Conclusion: Implications for the Future

Currently, as this book is being written, there is a national trend toward integrating social- emotional learning (SEL) and positive school climates into the academic mission of the school. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); the Aspen Institute’s National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development; the National Center on School Climate; the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning; and other organizations have put forth strong policy, research, and practice agendas to include these important variables as a focus of K- 12 schooling in the United States and worldwide. The authors of this guide aim to extend this effort to more school systems around the world, and the examples included here support this national and international effort. The ideas and practices presented in this guide, however, go beyond a specific point in history. The assumptions and values underlying supportive school monitoring are central to the educational mission of schools. Supportive monitoring is democratic and empowering for all school constituencies. Listening to the voices of students, parents, and staff, sharing what has been heard, and acting upon it reflect a democratic process. Supportive school monitoring can make this democratic process an ordinary magic, performed every day in schools as part of ongoing practice. The focus on each individual school and providing opportunities to tailor- fit the supportive monitoring system— or at least significant parts of this system— to each school’s needs is a remedy against “one- size- fits- all” solutions. It helps the school discover and maintain its uniqueness without rejecting accountability altogether. By making supportive monitoring an integral part of school life, accountability systems are not an oppressive outside intervention in the school. Instead, they are a path toward responsible and responsive education that is based on values and data- driven at the same time. Educators teach students about the importance of data in making key decisions. They encourage students to look for the most accurate data and take advantage of it. Sadly, however, many school administrators and teachers dread data, mainly because it’s been used to punish schools and teachers.

Photos, Videos, and Other Technology

On their own, photos and videos are not a reliable source of information about what is taking place in a school. It’s easy to react emotionally or with outrage to a video of a fight, a child being picked on, or some other display of abuse or wrongdoing. But everyone knows from highly publicized incidents posted on YouTube, Twitter, or other social media sites that photos and videos can be taken out of context. They tell a story, but they don’t tell the whole story. Even so, they can be used by administrators to discern whether the action shown in the photo or video is an isolated incident or could be a symptom of a larger problem. If an alarming photo or video taken at a school is receiving attention from the media, it’s better to talk about it with the school community as soon as possible than to pretend it didn’t happen. Situations like these create an opportunity to examine and share other sources of data about school safety, violence, and victimization. Too often, one incident can cause the public to draw conclusions about a school that are not accurate. That’s why a monitoring system is necessary— to put such an incident in context. Administrators who can refer to other sources of data regarding violence, drug use, or weapons can respond with more confidence when faced with criticism over one incident. As part of a monitoring system, photos, videos and other technology can be used for positive purposes. They allow students who might skip questions on a survey or don’t want to speak up during a focus group to express themselves in a different way. There are many examples of projects in which students are given cameras and microphones and encouraged to express themselves and present their experiences in school through this media. In addition to the individual students benefitting from such experiences, school leaders, staff members, and parents get the opportunity to see the school from the students’ perspectives.

Student Voice

Even those who agree with the idea of creating a monitoring system might still need to be convinced that what students have to say should be considered valuable input in the effort to improve schools, whether it pertains to raising academic performance or to safety, security, and behavior. Some argue that students are so disinterested in surveys that they answer randomly or give the first answer that comes to mind. Others are concerned that students respond deliberately in ways intended to harm staff members they do not like. Still others are not sure that students really understand the true meaning of the questions and, therefore, that their answers are not usable. Students, however, are often the best sources of providing detailed information on what is happening in schools and may even provide realistic suggestions on how adults can intervene. Looking at the ways students’ perceptions are already being used in schools can help policymakers and educators see how they can be part of improving school climate. This issue, for example, has been debated in recent years as some states and school districts have moved to include students’ opinions on their experiences in the classroom as one component of new teacher evaluation systems. For example, the Tripod survey,1 developed by Harvard University’s Ron Ferguson, asks students how much they agree with statements such as “My teacher explains diffcult things clearly” and “Our class stays busy and doesn’t waste time.” The Tripod was used as part of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s Measures of Effective Teaching project and is being used in districts across the United States, in Canada, and in China. In a 2013 report, Hanover Research reviewed the literature on using student perception surveys in teacher evaluation and professional development: “Given the consistent findings of the research reviewed for this report, it is reasonable to conclude that student perception surveys can provide accurate measures of teacher effectiveness,” they write. “When the proper instrument, or survey, is utilized, student feedback can be more accurate than alternative, more widely- used instruments at predicting achievement gains.

