A Case Study

of

Clarendon (Texas) Consolidated Independent School District and Its Role as a Partner in the NSF-Supported Texas Rural Systemic Initiative (TRSI)

Prepared

for

The NSF Rural Systemic Initiatives Evaluation Study

by

Kenneth H. McKinley

The Evaluation Center

Western Michigan University

Kalamazoo, MI 49008-5237

Other Visitation Team Members and Contributors

Jerry Horn

E. Robert Stephens

January 2003

Foreword

On behalf of The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University and the site visit team for the National Science Foundation (NSF) Rural Systemic Initiatives evaluation study, we thank the officials of the Clarendon (Texas) Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) for their willingness to include this community and school district in our study for NSF. First, Superintendent Monty Hysinger approved the case study project for the district, participated in early planning for the study visits, and opened the CCISD schools to our formal visits in September 2001 and May 2002. Secondly, John Taylor, district counselor and Texas Rural Systemic Initiative (TRSI) contact person, was extremely helpful in setting up appointments for us with various stakeholders in the district, providing us with useful and pertinent written information and data, and giving his own valuable insights of the CCISD programs and the Texas School Accountability Program. Further, Principals Larry Jeffers (high school), Marvin Elam (middle/junior high school), and Mike Word (elementary) committed time for interviews and visits to their campuses; we appreciate their candor and openness as they reflected on both problems and successes. Individual teacher partners allowed us to visit their classrooms and talked with us about their experiences related to TRSI involvement and impact on the Clarendon schools. They and all other personnel in the district and community members made the team feel welcome, and we will always remember this visit as a very positive professional experience.

We also thank the TRSI management team at West Texas A&M University. Ted Guffy, Dean of Education and Social Sciences; Judy Kelley, TRSI/STRSI Executive Director; and Marylin Leasure, TRSI Project Director, facilitated the selection of districts in Texas for inclusion in this case study research project and provided guidance and feedback on our work and, most importantly, their excellent service to the rural mathematics and science teachers of Texas.

We believe this report provides a fair and accurate description of the Clarendon community, its schools, and the efforts to provide a quality education for the district’s students. Certainly, there are challenges and problems in any public school organization, but we acknowledge the time and effort that many professionals are providing to meet the student needs of this community.

Lastly, we thank study team member E. Robert Stephens for his professional expertise and effort and the extensive and positive contributions he made in the development of this report.

 

Jerry G. Horn                                                  Kenneth H. McKinley

Principal Research Associate                         TRSI Case Study Team Leader

A Case Study

of the

Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (TX) and Its Role as a Partner in the NSF-Supported Texas Rural Systemic Initiative

Located in the southernmost tier of counties in the Texas Panhandle lies Clarendon, the small rural county seat of Donley County, which has a population of approximately 4,000. Clarendon is located some 60 miles southeast of Amarillo, the major economic center of the Panhandle, and nearly 300 miles northwest of the Dallas-Ft.Worth metroplex. Current day Clarendon resides on U.S. Highway 287, which is a major commercial truck route between Dallas and Denver. Due in great part to its location on a major highway within reasonable driving distance to a large population center with a vibrant economy and ample job opportunities, Clarendon has survived economically while other small towns on the high plains have diminished and even disappeared over the last half century.

The climate of Clarendon and Donley County is virtually dry and mild. The average annual rainfall is approximately 20 inches. Occasionally, the area will experience a 12-month measure of moisture in excess of 30 inches, but a third of that may come in one storm. The average temperature is 60 degrees F. with highs in July and August at or above 100 and lows in January and February near zero. The wind is always a factor in the area, since the panhandles of Texas and Oklahoma are positioned on a gradual up slope ranging from the flat, alluvial plains of south Texas to the high, arid prairies of the up slope on the eastern side of the North American Rocky Mountains. Also, Clarendon sits at the near west end of what is known in the middle United States as “tornado alley.” Because of prevailing air currents east of the Rockies, sudden, violent, tornado-producing spring storms may erupt when cold, still Arctic air from the north collides with warm, moisture-laden air from the Gulf of Mexico and south Texas.

The land is flat to rolling with cedar-studded canyons and, until recently, was particularly well suited to farming and ranching. Before the settlement of the area in the late 1800s, water flowed constantly in nearly all natural streams in the area throughout the year. With time, the face of the land has changed by varied, and sometimes imprudent, soil management practices. Now the constant supply of water, especially in smaller streams and ponds, has ceased; during the summer season these natural surface water sources become dry.

The major crops still grown in the county with irrigation from a ground water aquifer include cotton, alfalfa, milo, and peanuts. Large cattle ranches still exist for the purpose of breeding and raising beef herds. However, the absolute number of ranches that dot the land at the beginning of the twenty-first century in Donley County and the Texas Panhandle has dwindled precipitously as the economics of farming and ranching demand ever-larger units of land to sustain even a modest return on investment. One of the more recent developments in the area is the sale, rent, and lease of what was once productive farmland for nearly year-round recreational hunting. The major game varieties still existing on the land include white-tail deer, quail, dove, pheasant, and feral swine.

Clarendon was established in 1878 on a site some seven miles north of its current location. The original founder was the Reverend L.H. Carhart, a Methodist minister from the south, who named the new colony Clarendon in honor of his wife, Clara Sully Carhart. At its beginning, Clarendon was a Christian conclave, inaffectionately dubbed “Saint’s Roost” by the cowboys who drove their herds to market through the area and, at night, hunted without success for their favorite beverage after a long, hot day on the dusty trail. Clarendon was moved from its first location to its current site in 1907, which was probably quite fortuitous because the town fathers realized the need to establish a presence on the Ft.Worth & Denver Railroad, which was being built through the region. Also, in the middle of the twentieth century, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers erected Greenbelt Lake (originally Greenbelt Reservoir) at the intersection of Carroll Creek and the Salt Fork of the Red River. Today, the old Clarendon town site lies at the bottom of the lake.

Today, Clarendon, the county seat of Donley County, Texas, with a population of approximately 2,160, and Hedley, a smaller town in the southeast corner of the county, constitute its two main business and civic centers. Clarendon gives the first-time visitor the feel of an older, high-plains, boot-scootin’, cowboy, ranch town. Many of the streets are paved with the original brick laid in the early 1900s. There are several antique stores up and down main street, and the community’s private economy continues to be driven by small businesses designed to service an agrarian society. Farming and ranching are still major players in the county, but the rural population has dwindled significantly as the economic equation for sustaining family life on the farm has changed dramatically over the last half-century in rural America. Oil and gas mining were never major players in the Donley County economy, which distinguishes it quite markedly from other Texas Panhandle counties farther north and west of Clarendon.

Table 1 reveals that Donley County, and by association, Clarendon have not kept pace with the rest of the state and nation in terms of population growth, especially during the last half of the twentieth century. Beginning in 1940 and extending into the late 1970s, Donley County experienced a fairly significant population decline. This was primarily due to the changing economics of farming and ranching in the area. The 1980 census shows the county’s only double-digit (percentage) population increase in the last 60 years. This was a time when the oil and gas drilling activity of the Texas Panhandle was booming and agricultural land prices were escalating all over rural America.

Noticeably, this area of West Texas did not participate in the state’s explosive population and economic growth during the 1980s and 1990s. At the same time, population in the metropolitan areas of the Lone Star State increased almost exponentially in the last two decades of the twentieth century with the fast-paced growth of the telecommunications, electronics, and information-age industries.

