After much work and success in closing an achievement gap amongst student minority groups, we reviewed our critical data elements and decided to redirect our focus on attendance through data collected on our daily attendance report. Further disaggregation of the data revealed a gap and discrepancies in attendance among our grade levels. Although our 7th graders did better academically than our 9th graders, when comparing percentage of students on honor roll and how many D’s and F’s per grade level, their absences were discrepant and almost 20% higher when compared to absences by 9th grade students.
A target group was formed by identifying 7th grade students who missed 16 or more days the previous school year. A total of 32 students were targeted for our multi-tiered system of interventions. This identified group went down to 26 as 5 students moved over the summer and one moved mid-year out of state. To address this gap with this target group, Peet counselors designed and implemented a multitiered system of research-based interventions and best practice response to reach the students and the 8th grade at large. The comprehensive action plan and collaborative steps included:
* Five core curriculum lessons/units were implemented with all eighth grade students that primarily focused on ASCA’s Mindset/Behavior Standards regarding a healthy balance and development of the whole self, sense of belonging to the school environment, student success skills, critical-thinking skills for positive decision-making, goal-setting and creating positive and supportive relationships with other students.
* Individual and small group counseling were provided throughout the year to students in the identified group. Sessions focused on social/emotional learning, goal-setting as well as problem-solving root issues causing chronic attendance.
* Identified students were invited to participate in peer mentoring and outside agency resources were utilized when necessary. Mindset 1 and 3 served as our purpose as we focused on overall well-being and connection to our school.
* Counselors completed bi-weekly attendance checks, consulted with teachers, reviewed absences every month with administrators and attended parent conferences for identified students.
* Staff professional development and training activities focused on connecting with students and better understanding childhood trauma and outcomes; looking holistically at students and how we can support their well-being and learning.
* Parent newsletter and Parent/Teacher Conferences utilized to report attendance tips and information.
Ultimately, using data and its results, can paint a clear picture of our school and help us identify the needs of our students. Our data results chart the course and provide a roadmap for action steps for the next school year, and in this case, point to areas that need additional intervention such as this targeted group. Fortunately, we did meet our closing-the-gap goal as cumulative absences amongst this subgroup went down 25.5%, going from 848 to 630 total absences. However, we do realize that if all 32 of the original targeted group attended this year, we may have not reached our goal of a 20% decrease in cumulative absences.
Decisions for future recommendations and action steps include implementing more solution-focused small groups with identified students, utilizing peer mentoring for more students in the targeted group and increase the use of check in-check out. As mentioned in our CTG Results Report, the data showed us that in moving forward, we would like to make a stronger connection between our workshop goals/learning objectives (based on mindset and behavior standards) to direct outcomes with attendance and achievement. We felt this could be done with more instructional strategies and questioning techniques during small group discussion. With that, we felt that the overall delivery of the workshop could also be reformatted by implementing more Tier II small groups rather than presenting the content as a Tier I core curriculum lesson. We were generally pleased by outcomes with our core curriculum and large scale efforts addressing our program goals, and specifically, our closing-the-gap goal. There is room for improvement with some of our Tier II and III smaller scale initiatives. Once we identify another gap, we plan to continue similar interventions implemented this school year and let the data drive optimal student outcomes and our work towards improvement in those areas specified.
Goal: By May 30, 2018, 8th grade students who had 16 or more absences during the previous school year (2016-2017) will reduce the cumulative number of absences by 20% from 848 absences (2016-2017) to 678 absences (2017-2018).
Target Group: Twenty-six of those 32 students are now returning 8th grade students, who as 7th graders, missed 16 or more days of school during the 2016-2017 school year.
Data Used to Identify Students: Daily Attendance Report, Attendance/Truancy spreadsheet
Type of Activities to be Delivered in What Manner?: 8th Grade Workshops/Presentations (Girls & Boys), April Awareness (CC Unit), Internet Safety/Positive Decision Making (CC Unit), Career Cruising (CC Unit), Individual Counseling, Parent Meetings, Staff Consultations and Professional Development Meetings, Attendance Information Tip Sheet, Parent Newsletter, Staff Activity w/ School Mission, Small Groups, Peer Mentors, Outside Agency Referrals, Bi-Weekly Attendance Checks and Monthly Review w/ Office Staff.