Examples of Monitoring

This guidebook is inspired by 20 years of collaborative work to improve school climate and student well- being. Working with government leaders, district administrators, and school personnel in the United States and abroad, the authors have extensive experience in designing and implementing monitoring systems that fit local needs and in showing how results can be used to improve schools. These various monitoring models already in use can help education policymakers and administrators gain a better understanding of how these systems can empower schools and guide decisions about programs and interventions. The overarching message of this guidebook is that methods of monitoring should be well integrated into the process of leading a school, just as academic assessment is. Viewed together, both academic and nonacademic data can provide the information that school leaders need to create safer, more successful schools. The California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey is a comprehensive set of surveys that includes the: . . . California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) California School Climate Survey for staff (CSS) California School Parent Survey (CSPS) . . . The CHKS is a youth risk and resilience survey given to students in the 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th grades. The survey gathers feedback from students on issues such as school connectedness, safety, violence and victimization, substance use, and physical and mental health. There is a core survey that covers all of those topics to some extent as well as supplemental modules that ask more detailed questions on specific topics. The CSSS is for teachers, administrators, and all other school staff (e.g., secretaries, security guards, bus drivers). It asks about multiple aspects of school climate and needs for professional development. The CSPS focuses on parent perceptions. It asks many questions that parallel those presented to students and staff. In addition, parents describe how they perceive the ways that the school engages and involves them in the school.

Sharing the Monitoring Feedback

Whether it’s survey data, focus group responses, or the results of a mapping exercise, a vital component of a monitoring system is sharing the information with educators, parents, students, and sometimes even community members as soon as possible so it can be used to improve school climate for the students who are still in the school. Most people— especially those in education— have taken surveys at one point or another and never heard anything about the results. They’re left wondering how their responses compared to others and whether anyone would do anything with the informa­tion collected. As we mentioned earlier, monitoring isn’t just collecting data and storing it in a data warehouse or using it to write scientific journal articles that most parents and teachers might never read. Parents deserve to hear what they said as quickly as possible and to see how their views differed from those of their children, from those of the staff, or from parents at other schools (see Box 15.1). As part of the Building Capacity and Welcoming Practices projects, individual reports were prepared for the districts and schools as soon as possible so they could review their data and determine which issues to address. Jennifer Walters, who served as superintendent of the Escondido Union School District, in California, says it was refreshing to work as part of a research project in which the information was not only shared, but also shared in a timely way. “From the very beginning, it wasn’t something being done to the district, but really some common work,” Walters said. “Not only would the data information be shared with me or be discussed with us and move our organization forward, but then in updated communications, it was ‘here’s what we’re doing in Washington, here’s what we’re doing with the coalition.’ Other times I’ve worked with universities, they’ll come in and they want to do some research or an investigation. They’ll do that and then I have no idea to what extent it’s used afterward.”

Observations

Observations occur in school every day but are often not planned, systematic, or recorded for the purpose of improving school climate. Observations, however, can be a valuable source of information about what students are experiencing in school and where those experiences are taking place, especially when used in combination with other monitoring tools (see Box 10.1 for tips on conducting observations). For instance, mapping (which will be described in the next section) and focus groups may point out a troubling “hot spot” on the school campus where fights or other problems among students are taking place. Observations of that location can help school leaders understand what is happening in order to plan a solution. Studies and anecdotal reports have shown that bullying, school violence, or incidents involving drugs are more likely to occur in the common areas of the school campus or in the hidden- away spots that might not get a lot of traffic. Here is a list of areas that may be the subject of an observation when trying to collect information on where problems might take place: . . . Common areas, such as cafeterias, hallways. and courtyards Playgrounds, the gym (if it’s open to students outside of PE), athletic fields, or stadiums Routes to and from school School buses Nearby parks. . . Just because students leave campus doesn’t mean that adults should no longer be concerned with their behavior. Conflicts that take place in areas off campus often lead to violence, victimization, or other incidents at school. The observation process should be thought of as a continuum. At one end are unstructured observations in which the observer is looking to take away a general sense of the activity in that area. This less- structured approach provides opportunities to see behaviors that perhaps were not expected— both good and bad. At the other end of the spectrum are very structured observation schedules that employ detailed procedures and checklists. More structured observations conducted by multiple observers can lead to more agreement on what actually was observed. These are especially useful if the observation is focusing on a particular topic.

The Voices of Parents

Parents are important partners in the educational process. Including their views in the monitoring system has multiple benefits. First, parents who believe that the school is interested in their feedback and takes it seriously become even better partners with educators. They feel important, respected, and helpful and may be more willing to engage in meaningful dialogue with school leaders and staff members. Parents are also an impor­tant source of information on their own experiences in the school and on the lives of their children (see Box 7.1). In one school, for example, parents shared that their child’s teachers contacted them only when the child presented difficulties— never when the child did well. Following this feedback, the school changed their policy and made an effort to communicate regularly with parents and to emphasize student gains and achievements— not just problem areas. In another school, military- connected parents expressed a feeling that school staff members did not appreciate their sacrifices and the challenges their children face due to their parents’ military service. This input was helpful in developing a school climate that would be more welcoming to military- connected families and students. Parents can be viewed as the clients of the school. As such, it’s important to cosider their perceptions of school climate and whether they are satisfied with the services their children are receiving in order to retain these families and attract others. When parents think their children might not be safe in school, they will search for other options. Monitoring parents’ perceptions and levels of satisfaction is important in order to make adjustments and to ensure that student families remain loyal allies. A monitoring system that includes surveys for parents— and other opportunities for them to share their perceptions— can also help educators learn more about students’ lives out of school and whether there are any issues that could affect their academic and nonacademic lives in school. Surveys of parents and guardians, for example, can show whether students have someone at home after school or whether parents feel comfortable contacting teachers if they feel there is a problem.