Table 1

Population Summary: Donley County, Texas, and the USA from 1900 to 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000

Tables 2 and 3 illustrate yet another insight into the evolution of Donley County and the state of Texas over the last 20 years with respect to changes in the racial composition and income levels of the two entities. Donley County, the population of which is dominated by the population of Clarendon and the households that send students to its public schools, has gained in the percentage of Hispanic citizens while losing total population. The slight decrease in the percentage of white residents is reflective of the changes in the socioeconomic composition of the area. With the decline of production agriculture in the area in the last 20 years, the percentage of white residents in the county has decreased commensurately. Fewer current generations of farm and ranch families are living on the land and, once graduated from high school, their children are leaving for higher education and/or other employment opportunities, never to return.

Table 2

Summary of Population Trends in Donley County, TX, by Race and Income: 1980 to 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000

Income growth for the area, even when adjusted for inflation, has increased nicely over the last two decades. When compared with the state of Texas, household income in Donley County and the Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) has kept pace, if not slightly outgained the state since 1980. This may be explained by the fact that the three major payrolls in the community are the school district, Clarendon College (CC), and income earned by households that have at least one wage earner employed in the Amarillo area, particularly at a large government contracting industry, Pan-Tex Corporation, a processor of munitions and nuclear energy materials. The wage base for skilled and semiskilled workers in greater Amarillo is significantly higher than in rural Clarendon, yet a number of citizens prefer to live in the lower cost rural areas that have good school systems and safe, secure standards of living. Another steady income stream into the Donley County region is that of government transfer payments (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, Aid to Dependent Children).

While the population of Donley County is still predominantly white, the Hispanic population has increased consistently in the last 20 years in terms of percentage growth, if not significantly in absolute numbers. Certainly the dramatic growth in the state’s Hispanic population has not yet reached the high plains in significant proportions.

Table 3

Summary of Population Trends in Texas by Race and Income: 1980 to 2000

	Race					Income
Year	White	AA	H/L	Other	Total (N)	HHI ($)	Below Poverty Level (%)
1980	65.9%	11.9%	21.0%	1.3%	14,229,191	$16,708	19.7%
1990	60.8%	11.7%	25.3%	2.3%	16,986,510	$27,016	18.1%
2000	52.4%	11.5%	32.0%	4.1%	20,851,820	$34,478	16.7%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000

In terms of the racial/ethnic composition of Texas, the most dramatic change is among the Hispanic population. It has gained “market share” on the order of 50 percent, moving from approximately 21 percent of the state’s population in 1980 to 32 percent in 2000 (see Table 3).

No major manufacturing plants are located in the Clarendon area. In addition to the employers listed above, the predominantly service economy provides the bulk of employment opportunities in Donley County. We observed a number of antique stores, filling stations, motels, insurance companies, grocery stores, and small eating establishments. Interestingly, Clarendon boasts five banks, some of which are branches of major banking corporations whose headquarters are located in Amarillo, Lubbock, Dallas, etc.

Clarendon College, which enrolls 700+ FTE students in accredited freshman- and sophomore-level courses, employs a faculty of nearly 40. The college offers freshman and sophomore courses in arts and sciences eligible for transfer to degree programs in regional four-year colleges and universities, technical and occupational programs leading to associate degrees, certificates of completion, and entry into semiskilled and skilled occupations. The college is known for its outstanding one-year certificate programs in feedlot and ranch management and livestock judging.

The college was administratively linked with CCISD until 1968 when it separated from the school district and moved to its current location at the top of the hill on the west side of town adjacent to Highway 278. Prior to that event, the CCISD high school students and CC students attended classes in the same building on the current CCISD campus, many of which were taught by teachers/faculty who served both education systems. Both entities also were under the same board of education. The college serves an eight county region of the Texas Panhandle, but students from all over Texas and the Southwest, as well as students from several foreign countries, attend there. Clarendon College has a large attendance center at Pampa, Texas. However, the central administration function of the college, funded in part by state and local property taxes, continues to reside in Clarendon.

Table 4 exhibits a more formal summary of the types of occupations engaged in by area residents over the age of 16. As shown, education, agriculture, and retail trade driven by small businesses undergird the area’s economy. Education employment in Donley County is dominated by the Clarendon and Hedley school districts and Clarendon College, agriculture by the farming and ranching interests in the county, and retail trade by the service establishments that support the agricultural production and educational entities in Clarendon and Hedley.

What are the prospects for the Clarendon/Donley County economy over the next 5-10 years?

In a conversation with the town’s leading banker who also serves on the CCISD Citizens Advisory Committee, the site visit team learned that no new, major manufacturing concerns or production plants with accompanying large payrolls are planned, but several smaller ventures are in the developmental stages:

 

∙          the continuation and expansion of the research and development function for a heavy dirt-moving machinery company with substantial international connections 

 

∙          a new equestrian center at the college. It will be large and functional enough to host regional horse and cattle shows, auctions, fairs, concerts, and other events that will bring significant crowds to town several weekends a year. This will spawn the need for 

 

            •          new overnight lodging and food accommodations for the event attendees. Best Western Motels, Inc. has indicated a desire to build a 60-room unit in Clarendon. 

 

            •          additional food establishments. Several fast food chains are exploring the market potential of the area. 

 

∙          a new library and student resident hall at the college 

 

∙          a $4 million renovation of the old Donley County courthouse, which is well under way 

 

∙          growing use of the Greenbelt Lake recreation area by Panhandle residents. There is an ever-increasing need for lodging and food accommodations in the area. 

The bank president concluded by saying that the attitude of city leaders toward planned growth in Clarendon is changing. Education has always been a high priority. Now, communication is beginning to occur between the major entities in town—e.g., the school board, city hall, and the college—regarding ways to cooperate. The city goals are quite simple: pave every street, clean up the town, and attract new home construction.

Table 4

Donley County, Texas, Occupational Summary, 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000

The School District

Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) is one of several rural school districts in Texas with the word “consolidated” in its formal name. For most districts with this distinction, it reflects the consolidation or merger of two or more rural K-12 districts, usually for the purpose of financial efficiency; the motivation to offer a more comprehensive academic program to the students attending from the combined districts; and the need to utilize staff, facilities, and equipment more efficiently and effectively. CCISD, at the outset of the 21st century, is a combination of nearly 40 small, rural, kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8) one-room schoolhouses, which were closed primarily during the ten-year period after the end of World War II because of a decreasing rural student population and the increasing costs of

educating pupils in these remote locations. Students were bused to town, some riding as long as one hour each way from the far corners of the school district. This situation still exists today, but only in rare instances for those rural children who come from the few large ranches and farms in the county. More than 90 percent of the CCISD students live in Clarendon or in the Greenbelt Lake recreation area. The Greenbelt area has experienced a relatively rapid increase in population as citizens with school-age children, who work as far away as Amarillo (60 miles) and Childress (55 miles), elect the country lifestyle.

Table 5 exhibits some salient facts about CCISD. Student enrollment has decreased modestly over the last 6 school years from a high of 555 K-12 pupils in 1997-98 to a low of 493 pupils in 2001-02, the year most recently reported. This is an 11 percent decrease during the time period shown and may be due to normal fluctuations of large classes graduating from the high school and smaller classes entering kindergarten and first grade. The CCISD administration acknowledged awareness of the trend to the site visit team, but did not express undue alarm about the decline in enrollment. Mention was made that, prior to the arrival of the current superintendent, some families moved their children to the Hedley school system, some 15 miles down the road. It was surmised that this movement took place primarily for the following reasons: (1) Hedley is much smaller than Clarendon and may afford more opportunity for selected students to participate in athletics, (2) a number of Hedley teachers live in Clarendon and enroll their children in the Hedley schools as a matter of convenience, and (3) a racial incident in Clarendon a number of years ago may have precipitated the transfer of some Clarendon students to Hedley.

