self identified. We had no survey respondents teaching Natural or Physical Science in Gila, Graham, or Greenlee Over 60% of responding Physical Science teachers were Unqualified in 3 counties: La Paz, Mohave, Yuma
MATH AND SCIENCE PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT (PD) HOURS 388 science teachers report no science PD in last 3 years (33%).
Highest concentration proportionatelyin Navajo and Apache Counties
136 math teachers report no math PDin last 3 years (11%).
Highest concentration proportionatelyIn Pinal and Yavapai Counties
Apache Coconino Cochise Gila Graham Greenlee La Paz Mohave Navajo Santa Cruz
Pinal Yavapai Yuma0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
14%
4%
13%
4%
2% 2%1%
10%
19%
2%
12%
10%
7%8%
5%5%
2% 3%
1% 1%
9%
14%
4%
19%
16%
14%
Location of Teachers with No Science orMath PD in Last 3 Years
MathScience
none 1-4 hours 5-8 hours 9-12 hours 13-16 hours more than 16 hours
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
33%
22%
12%
7%4%
22%
11%15% 16%
12%
7%
39%
Self Reported Professional Development for Science and Math Teachers
Science Math
Drill Down
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 17
Funds f
or Supplie
s
Purchase
Equipmen
t
PD: Yea
r
Common Planning T
ime
After Sch
ool Pro
grams
Field Tr
ips
Grants:
Grad Ed
ucation
SFAz P
D
SFAz C
urricu
lum Dev
Computer la
bs
PD: Summer
SFAz M
entorin
g
Visitors
Scien
ce/Math
Paid In
ternsh
ips0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%60%
49% 48%
39% 38%
31%
28% 27%25%
21% 21% 22% 22%20%
47%
51%
42%
38%
31%29%
32%
22%25% 24% 24%
18%21%
25%
ELEMENTARY Science and Math Teachers (n=1277)
HS Science and Math Teachers (n=355)
PRIORITY SELECTIONS FOR SCIENCE AND MATH TEACHERS
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 18
We asked which 3 of the following would be most helpful in implementing Common Core. 1) funds for supplies, 2) purchase of equipment, and 3) professional development were the
top priorities for 40%+ of science and math teachers in elementary and high schools.
OPEN QUESTION: LEARNING IN SCIENCE AND MATH
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 19
Comment Count %
Equipment & supplies 1334 56%
Professional development (on site preferred) 370 16%
Help with understanding and implementing common core 315 13%
Curriculum guide, access to programs, educational memberships 293 12%
Planning time-common planning time, help with integration of subject; Collaboration among educators-rearranging day to allow for time to teach STEM 147 6%
Money for teacher education 61 3%
More teachers, aides, smaller class size 57 2%
Culture where education is important to students and parents 45 2%
Mentors, guest speakers 41 2%
After school programs and field trips 23 1%
Coordination with special groups: SPED GIFTED Poverty 16 1%
Teacher pay 8 0%
We asked what 1 item would help provide greater student learning in science and math 78% of our survey respondents wrote replies to this question. This is a very highresponse rate for a non-required question. This was the 20th question on the survey.
FINAL QUESTION: Is there anything else we Should know before we begin this initiative?
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 20
27% (827) of our survey respondents wrote replies to this question A sampling of these responses are available on our website www.SFAz.org
NEXT STEPS
SFAz will commit $15M to a 3-year Rural and Remote Initiative to provide teachers thetools they need to improve academic achievement and develop the skills to implementArizona’s Common Core Standards and Next Generation Science Standards. We will beginwith a focus on Navajo and Apache Counties as areas of greatest need, but will include programs available to all 13 counties.
SFAZ SHORT TERM STOPGAP ACTIONS
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 21
1. Hire a full-time field staff person to assist teachers in teaching science and math in Apache and Navajo counties. (SFAz already has STEM field staff working in other areas.)
2. Give every full-time K-12 teacher in Navajo and Apache counties a gift card for supplies for 2013-2014 PROVIDED the school superintendent and principal agree to set aside weekly common planning time to focus on science and math and the implementation of Arizona’s Common Core Standards.
3. Issue a very simple Request for Proposal (RFP) to schools in the 13 counties for up to $10K each for equipment that would improve academic achievement in science and math. While Navajo and Apache Counties will be given priority, all responses will be considered with the requirement noted above for common planning time.
4. Issue RFP’s to fund both teacher professional development and create after-school science, math and robotics clubs. Funding will be available to all counties. Staff development and planning sessions will be recorded and evaluated.
PLEASE NOTE
©2013 Science Foundation Arizona. All Rights Reserved. 22
Please join us by selecting one of the above-noted areas to support, allowing us to address educator needs more quickly. This report is a summary of the data collected. We can run cross-tabulated data any way that would be helpful to a potential donor or advisor.
Resources need to be dedicated to these 13 counties quickly, in addition to continuing support for the urban counties. We are asking individual philanthropists, trusts, foundations, and corporations to join us in investing to ensure an educated workforce that maintains America’s competitiveness.
It is important to note that SFAz is not making a statement on the funding needed per student. We are simply taking short-term stopgap measures to address today’s needs as identified by the teachers responding to our survey. We hope the appropriate bodies review the distribution of education funding that goes to administration, versus the amount that gets to the classroom, and recommends any necessary adjustments to ensure teachers have the tools necessary to educate Arizona’s Children.
THE CALL TO ACTION