The Voices of Staff Members

The voices of staff members are important to any school improvement process. The perceptions of those who work in a school can have a significant impact on the environment within that school. Improving school climate doesn’t mean only making sure that stu­dents feel safe and welcome and believe that adults care about their academic and social-emotional well- being. It also means that teachers, administrators, and other school staff feel committed to the school, view it as a good place to work, and believe they have a role in promoting positive experiences for all students— even those not in their classes or otherwise assigned to them. Staff surveys are an important part of a comprehensive monitoring system because they can tell us first- hand about the lives of staff members in school and can also add another perspective on student behaviors. Staff members are an essential source of information on the interrelationships among teachers, administrators, and classified personnel. For teachers and supporting staff members to contribute best to school performance, they need to feel that the organizational climate supports them and their work. Teachers who feel unappreciated and that they operate under difficult working conditions will be less motivated to invest in their work and may burn out faster and leave the school. Such frequent staff turnover has disastrous consequences for students’ lives in school (see Box 6.1). Staff members may feel that asking for students’ perceptions of how they teach and run the school puts them in a disadvantageous position in which others can blame them for academic or behavior problems among students. Listening to staff members and their views of the students, the school, and the district leadership is a way of communicating that their opinions and perceptions are valued. It is also a way for leaders to advocate for the importance of listening to feedback and to show that they welcome feedback from staff members about their performance. Providing regular opportunities for feedback from staff members is an important way to assess their needs for training and other types of support.

Developing a Monitoring System

The steering committee responsible for developing the system is sometimes charged with creating a system from scratch. In many other cases, they are expected to implement an existing monitoring system imposed by the state, the district, or a funder. Even when an existing monitoring system is implemented, the role of the local steering committee is crucial— there is always a need to make both small and large adjustments and modifications to ensure that the system is most helpful in the circumstances particular to a school or district. Box 3.1 summarizes the key steps for developing a monitoring system. For instance, school leaders, in cooperation with the steering committee, may decide to add a few questions to an existing survey to learn more about a particular issue of concern to a school. For example, they might want to know how Native American parents view the school’s respect for their heritage or if military- connected students feel that their parents are appreciated. The committee may also want to add an additional method, such as a focus group, to enhance its ability to receive feedback on a particular issue. Before deciding on the components of a monitoring system, leaders first need to address how to cover the cost. Creating a new monitoring system can be an expensive endeavor, so policymakers should conduct extensive research on what sources of funding they have available before finalizing the components of their monitoring system. Sources of funding might include federal grants, foundation grants, or discretionary funding at the district or local school level. These funds might also cover the cost of having staff people analyze the results and write reports to share with policymakers, parents, educators, and students. Making use of or adapting existing instruments is obviously less expensive than having something new created. Partnering with other organizations, universities, or government agencies that might want to have access to similar information is another cost- efficient way to approach the funding aspects of monitoring. Many monitoring techniques require little or no funding at all.

Using Monitoring to Support and Improve Schools

The ultimate goal of implementing a monitoring system is to improve the settings in which children go to school every day and to identify areas where students need support. Data can show which aspects of school climate are already creating positive experiences for students while also leading educators to focus on those areas that need attention or intervention. Educators should pay special attention to groups of students that might be more likely to exhibit risky behavior or to be victimized by other students. For example, using the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) data, it became clear that military- connected students who have changed schools multiple times experience victimization and reported higher rates of weapon- carrying than others. The schools, therefore, have implemented a wide range of initiatives to help new students feel welcome, meet other students, and get involved in school activities. Similarly, data showing that foster care and homeless youth experience social- emotional difficulties may prompt districts to pay attention to these groups of students and mobilize community and state resources to respond to their needs. Sometimes the data will show that certain incidents among students are more likely to occur during certain times of the school day or in certain areas of the campus, mostly where there is a lack of supervision by adults. This knowledge can help school leaders and students develop innovative solutions for avoiding those problems. Such a situation took place at Santa Margarita Elementary School— located on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton— where tensions among students often boiled over on the playground during recess. Then- Principal Pat Kurtz worked with her playground “duty supervisors” to implement a variety of strategies that would make recess time less stressful and empower both the students and the supervisors to create more positive experiences for students: . . . First, when Kurtz brought a child into her office because of a behavior problem, she also brought in the duty supervisor, who likely intervened in the situation on the playground, so that he or she could learn how Kurtz worked with a child who was struggling with peers. . . .