The student-to-teacher ratio in CCISD remains at or below ten to one (10:1), an indicator that is reflective of many rural schools in Texas and on the high plains. It has remained relatively constant over the last 6 school years. Per-pupil revenues rose significantly (24 percent) with the growth in the state and national economies and concomitant increases in teacher compensation and district fixed costs. Local property tax valuations in the district rose 19 percent during the period, while the percentage of the district operating budget provided by the state hovered steadily around 60 percent. Clarendon is not a wealthy district, having no appreciable gas and oil activity (although this indicator has diminished markedly for many rural Texas districts compared with the “boom” days of 1974-82). Its local per-pupil assessed tax value is only 78 percent of the state average. Thus, it is a “donee” district for state aid under the Texas school finance formula. Except for the 1996-97 school year, when the district finished retiring local indebtedness to complete remodeling of the current high school campus, the locally assessed tax

rate in the district has remained in the $1.20-$1.30 range (per $100 of assessed valuation). This is well below the state average (which is in the high $1.40s) and the state cap of $1.50.

Table 5

Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) Enrollments and Finances,

1996-97 through 2001-02

School Year	Enrollment (K-12)	St/T Ratio	Revenue ($) /Student	TVPP	LATR	State Aid	Fund Balance
1996-97	511	9.8	$6,121	$153,880	1.475	58.7%	36.1%
1997-98	555	10.2	$6,216	$146,947	1.200	60.8%	27.3%
1998-99	513	9.4	$6,969	$162,961	1.200	60.9%	27.0%
1999-00	533	9.9	$7,075	$164,697	1.290	63.0%	16.0%
2000-01	494	9.5	$7,745	$173,734	1.270	59.8%	22.0%
2001-02	493	9.8	$8,088	$183,060	1.305	60.3%	13.1%

When compared with the other school districts in Region 16 and the state of Texas, CCISD enrolls a predominantly white, relatively racially homogeneous student body (Table 6). Its percentage of economically disadvantaged students, as measured by those who participate in the federally supported school nutrition program (free and reduced-price lunch) lags the state, Region 16, and state averages for districts with enrollment less than 500 (not shown) by an average of five percentage points. The CCISD cost per pupil exceeds that of the region and state by nearly 30 percent, not atypical of small, rural school districts when compared with their larger peers in the predominantly rural states of America. The cost per pupil shown here does not agree with the per-pupil budgetary figure shown in Table 5 because the previous number reflects revenue per pupil from all sources, while Table 6 shows the actual, audited operating cost of providing the education program across all pupils in the CCISD for the 2000-01 school year.

Table 6

Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) Pupil Enrollment by Race and Cost Per Pupil as Compared with ESC Region 16 and the State of Texas, 2000-01

Source: Texas Education Agency, Snapshot 2001

Table 7 provides a brief profile of how CCISD teachers compare, as a group, with the teaching force in the other 63 school districts served by Texas Education Service Center Region 16 and within the state of Texas on the variables of experience, formal education, and turnover rate. The 52 teachers in the Clarendon schools appear to be a well-educated, dynamic force. Many who come to CCISD are natives of the region and have earned bachelor’s degrees and basic teaching credentials from area colleges and universities such as West Texas A&M , Texas Tech, Angelo State, and Midwestern (Wichita Falls). As a group, they possess, on average, nearly 13 years of classroom teaching experience, a number in excess of the state average, and approximately 1 in 5 has an advanced degree.

Table 7

CCISD Classroom Teacher Cohort Profile Comparison, 2000-01

Source: Texas Education Agency, Snapshot 2001

The issue of recruiting and retaining quality mathematics and science teachers does not seem to present the challenge for CCISD as it does for other small, rural districts in Texas. This may be explained, in part, by a conversation the site visit team had with the senior high school science teacher who also serves as athletic director and head football coach for the district. He said, “This is a great place to raise a family. There are plenty of wholesome outlets for recreation and family activities here. Yet, we are close enough to Amarillo (one hour) to enjoy and take advantage of major shopping, arts, and entertainment venues.” Other CCISD teachers and administrators echoed this sentiment, saying they would rather work for a lower salary in this type of a small school setting, with its low to nonexistent crime rate and the lack of the diversions of a larger population area. These community attributes, plus a supportive public and relatively stable student home environments, make CCISD a good place to teach. Teachers know the families that send their children to CCISD, and vice versa. If there is a problem with student learning or behavior, communication between the school and home is, for the most part, easy and effective.

The CCISD administrative team is composed of 5 full-time professionals: a district superintendent, 3 campus principals (high school, junior high, and elementary), and a district counselor who also handles several other administrative responsibilities, e.g., TRSI contact person, special programs coordinator, etc. This administrative group appears to be a stable, well-organized, functioning team with more than 50 years of service, collectively, to the Clarendon school district. They appear to be intent on maximizing the resources available for educating the CCISD students and minimizing the hindrance to teachers in pursuing their primary mission: optimizing the learning opportunities for the district’s students.

The three CCISD academic campuses appear to be aging, yet are well maintained and functional for an effective elementary and secondary education program. The three connected campuses house classrooms, computer laboratories, and a library for 243 elementary-age youngsters (PreK-5), 113 middle school/junior high students (grades 6-8), and 135 high school students (grades 9-12) (school year 2001-02). The high school was refurbished within the last ten years. It features an interesting architectural configuration of classrooms on three floors—wide hallways and recessed entryways (to classrooms)—which gives it more the feel of an old college building, which indeed it was until 1968. At that time the then Clarendon Junior College, which co-occupied the premises, separated and established quarters on the edge of town. The high school science classrooms have laboratory equipment arrayed on tables and shelves around the edge of the room. The equipment, which appeared to be functional and in use, was adequate for a rural high school. No separate science laboratories exist in either the junior high or high school. The mathematics classrooms are nicely arranged for learning, but no outstanding equipment except Internet-active desktop computers were observed.

One of the outstanding attributes of the CCISD is the exciting infusion of modern computing and telecommunications technology that has been acquired and installed in district classrooms and computer laboratories over the last eight years. The district has aggressively pursued and acquired a variety of competitive state and federal grants for technology hardware, software, and training that make it quite unique for a district of its size, remoteness, and relative lack of local resources. Some of the highlights of the CCISD technology program are listed below:

 

∙          a comprehensive, written, five-year district plan that outlines the vision, mission, and objectives of the CCISD technology program to provide for planned obsolescence, upgrades, support staff, and the district’s response to state curriculum mandates in the areas of technology education and the enhancement of other basic curriculum areas, including mathematics and science 

 

∙          a state grant (approximately $675,000), titled “Teaching an Old Town New Tricks,” acquired to network the community (library, museum, city hall, etc.) with the school district and the college for the purpose of easily sharing computer hardware, connectivity, training, and information 

 

∙          an additional state infrastructure grant to upgrade cabling, servers, workstations, and adaptive devices 

 

∙          more than 330 desktop computers (1 per 1.5 students) with attendant state-of-the-art servers, networks, and software for classrooms, laboratories, libraries, and offices 

 

∙          a fully equipped and dedicated multimedia classroom, with full-motion send-and-receive audio and video telecommunications capability connected with ESC Region 16 in Amarillo and other Region 16 school districts with similar capability 

 

∙          two full-time technology coordinators, one of whom is responsible for the technical aspects of the system, the other for training and technical assistance to teachers on classroom applications and instructional integration issues 

CCISD is 1 of 60 (out of 64) Texas Panhandle school districts that uses the Region 16 Internet server and is the third highest user of bandwidth on that server. This is quite remarkable when one considers that 26 districts in that service region have larger enrollments than CCISD.