Process Data (Number of students affected): All 8th grade girls workshop (103)
1 large group session for 1.5 hours
and
All 8th grade boys workshop (121)
1 large group session for 1.5 hours
Perception Data (Surveys or assessments used): (Girls)
Online pre- and post-tests were completed by all students present, 77 students for pre-test and 81 students present for post-test.
Pre/Post test Results when comparing # of Strongly Disagree/Disagree answers to Agree/Strongly Agree answers:
1. Feel confident in their ability to succeed.
Pre: 87% Post: 95.1%
9.3% increase in belief/attitude
2. Have a positive and supportive friendships with peers at school.
Pre: 94.8% Post: 97.5%
2.8% increase in belief/attitude
3. Can stand up for themselves.
Pre: 89.7% Post: 92.6%
3.2% increase in skills
4. Can "bounce back" from hard things and difficult circumstances (resiliency) and have the skills to cope.
Pre: 89.6% Post: 95.1%
6.1% increase in skills
5. Know how to make positive choices that lead to positive outcomes.
Pre: 97.4% Post:100%
2.7% increase in knowledge
6.Believe they have value and can balance between home, school and activities with appropriate self-care.
Pre: 79.3% Post: 87.7%
10.6% increase in belief/attitude
and
(Boys)
Online pre- and post-tests were completed by all students present, 91 present for the pre-test and 80 students present for the post-test.
Pre/Post test Results when comparing # of Strongly Disagree/Disagree answers to Agree/Strongly Agree answers:
1. Believe their character and integrity are important to their future success.
Pre: 97.9% Post: 95%
3% decrease in belief/attitude
2. Have a positive and supportive friendships with peers at school.
Pre: 94.5% Post: 95%
.5% increase in belief/attitude
3. Can take responsibility for their actions and decisions, whether good or bad, without blaming others or lying to look better.
Pre: 93.4% Post: 97.5%
4.4% increase in skills
4. Have set one personal goal and one academic goal.
Pre: 78% Post: 95%
21.8% increase in skills
5. Know how to make positive choices that lead to positive outcomes.
Pre: 98.9% Post:94.9%
4% decrease in knowledge
6. Know what a SMART goal is and are able to write one.
Pre: 70.3% Post: 98.8%
40.5% increase in knowledge
Outcome Data (Achievement, attendance, and/or behavior data): We are linking this to our program goal/closing-the-gap goal of:
Decrease in cumulative number of absences for 8th grade students who missed 16 or more days for the 2016-2017 school year (Attendance)
Total # of cumulative absences during the 2016-2017 school year:
848 cum. absences
Total # of cumulative absences during the 2017-2018 school year:
630 cum. absences
Implications: (Girls) For the girls' workshop, the data would indicate some steady growth in all of our learning objectives and behavior standards. Our biggest increase came in the attitude/belief that they have value and can balance home, school and activities with appropriate self-care! We believe that even though our increases were between 2 and 10%, that our objectives and behavior standards were accurately chosen and served as the foundation to our entire workshop!
From the process data, we had nearly the same number of students take the pre- and post-test, but the numbers also tell me that around 20 students missed the pre- and post-test all together. We wonder how the perception data would or could have changed due to another 20 responses. Eighth grade social studies teachers helped us by administering the pre- and post-test during the beginning of their class time on two different days. We know one teacher forgot during the pre and post and that probably attributed to that difference as well as absences or extracurricular activities with early dismissals for games. It is also important to note that ALL females included in the targeted group for the CTG goal, 14 total, were in attendance for this workshop.
Perception data results show gains in knowledge, skill and belief between 2 and 10%. Although many of these themes were frequently taught, in various deliveries and initiatives this year, in this one time workshop we believe these small gains show great success! We believe this translates well to our goal regarding attendance. In moving forward, we think we would make a stronger connection between the two through small group discussion. This can be done with more direct questions such as, "How do positive choices in achievement and attendance lead to positive outcomes?" OR "How does appropriate self-care and/or supportive friendships relate to our achievement and attendance in school?"
