This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
CASEL/NoVo Collaborating Districts Initiative for Social and Emotional Learning:
Cross-District Evaluation Report
David Osher, Kimberly Kendziora, Lawrence B. Friedman, and the AIR CDI Evaluation Team
November 8, 2012
2
Key Questions: Overall CDI Evaluation
• What are the outcomes in districts? In schools?• How did the districts implement SEL over time?• What factors influence implementation quality?• To what extent and in what respects are
intended student-level outcomes realized?• How are realized student outcomes associated
with the school- and district-level implementation of the CDI?
3
Key Questions: Focus of this Presentation
• What is the progress of district activities and outcomes as summarized by rubric scores? 2011 and 2012 scores for Cohort 1 2012 scores for Cohort 2
• Student social and emotional competence at baseline
• Challenges and solutions• Next steps
4
Methods•Two cohorts of districts:
• Cohort 1 = Anchorage, Austin, and an R&D district, Cleveland• Cohort 2 = Chicago, Nashville, Oakland, Sacramento,
Washoe County
•District interviews 97 stakeholders across the 8 districts were interviewed
•Data examined Planning documents, communication materials, handouts,
district reports, consultant input Districtwide staff SEL surveys Student data, climate data, student social and emotional skills
ratings
•Triangulation of data District rubric scores and district reports
5
Cohort 1 Districts: Scores from 2011 and 2012
Vis
ion
Cen
tral
off
ice
expe
rtis
e
PD
pro
gram
s
Alig
n re
sour
ces
Com
mun
icat
ions
SE
L st
anda
rds
for
PK
–12
Evi
denc
e-ba
sed
prog
ram
s
Inte
grat
e S
EL
with
oth
er in
itiat
ives
Con
tinuo
us im
prov
emen
t
Pos
itive
clim
ate
Sta
keho
lder
com
mitm
ent 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Rubric Scores for Cohort 1 Districts: 2011 (Planning Phase) and 2012 (Implementation Year
1)
2011
2012
6
Cohort 2 Districts: Planning Phase Rubric Scores
Nee
ds &
res
ourc
es
Vis
ion
Cen
tral
off
ice
expe
rtis
e
PD
pro
gram
s
Alig
n re
sour
ces
Com
mun
icat
ions
SE
L st
anda
rds
for
PK
–12
Evi
denc
e-ba
sed
prog
ram
s
Inte
grat
e S
EL
with
oth
er in
itiat
ives
Con
tinuo
us im
prov
emen
t
Pos
itive
clim
ate
Sta
keho
lder
com
mitm
ent
Rol
es &
res
pons
ibili
ties
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
2012 Rubric Scores: Cohort 2
7
Grade 7 Students’ Social and Emotional Competence: Baseline
Self-a
waren
ess
Self-m
anag
emen
t
Social
awar
enes
s
Relatio
nship
skil
ls
Resp
Decisi
on-m
aking
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
23%18% 22%
15% 17%
29%33%
33%
29%30%
28% 31% 28%38%
38%
21% 17% 18% 17% 14%
85th percentile or above
50th to 84th percentile
16th to 49th percentile
15th percentile or below
Caution: Data are combined across all districts and all survey types. Data do not represent any one district. Reliability for some scales was low.
8
Grade 10 Students’ Social and Emotional Competence: Baseline
Self-a
waren
ess
Self-m
anag
emen
t
Social
awar
enes
s
Relatio
nship
skil
ls
Resp
Decisi
on-m
aking
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
6%13%
8% 8% 9%
29%
40%
35%30% 26%
39%
31%
36% 48%45%
26%16%
21%15%
20%
85th percentile or above
50th to 84th percentile
16th to 49th percentile
15th percentile or below
Caution: Data are combined across all districts and all survey types. Data do not represent any one district. Reliability for some scales was low.
9
Findings about Student Social and Emotional Competence Across All Districts at Baseline
Results for seventh grade students• Females rate themselves more highly then
males for self-management, social awareness, and relationship skills
• For self-awareness and social awareness, American Indian and White students rated themselves the highest, followed by multi-racial, Native Hawaiian, Black, Hispanic, and Asian students, and finally Alaska Native students.
10
Findings about Student Social and Emotional Competence Across All Districts at Baseline
Results for tenth grade students• Females rate themselves more highly then
males for responsible decision making• American Indian students rated themselves
higher than all other racial groups (Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native students were not included because n=14 and n=5).