When asked how they planned to keep pace with the ambitious goals outlined in the district technology plan, CCISD administrators said that “technology is not an option in Clarendon” and that “we plan to stay proactive in the pursuit of outside resources (grants, contracts, private donations) as old grants terminate. We have a board of education that is pro-technology and understands the need to help make every student 21^st century technology literate.” This appears to be a goal that is well on its way to being met in Clarendon, an outstanding accomplishment for a small, rural school district in the high plains of the Texas Panhandle.

The Texas System of Elementary and Secondary Education

The Texas public elementary and secondary education system is administered by the Texas Education Agency (TEA), the regulatory arm of the executive branch of state government. The TEA executes policy and provides oversight of education laws and regulations established by the legislature and the state board of education. This is a huge responsibility in that there were more than 4 million students attending 1,199 Texas local independent school districts and charter schools in 2001-02. The TEA administers state curriculum policy and frameworks, budgetary policy and distribution procedures, and attends to the needs of student special populations. The TEA also administers the Texas accountability program, one of the most unique, structured, complete, and consequential student testing programs in the United States.

The TEA is assisted in its administrative responsibilities by a network of 20 regional Education Service Centers (ESCs) with defined geographical areas of service. The largest ESC, in terms of the number of local school districts served, is located at Richardson (in the Dallas metropolitan area) with 107; the smallest is at El Paso, serving 16 districts. The ESCs employ specialists in curriculum, telecommunications and computer technology, testing and assessment, finance, grant acquisition and administration, professional staffing of special and cooperative education programs, and special needs student population services (e.g., special education, bilingual education, etc.). Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District, along with 63 other public school districts primarily in the Texas Panhandle, is served by ESC Region 16 located in Amarillo.

No discussion of any aspect of the PK-12 public education program in the Lone Star State could be held without including an overview of the Texas School Accountability Rating (AR) system. Texas entered its third decade and fourth generation of a statewide criterion-referenced testing (CRT) program with the commencement of the 2002-03 school year. This movement gained momentum and national attention in the 1980s with the report of the Texas Select Committee on Education, chaired by H. Ross Perot, CEO of Educational Data Systems (EDS) and independent candidate for president of the United States in 1992 and 1996. In 1984, the Texas legislature enacted a comprehensive education reform law mandating the most sweeping changes in public elementary and secondary education in the prior 30 years. The law established the framework for a statewide curriculum (called the Essential Elements), required students to achieve a score of 70 to pass their high school courses, mandated the “no pass, no play” rule (students participating in varsity sports and other extracurricular activities must pass their high school courses in order to participate), required teachers to take and pass a statewide curriculum exam, and mandated changes in the statewide testing program (including testing of kindergarten and first-grade pupils, ostensibly for the purpose of sound program placement and instructional intervention). Although other measures beside CRT scores make up a Texas school district and campus Accountability Rating (AR)—e.g., student attendance and dropout rates—the student assessment process, which some call “high stakes” testing (HST), clearly drives the process.

Texas is cited in the literature (Haney, 2000; Amrein & Berliner, 2002) as one of 18 states in America that currently administers an HST program in the elementary and secondary schools. High stakes tests are defined as any forms of assessment wherein the results have definable consequences (good, bad, or indifferent) for students, teachers, campuses, and/or school districts. Texas and North Carolina lead with as many as 8 out of 10 selected “stakes” associated with their statewide HST programs:

 

1.         Graduation from high school is contingent on a passing grade on the state exam. 

 

2.         Grade promotion is contingent on passing the state exam. 

 

3.         The state publishes an annual school (campus) or district report card (in Texas, school districts are required by law to disseminate these reports to parents). 

 

4.         The state rates or identifies low performing schools according to whether they meet state standards or improve each year. 

 

5.         Monetary awards are given to high performing or improving schools. 

 

6.         Monetary awards can be used for staff bonuses. 

 

7.         The state has the authority to close, reconstitute, or revoke a school’s accreditation or take over low performing schools. 

 

8.         The state has the authority to replace school personnel because of low test scores. 

 

9.         The state permits students in low performing schools to enroll elsewhere. 

 

10.       Monetary awards or scholarships for in- or out-of-state college tuition are given to high performing students. 

Texas incorporates all but numbers 2 and 10 (above) in its school accountability program. However, the state will add number 2—“grade promotion contingent upon passing the state exam”—to the list of identified high stakes beginning with the introduction of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in 2003.

The benefits of high stakes testing, as posited by various researchers and state education agency officials, include the following:

 

1.         Challenging academic expectations for students, teachers, and schools are established and clarified. 

 

2.         Schools return to focusing on the mission for which they were originally established: student basic skills acquisition—reading, writing (verbal), and mathematics (quantitative). 

 

3.         Student achievement gaps can be easily identified and efficiently addressed. 

 

4.         Student learning performance is boosted. 

 

5.         The public is given some concept and confidence in their “return on investment” in the schools. 

 

6.         Delivery of curricula is improved. 

 

7.         Teacher and administrator professional development is focused on and built around “what works.” 

 

8.         An awareness of the learning needs of ALL students is sharpened. 

 

9.         Educators’ knowledge of the integral role of assessment in the teaching and learning process is increased. 

 

10.       The dialogue about what schools should be about is improved, internally between teachers and teachers and administrators and externally between schools and their publics. 

High stakes tests (HSTs), as they are now promulgated across the United States, often generate unintended and negative consequences. A representative list of these documented effects of HSTs include such observations as the following:

 

1.         They encourage “teaching to the test.” 

 

2.         Student test performance is shaped by factors other than content knowledge, e.g., teaching test-taking skills, motivating students through extrinsic reward programs, modifying the curriculum to match the test, and elevating test-taking skills to the forefront as the most important of student characteristics. 

 

3.         Results are used for inappropriate tracking, grade promotion, and retention. 

 

4.         Students who don’t test well become labeled as liabilities because their scores lower the group average. 

 

5.         They narrow the curriculum (“If it isn’t on the test, we don’t teach it!”). 

 

6.         Vital resource and curriculum decisions are made on the results of a single test score. 

 

7.         They tend to transfer control over the curriculum to the body that controls the test. 

 

8.         They are used to make extremely important decisions about individual students, e.g., grade promotion, graduation, etc. 

 

9.         They are culturally biased against certain groups of students. 

 

10.       They perpetuate the idea (some would say myth) that “good” education equals a high test score and vice versa. 

The 2001-02 school year marked the last year in a ten-year run in the implementation and use of the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) as the major marker of student academic achievement in Texas public elementary and secondary schools. In addition to being used to insure student learning, TAAS results are also used to hold school districts accountable for student learning (Haney, 2000). The Texas State Board of Education is mandated by law to rate the performance of schools and school districts according to a set of “academic excellence indicators,” including TAAS test results and student dropout and attendance rates (TEA, 1998). State law also prescribes that student performance data be disaggregated by ethnicity and socioeconomic status. The TEA school accountability rating system holds that district and campus performance is not acceptable if the achievement results of all subgroups is not acceptable. Based primarily on the percentage of students passing each TAAS test, since 1994 the more than 6,000 campuses in Texas have been rated as “exemplary,” “recognized,” “(academically) acceptable,” or “(academically) unacceptable” (Haney, 2000).

Beginning in 2002-03, the statewide test will be changed to the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) (see Table 8). Reasons given by state officials for the change are that “the (TAAS) test items are no longer ‘fresh’ (classroom teachers and students have become adept at anticipating the correct answers on each succeeding year’s form of the test), and elected and appointed state policy-makers believe the state suffers from score inflation. The results are not reflective of sound student learning.” However, one Texas superintendent with whom this author interacted likened the whole process of changing the test “when the scores get too high” to a sports analogy. “We can teach a basketball player to shoot free throws with 80 or 90 percent accuracy. When he/she reaches that goal, we don’t then suddenly raise the hoop to 12 feet. We need to decide as a state and nation what constitutes acceptable learning in this country and how to assess it, then stay with it and not change every few years.”