Although we feel like a big takeaway was to make a stronger connection directly between our workshop goals and learning objectives to students achievement and attendance, we feel our outcome data still showed a positive result to our work with these 8th grade workshops. Our total cumulative absences went from 848 to 630 this school year, meaning a decrease in chronic attendance by 25.5 percent! Holistically, it "took a village" to see these gains in attendance. It was more than these workshops and our other closing-the-gap interventions (see action plan), our entire staff worked hard to adhere to our multi-tiered system of supports and provide intervention, re-teaching and accountability. Our building mission to build relationships with kids and maximize their learning is at the heart of what we do and what we value most and these results show just that!
(Boys) For the boys' workshop, the data would indicate some lopsided or inconsistent gains in our learning objectives and behavior standards. For example, two objectives showed decreased belief and knowledge when comparing pre- to post-tests, whereas, other objectives showed up to 20 or 40% growth. Our biggest increase came in the knowledge of SMART goals and ability to write one.
Overall, we believe our objectives and behavior standards were appropriately chosen, our big take away moving forward, is how we can better teach, through this workshop and other initiatives, the standards we saw decreased perception data (B-LS 1: Demonstrate critical-thinking skills to make informed decisions and B-SMS 1: Demonstrate ability to assume responsibility)? Answering this big question will restructure how we present and implement the entire workshop, whether we add more focus through more small group discussion, personal story and reflection, role play scenarios or other instructional strategies such as think/pair/share. These strategies might create more dialogue and reflection for students to learn and take away something that strengthens their informed decision-making as well as their ability to assume responsibility. Another option moving forward, would to re-think the format in which we deliver this workshop. Although the large group format worked for the girls, we might look at a more targeted group and create small groups out of those most at-risk and implement as more of a Tier II intervention.
Unlike the process data from the girls' workshop, we had a bigger gap (11) in the number of students who took the pre- from the post-test. However, the numbers that are more alarming are the fact that 30 students missed the pre-test and 41 missed the post-test. Again, we wonder how the perception data would or could have changed due to another 30-40 responses. We also wonder, could this have affected the perception data if students took the pre- and not the post, and therefore, their growth is not accounted for? Vice versa, a student could have missed the pre- and taken the post and that would skew our data as well. We mentioned before, that the pre-and post-test were administered by eighth grade social studies teachers on two different days. We also mentioned that we knew one teacher forgot during the pre and post (with different periods and students) and that probably attributed to that difference as well as absences or extracurricular activities with early dismissals for games.
Furthermore, regarding the perception data, we questioned whether, moving forward, we should have all students bring their chrome books to the workshop and take the pre-and post right there. However, with 120ish boys, that could also create a huge mix-up with chrome books lying around and cause a big distraction if they are close by as well. In the future, we could just ask a random sampling of students and ensure we get the same ones taking the pre- and post-test, this option seems more efficient, as well as providing the most valid and credible data. With that, as we looked through our perception data, we realized that there were some outliers and students who didn't take the tests seriously, and therefore, answered inconsistently on both the pre-and-post and skewed the data. That could contribute to some of the decrease in attitude and knowledge. Although definite outliers, we still included these students, and their responses, because that is the full picture of perception data we got. We are, however, unable to trust if it is truly honest if a handful of students noticeably answered inconsistently from the pre-test to the post-test. For example, one student alone answered "Strongly Agree" on the PRE that he believed his character and integrity are important to his future success and on the POST, two days later, "Strongly Disagreed" with that statement. Another example is from a different student answering "Agree" on the PRE that he has positive and supportive friendships with peers at school and on the POST, that same student answered "Disagree". Those are two examples of the inconsistencies we found that do not make much sense in two days time and after the workshop.
Regarding process data, it is also important to note that 11 out of the 12 males, included in the targeted group for the CTG goal, were in attendance for this workshop.
As for outcome data, please read our reflection above in the girls' workshop section as both workshops worked towards our closing-the-gap goal on chronic attendance amongst an 8th grade targeted group and the outcome data ultimately shows results for both initiatives.