Table 8

TAAS to TAKS Conversion Chart

 

Source: John Taylor, Counselor, Clarendon (TX) Consolidated Independent School District

*Students must pass TAKS test at indicated grade levels to be eligible for promotion to next grade

**Students must pass TAAS test to be eligible to graduate from high school

***Students must pass TAKS test to be eligible to graduate from high school

After undoubtedly millions of professional person-hours of collective effort and input by classroom teachers, district curriculum personnel, state agency officials, test-construction contractor representatives, and student field-testing, the new state high stakes test, the TAKS,

will be implemented Spring 2003. It reportedly will be more rigorous than the TAAS and will more accurately measure students’ higher order and inferential thinking skills. This same claim

was made in 1990 at the time of the transition from the Texas Assessment of Minimum Skills (TEAMS) to the TAAS. This change, or what some would call “raising the bar,” creates what is known as the “sawtooth effect” in state test scores over time (Linn, 2000).

Shown in Table 8 (above) are the number, level, and types of tests that will result with the discontinuance of the TAAS and introduction of the TAKS. By the end of the fifth year, 2007-08, of the TAKS implementation, Texas will have evolved from requiring 19 tests at 7 grade levels with a single graduation requirement under TAAS to the administration of 26 tests over 9 grade levels with multiple test-driven graduation and grade promotion requirements. The high stakes requirement of third graders passing the state exam in reading for promotion to fourth grade and the passage of reading and mathematics exams at the fifth and eighth grades will be introduced with the TAKS. Whereas there will be statewide mathematics testing at every grade from third through the rising junior level in high school (eleventh grade exit exam) with high-stakes consequences, the state will require only 2 science exams. With the move of the TAAS eighth grade science test to the TAKS fifth grade test, a 6-year gap in assessing science instruction at the state level will be created. This is of professional concern to two primary groups: fifth grade teachers who previously have not taught science in any depth and middle school/junior high school science teachers who worry about the possible diversion of local school district resources away from their content areas to address other changes in the state high stakes testing program. TRSI specialists are busy addressing the concern of at least the first group in their member schools. One told this writer that the state tends to “back-end load” any new testing program: new tests are created and implemented, the achievement bar (standard) is raised, and then teachers must adjust to the new expectations after the fact by scrambling for training, resources, equipment, and supplies.

Purportedly, TAKS will be built on the fully developed comprehensive state curriculum framework, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). In addition to more sensitively mapping onto TEKS, according to state officials and official state education (TEA) publications, TAKS will measure student higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills with greater reliability and validity. Students will not only have to be able to analyze, calculate, and synthesize answers, but also will have to exhibit their ability to apply these skills to real-world problems on the new paper-and-pencil TAKS test. Shown in Figure 1 is an example of the kinds of questions that have appeared on each succeeding generation of Texas high stakes tests: TABS (1980) - TEAMS (1985) - TAAS (1990) - TAKS (2003). To the extent that these sample items from the various exit-level mathematics tests over the last 20 years are representative of the

Figure 1: “From TABS to TAKS.” From the Dallas Morning News, April 22, 2002.

evolution of the student assessment program in Texas, the types and complexity of the skills that students will need to exhibit to succeed in ensuing years will be greatly increased.

One of the positive characteristics of the Texas accountability system is the plethora of data and reports that the TEA generates for use and decision making by local school districts and the fairly rapid turnaround time in which it is generated and fed back. Local districts and campuses receive state test results and item analyses prior to the end of the school year in which the test was administered. This allows for summer and pre-fall planning and curriculum/instructional changes for the ensuing school year. This is, of course, one of the advantages of a paper-and-pencil, single test, single score assessment system. Texas, with more than 20 years of experience, has clearly raised the art of data generation and feedback to schools to a new level.

Although there are many more statistics than are listed below, the following were observed as useful and being utilized by CCISD classroom teachers and administrators to inform decisions regarding the local curriculum and related instructional strategies:

 

•          a thorough test-item analysis for each student test taker for each objective for each state curriculum (TEKS) content area 

 

•          the Texas Learning Index (TLI)—an indicator that is generated each testing period that describes each student’s performance on the TAAS reading and mathematics test. A test-equating statistical method is used to determine the TLI and therefore measure how a  

student has performed in relation to that year’s passing standard, which had been equated to a 70 when the TAAS was implemented in 1990.

 

•          a campus or district Comparability Index (CI), which allows local educators to compare the performance of their student body with other Texas school districts with comparable student characteristics, e.g., ethnicity, economic status, etc. 

 

•          a comprehensive disaggregation of the data by student ethnicity and racial composition, economic status, and gender, etc. 

As previously mentioned, Texas administers one of the most high-profile student assessment programs in the country. This fact gained national attention in the presidential campaign of 2000 when then-governor George W. Bush campaigned on the Republican ticket and won the race for President of the United States. That event, as well as at least one prominent lawsuit, GI Forum vs. Texas Education Agency, brought by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) spawned a flurry of research and study on the annual and sometimes dramatic year-to-year increase in state test scores. MALDEF alleged that the TAAS exit exam had illegal, discriminatory impact on black and Hispanic students. On January 7, 2000, Judge Edward C. Prado ruled against MALDEF and for the state of Texas on the grounds that the TAAS was an integral and necessary part of the state’s education reform plan. Test score gains on the order of 60 percent from 1994 through 2002, which some have called the “Texas miracle in education,” were not uncommon. Table 9 presents an example for the state tenth grade TAAS results over eight testing periods.

Table 9

Percentage of Grade 10 Students Passing the TAAS: Texas, 1994-2002

Researchers have generally attributed the rise in test scores in Texas and other states with similar criterion-reference testing programs, at least in part, to the following phenomena:

 

•          student familiarity with the test items 

 

•          improvement in student test-taking skills 

 

•          a relatively low threshold level for what constitutes proficiency or passing on the state criterion-referenced exam 

 

•          evidence of schools moving selected students off the test-taking list, declaring a greater percentage as test-exempt, special education students 

 

•          as the population grows (see Table 1), categorizing a greater percentage of students as test-exempt, limited English proficiency (LEP) students 

 

•          an increase in the student dropout rate caused by high stakes tests, especially among minority populations between the ninth and twelfth grades. Although not presented to suggest that such is the case for the state as a whole or its rural school districts, Table 10 presents enrollment data from the Houston Independent School District (HISD). The data are instructive relative to this reported dropout trend. The other metropolitan school districts in the state (Dallas, Ft. Worth, San Antonio, Austin, etc.) tend to exhibit the same pattern. 

What does the public in Texas make of HST? How has it permeated the culture? Some form of HST has been in place now for 20⁺ years. A vast majority of the classroom teaching force knows no other system of comprehensive assessment. Many of the younger teachers took some form of the state HST as students in the public schools. As Pollard (2002) said, “As we move away from the classroom, and through the various levels of the educational bureaucracy—first principals, then progressing to central office administrators, school board members, state board of education members, state legislators, and governors—support for standardized testing grows.” Observations made by the site visit team regarding the use of state test results and how they have permeated the culture of Texas include the following:

 

•          Scores are announced in the state’s leading newspapers, which routinely sell out on those days. 

 

•          District and campus accountability ratings (ARs) are posted on the TEA Web page. Huge “hit” rates are recorded on the day of initial posting of the results. 

 

•          Rural communities post signs at the city limits, proudly trumpeting high district ARs. 

Table 10

Houston (TX) Independent School District Student Enrollment by Grade, 1993-94 and 1999-2000

                

Source: HISD Profiles, 1994, 2000

 

•          Real estate agents unabashedly utilize high campus ARs to promote home sales in selected school neighborhoods. 

 

•          Bumper stickers appear with messages such as “My daughter (or son) attends XYZ Elementary School-An EXEMPLARY campus!” 

 

•          Parents decide to enroll or move their children in or out of schools based on the reports in newspaper articles and statewide magazines (e.g., Texas Monthly). 

 

•          Banners are hung from school buildings displaying the latest positive TEA AR for that campus. 

Thus, it can be pronounced safely that high stakes testing in Texas has surely “grafted” itself onto the state elementary and secondary education system. Short of a new court decision, a rollback of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, or an overwhelming groundswell of opposition from the public reversing the current order of business, it is here to stay.

The Texas Rural Systemic Initiative (TRSI)

The Texas Rural Systemic Initiative (TRSI) began in 1997-98 with a planning grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to the Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES), a state agency that is part of the Texas A&M University System. TRSI is led by West Texas A&M University (WTAMU), which is located in Canyon, just south of Amarillo in the Texas Panhandle. Representatives of about 20 rural Texas school districts met several times in the initial planning grant year to advise WTAMU project personnel regarding the major services and technical assistance interventions needed by rural Texas mathematics and science classroom teachers to improve and systemically reform K-12 education in these two vital curriculum content areas. Upon the receipt of a 5-year, $10 million operational grant from NSF in 1998, TRSI Cohort I was formed. Most of the original 20 TRSI cohort I districts were the same as those that had participated in the planning grant. To be eligible to become TRSI members, school districts were required to meet specific student socioeconomic and population guidelines (a poverty rate equal to or greater than 30 percent and a county population less than or equal to 20,000) and to sign an agreement to participate and collaborate under specific TRSI guidelines.

Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) joined the TRSI collaborative as a full Cohort II member beginning with the 2000-01 school year. Although CCISD did not technically meet the poverty criteria for membership, the superintendent petitioned the TRSI management for inclusion, which was granted upon approval by NSF.

The TRSI program is built on a fivefold mission of technical assistance and capacity building in mathematics and science education in member districts. Although not emphasized as a component of the TRSI collaborative’s primary mission, technology education was utilized as a tool to enhance mathematics and science reform. The five TRSI program objectives, called “attributes,” are built around and mirror the six NSF drivers of systemic reform:

 

•          Successful implementation of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the state standards-based curriculum framework, in mathematics and science 

 

•          District policies supporting TEKS mathematics and science implementation and systemic reform through campus administrative support and alignment of district improvement plans with TRSI attributes 

 

•          Alignment of resources to support systemic reform efforts and TEKS mathematics and science implementation 

 

•          Stakeholders’ commitments to systemic reform of district mathematics and science education 

 

•          All district students reaching high academic standards 

To achieve these objectives, the TRSI management team engaged the resources of a uniquely Texas collaborative of participating rural school districts, colleges and universities, the Texas Education Agency, the Texas Statewide Systemic Initiative, regional Education Service Centers (ESCs), the Texas Engineering and Experiment Station, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, and other stakeholders in elementary and secondary mathematics and science in Texas, e.g., the Southwest Educational Development Lab in Austin and the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History.

TRSI primarily utilizes its $10 million, 5-year grant from NSF in the following ways:

 

1.         hiring and strategically locating regional education specialists, most of whom are former senior classroom science and mathematics teachers. These specialists provide technical assistance to participating TRSI district classroom teachers on a scheduled and on-call basis in such areas as aligning local curriculum with the state curriculum framework, TEKS; vertical and horizontal alignment of district mathematics and science curricula; implementation of inquiry-based teaching methodologies; use of appropriate and specific mathematics and science teaching materials (e.g., Foss kits) and tools (e.g., graphing calculators); and other topics as identified by local classroom educators. 

 

2.         sponsoring a statewide summer institute that brings TRSI collaborative member teachers, administrators, and community representatives together to share and learn regarding TRSI, TEA, and local district implementation activities focused on the TRSI attributes 

 

3.         conducting state and regional subject- (mathematics and science) and grade-level-specific institutes for TRSI classroom teacher partners, the content of which is aimed at addressing specific student achievement deficiencies identified by TRSI staff from the state-mandated assessment program 

 

4.         sponsoring regional (Texas) workshops on topics identified by classroom teachers and administrators as related to the TRSI attributes 

 

5.         purchasing materials and equipment for loan to participating TRSI school districts to address identified mathematics and/or science systemic reform initiatives related to the TRSI attributes 

 

6.         assisting local districts to identify and acquire state, federal, and private grants to supplement their local operating budgets, e.g., computer technology hardware, software, training and connectivity, and science equipment for the early elementary grades to begin the process of gearing up for the new fifth-grade science assessment mandated under TAKS 

 

7.         leveraging local resources to achieve the TRSI attributes, e.g., participating district personnel time and effort; district and ESC facilities, networks, and equipment; university facilities and expertise; state agency expertise and guidance; and other stakeholder in-kind contributions 

Local participating TRSI school districts receive few, if any, cash grants. They identify and pledge the time and support of classroom teachers and administrators, called “partners.” Districts also coordinate the deployment of substitute teachers in their mathematics and science classrooms so that TRSI teacher partners can participate in learning, implementing, and sharing within and among participating TRSI districts; purchase the necessary software to supplement recommended instructional equipment and materials; and release time for in-district planning and workshops so teacher partners can share the results of their TRSI training and assistance. TRSI provides stipends for teachers who participate in collaborative activities on district noncontract days, e.g., weekends, holidays, summer, etc.; underwrites the cost of participant travel and per diem; and supports the employment of substitute classroom teachers in participating districts.

In 2001-02, TRSI administratively divided its programming and service delivery into 2 regional sites: one continuing at WTAMU - Canyon, and the other at the South Texas Rural Systemic Initiative (STRSI) housed at Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi. Eighteen rural school districts, all previous TRSI cohort members, which lie south of an east-west line generally running through the San Antonio region, joined to form the initial STRSI collaborative. Eleven new and eligible rural Texas school districts have joined STRSI in the last year (2002-03), so that STRSI now serves 29 districts. This new alignment was “lubricated” with an additional 5-year, $6 million grant from NSF.

Thus, 2002-03 marked the third full year of CCISD personnel participation in the project. District personnel report that CCISD has been heavily involved in TRSI and believe this has helped improve scores in mathematics. Appreciation was expressed, especially for the training that CCISD personnel received. Campus administrators and teachers independently and repeatedly corroborated the fact that a “lot” of TRSI materials have been brought back from TRSI workshops and incorporated into the district’s curriculum. This seems to have occurred at all grade levels of the district.

TRSI’s main impacts on rural Texas school district collaborative members appear to be in the areas of staff development, increased curriculum leadership and pedagogical awareness by classroom teachers, acquisition of instructional equipment, and curricular reform. Several Clarendon TRSI teacher partners reiterated their affirmation of the benefits of TRSI membership. They said they need training in inquiry teaching methods, grant proposal writing, and the use and integration of equipment into their instructional plan. They said, “TRSI comes to our campus. TRSI subject-matter (mathematics and science) specialists teach demonstration lessons to our own students. This is a very effective way to get a feel for how a new instructional technique might work in my own classroom.”

On another theme, CCISD teacher partners noted that TRSI workshops are among the highest quality they have experienced as veteran in-service teachers. Although they reported that they get quality service from Texas ESC Region 16 workshops and consultations, “Region 16 serves many school districts and teachers in all subject areas and across a variety of special student populations. Our TRSI specialist gives us special, up-to-date attention and information relative to the state mathematics and science curriculum. It’s like having our own, on-site, dedicated classroom consultant.”

CCISD teachers and administrators listed the following ways in which they believe the district benefits from membership in TRSI:

 

•          good quality, applicable hands-on training (through institutes and workshops) that can be imported back to local classrooms and shared with peers 

 

•          identification of new and relevant teaching materials 

 

•          on-site technical assistance from TRSI-sponsored mathematics and science content specialists 

 

•          networking opportunities with other mathematics and science classroom teachers regarding teaching strategies and local curriculum alignment with the state curriculum standards 

 

•          assistance with grant writing and acquisition 

 

•          provision of classroom substitutes, which allows regular teachers release time for training 

On balance, and as with other TRSI districts visited by the case study team, the CCISD teacher partners reported that students enjoy science and mathematics more as a result of TRSI’s impact and influence on the content and the methodologies being employed. The teacher partners see improvements in mathematics achievement test scores, but limited improvement in student interest. On the other hand, there appeared to be limited improvement in science test scores, but a noticeable increase in student interest. Some teachers and administrators reasoned that this increase may be due, in large part, to an increased emphasis in teaching science in the district as a result of TRSI training in inquiry-based methods.

Overall, the TRSI teacher and administrator partners interviewed by the case study team were extremely positive regarding their experiences with TRSI. Clarendon is a small, rural district. The participating teacher partners constitute all the junior high and high school mathematics and science teachers and a strongly representative sample of the CCISD elementary teachers.

Presence and/or Progress of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Drivers of Educational Systemic Reform in the Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District)

A major focal point of the site visit team’s work was an attempt to determine evidence of the presence or progress on the NSF “Six Drivers of Educational System Reform” in science and mathematics education in CCISD. In the following section, these findings are summarized.

Driver #1: Implementation of a comprehensive, standards-based curricula as represented in instructional practice, including student assessment, in every classroom, laboratory, and other learning experience provided through the system and its partners.

It is evident that the education program in CCISD is driven by the state curriculum standards, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). This, in turn, is measured and reported for all the public to see by the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS), the state high stakes test, which will be replaced by the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in 2003 and beyond. Administrators and teachers throughout CCISD are focused directly on ensuring that their students will be able to pass the state HST.

Although much of the testimony the site visit team received, in one form or another, pertained to the Texas school accountability system, it was not an issue that appeared to unduly consume the attention of teachers and administrators at CCISD as it may at other Texas school districts. Based on the conversations between the site visit team and CCISD educators, there was a sense that the state assessment program is a legitimate and institutionalized part of the schooling industry in the state. Anyone who wishes to teach in Texas must buy into the system and be accountable for their students’ performance on the tests. Since the statewide testing system was instituted in the early 1980s, many of the teachers who grew up in Texas took the tests as K-12 students. Thus, they know no other system and have long ago accepted it as a “part of doing education” in their classrooms.

However, some concern was expressed about the new TAKS exit level mathematics test. Field tests of TAKS items administered to selected representative samples of students statewide in 2001 and 2002 project a failure rate on the order of 40-45 percent. However, Clarendon students have traditionally performed well on the TAAS mathematics tests (see Driver #5). Teacher informants stated that students who move into the Clarendon schools are “behind” (their Clarendon peers) in mathematics. No attempt was made by the site visit team to corroborate this assertion, except to reference data that are included in this report related to the discussion under Driver #5. Region 16 generally leads the state in math test scores, and CCISD leads Region 16.

The high school and junior high mathematics teachers have participated in the TRSI workshops on a regular basis since 1999 to work on alignment of the CCISD math curriculum to the state curriculum (TEKS), to attend algebra institutes, and to learn teaching techniques that integrate technology and inquiry-based methods into the instructional process.

Glencoe Publishing Company provides the mathematics textbook series for CCISD. Saxon Math was considered but not adopted because the teachers were satisfied with Glencoe and its “mapping” onto the state curriculum.

In the science curriculum area, the major challenge for CCISD and all other Texas public school districts is dealing with the transition from TAAS to TAKS, the landmark change in the state assessment program. Please refer to page 17 for a concise summary of how the science testing will change. It is one of the most rigorous modifications in the state accountability program resulting from the introduction of a new generation of tests. Science testing will take place at the fifth grade level for the first time. It will be eliminated from the eighth grade, added to the tenth grade, and repeated in the eleventh grade as an exit-level exam beginning with the 2003-04 school year. The fifth and tenth grade science tests will “count” in the state district and campus accountability ratings beginning with the 2003-04 school year. An additional high stake will be added in 2003-04: students must pass the TAKS in four core subjects: English/language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies.

This change in student science learning accountability will have some of the most profound effects on district and campus curriculum and instruction decisions of any made in the Texas public school enterprise. These changes include (1) a more in-depth approach to teaching science content in the early grades (third-fourth-fifth) in preparation for the statewide fifth-grade science test; (2) a five-year gap in statewide science testing (from the fifth to the tenth grade); and (3) a TAKS exit-level exam required of all eleventh graders (juniors). This exam must be passed in order to graduate from high school.

These changes will exacerbate the need for

 

1.         more content training and certification in science for elementary teachers since it has typically been taught in the upper elementary grades and above by persons with full subject-matter certification 

 

2.         vigilance by school districts, especially in lean budget times, to not move resources away from the science curriculum in the middle grades (6-9) even though the state has removed an assessment requirement in this sequence of schooling in Texas 

 

3.         emphasis in the high school curriculum to extend intensive science programming through at least the junior year. For some time now, Texas has required a two-course minimum in high school. The current school year (2002-03) marks the first time that student science learning will be assessed with a high stakes test at the end of the third year of high school. 

Based on statements made by the CCISD teacher partners to the site visit team, it is clear that the TRSI program is aimed primarily at helping teachers align and teach a local curriculum focused on the state curriculum and high stakes test. Other forms of assessment such as teacher in-class grading, norm-referenced standardized tests, and portfolio types of projects were seldom mentioned. Few, if any, of the rural school districts in Texas, including CCISD, administer national norm-referenced standardized tests because of the prohibitive cost.

Beyond the necessary preoccupation with state testing, other district efforts in curriculum reform include small classes, availability of computers labs, the fact that every teacher has access to the Internet in his/her classroom, the growing number of parents who volunteer to assist teachers, and the apparent districtwide emphasis on employing manipulatives and hands-on approaches to education.

Finally, further evidence that teaching and learning are being driven in the district by the state HST occurred during a conversation about how CCISD teachers are evaluated. In compliance with a state mandate, every teacher and other professional staff member—i.e., campus administrators, central office personnel, counselors, technology directors, etc.—is also evaluated, in large part, on the basis of student performance on the statewide high stakes test.

Driver #2: Development of a coherent, consistent set of policies that supports: provision of high quality science and mathematics education for each student; excellent preparation, continuing education, and support for each mathematics and science teacher (including all elementary teachers); and administrative support for all persons who work to dramatically improve achievement among all students served by the system.

In reviewing the narrative in this section, it may be useful for the reader to consider that policies can be viewed as canons that document policies and procedures that organizational members and their constituents regularly understand, accept, and adhere to. Or they may include practices, often undocumented and informal, that the employees and their clients practice and institutionalize as their way of doing business. In the final analysis, the formal and informal policies and procedures coalesce to constitute the culture and reputation of the organization. Both seem to exist in the CCISD. Every school district in Texas is required to prepare, disseminate, and use district and campus improvement plans. These are to be reviewed and updated annually and used to inform district and campus program practice.

For purposes of this discussion, Table 11 provides a classification of Clarendon district and campus objectives proposed by CCISD teachers and administrators for improving the district’s education program. The numbers shown in Table 11's cells indicate the number of goals and objectives that the district and individual campuses report in their approved plan for improvement in the 2001-02 school year with respect to major areas of emphasis within the district educational program. The number of written goals related to the state testing program far outweigh the number of program goals in the other areas combined. For example, 67 stated goals are related to the state assessment (TAAS) out of 127 total listed for the district and the individual campuses: high school, junior high, and elementary. This analysis reveals an institutional (districtwide) plan that reinforces the notion that the main focus of education in the district is acutely sensitive to the state high stakes testing program and the influence it has on the public’s opinion of the quality of education in Texas. A clear message is imparted that attention to and achievement on the state tests are of high importance.

Another indicator of the mathematics and science education policies in CCISD is centered around discussions of altering the content and sequence of the high school curriculum in preparation for the coming statewide testing changes from TAAS to TAKS (see Table 8).

Table 11

A Classification of CCISD District and Campus Improvement Plan Goals and Objectives:

2001-02

Source: CCISD District and Campus Improvement Plans, 2001-02

Shown in Table 12 is a “before (TAKS) and after” schematic of the course offerings in science and mathematics at the CCISD high school. It is presented to denote what changes districts such as Clarendon might consider in order to prepare its high school students for the change in the statewide assessment program (TAAS to TAKS). In order to receive a high school diploma, Texas students are required to pass two credits (years) of science, three in mathematics, and four in social studies/economics in addition to passing the TAKS as described above . Typically, mathematics consists of some combination of Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry to meet the three-course requirement. Science includes integrated physics and chemistry (IPC) and biology for students who terminate their science course-taking experiences with the state two-course minimum requirement. It is a difficult challenge in small, rural districts to provide all of the advanced coursework that college-bound students want and need. CCISD meets this challenge by alternating advanced courses every other year or semester, so that, with proper advance planning, students can arrange their academic schedules in order to receive the basic knowledge and skills preparatory to college matriculation.

Professional development for CCISD science and mathematics teachers is stimulated primarily by involvement in TRSI activities and in-service offerings provided by Region 16. Professional development in this and other TRSI partner districts is acutely sensitive to

 

•          the state curriculum standards (TEKS) 

 

•          alignment of the local curriculum and daily lesson plans with TEKS 

 

•          teaching strategies that best deliver student understanding of TEKS  

 

•          assessment (TAKS) 

Most of the TRSI mathematics curriculum workshops deal with vertical alignment of the local curriculum from third grade through eleventh grade, integration of manipulatives in the lower and middle grades, use of graphing calculators in the upper grades, and strategies for identifying gaps and/or overlaps in the scope and sequence of the district’s mathematics content presentation.

Teaching strategies dovetail with the curriculum. Although the state strongly recommends that at least 40 percent of science instruction be laboratory oriented, we believe that CCISD, like most other districts, does not and will not meet this recommendation unless and until the state derives a way to test student learning that reflects this kind of teaching. Some say the new TAKS will move the schools much closer to this goal. Several years of administering the TAKS and researching the results will be likely be needed to affirm or reject this assertion.

Table 12

Science and Mathematics Course Offerings at CCISD “Before and After” TAKS

Before TAKS

Science

 

•          8th grade - Integrated Physics and Chemistry (IPC) for high-school credit 

 

•          9th grade - Biology  

 

•          10th grade - Chemistry* 

 

•          11th/12th grades - fourth science credit from AP Physics or GMO (Geology, Meteorology, Oceanography, or Aquatic Science)  

Mathematics

 

•          8th grade - Intro to Algebra or Algebra I for high-school credit 

 

•          9th grade - Algebra I or Geometry 

 

•          10th grade - Geometry or Algebra II* 

 

•          11th/12th grades - Algebra II*, Math Models**; also Pre-Calculus, Calculus available but not required 

After TAKS (2003 and beyond)

Science

 

•          9th grade - IPC 

 

•          10th grade - Biology 

 

•          11th grade - Chemistry or Pre-AP Chemistry* 

 

•          11th/12th grades - fourth science* from AP Physics, Environmental Science, AP Chemistry, AP Biology 

Mathematics

 

•          8th grade - Intro to Algebra or Algebra I for high school credit 

 

•          9th grade - Algebra I or Geometry 

 

•          10th grade - Geometry or Algebra II* 

 

•          11th/12th grades - Algebra II, Pre-Calculus*, or Math Models**; Calculus available but not required 

* for students graduating on the Texas Recommended High School Program/Distinguished Achievement Plan (only

** for students graduating on the Texas Minimum Graduation Plan only

Administrative support for quality science and mathematics instruction is excellent in Clarendon. This is manifested through

 

•          district participation in TRSI, which was initiated by the superintendent 

 

•          coordinating the weekly district and campus calendars so that teacher planning time is scheduled as an integral part of the curriculum 

 

•          feedback and use of state test data 

 

•          aggressive pursuit and acquisition of available grants, especially for supporting technology (one or more computer labs at every campus, in-room Internet access, etc.) 

 

•           release time for teachers to participate in selected TRSI and Region 16 workshops, etc. 

In summary, this NSF driver of systemic reform is being addressed quite well in the CCISD. Policies are developed and revised according to student performance on the state testing program. Gaps and overlaps in curriculum coverage are identified, and attempts are made to address them.

Driver #3: Convergence of the usage of all resources that are designed for or that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education—fiscal, intellectual, materials, curricular, and extra-curricular—into a focused and unitary program to constantly upgrade, renew, and improve the educational program in mathematics and science for all students.

The Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District (CCISD) is to be commended for making a concerted and effective effort to identify all available resources to support and enhance the district’s instructional program. The district administrators and teachers have been especially successful in identifying and acquiring competitive and block grants to serve special student populations and special curricular needs across the CCISD student population. Some of these programs for the 2000-01 school year are listed below:

Grant Category

 

•          Bilingual/English as a Second Language (ESL)  

•          Career and Technology Education 

•          Gifted and Talented Education 

•          Compensatory Education 

•          Special Education 

            TOTAL

Amount

 

$ 3,834

$ 161,199

$ 34,800

$ 271,443

$ 245,362

$ 716,638

Although these program titles do not directly address science and mathematics instruction, the instructional components of each program are focused on helping students improve their basic skills relative to the state high stakes testing program. The emphasis is on mathematics, reading, and writing, which are the basic skill sets included in the Texas school accountability system.

Another impressive area of resource acquisition and convergence in the CCISD is in the area of technology. The system description is located on pages 11-12. Technology grants and eligible federal flow-through monies that the district has captured in the last two years include those listed below:

 

                        Category                                             Amount

•          E-rate                                                               $ N/A 

•          Texas Education Agency                                 $ 578,000 

•          Technology Infrastructure Fund                      $ 674,000 

            TOTAL                                                           $ 1,252,000

E-rate is a federal technology connectivity support program that CCISD participates in and leverages a good return on because of its relatively modest socioeconomic status. Revenue for the E-rate program is generated through telecommunication surcharges (i.e., home and business telephones). The Texas technology programs are funded by the state in support of public school district integration of technology into the curriculum and administration. The amalgamation of resources that the district has been able to acquire for technology is impressive. One of the key features is the employment of two full-time technology specialists. The district technology coordinator handles the connectivity, hardware, and software technical issues, while the technology instructional specialist works with classroom teachers on the integration of technology into the curriculum and the enhancement of instruction through the use of the Internet and special software applications. This is quite commendable for a small district the size of CCISD. On many occasions, local districts are aggressive at acquiring hardware, software, proper connectivity, and even training. Then the teachers are basically left to their own devices to make it all work. Many times there are frustration and a breakdown in the delivery of the promise of technology. CCISD has avoided such a disconnect in its classrooms by providing a full-time, on-site technical advisor to the end users—students and teachers.

CCISD has also used technology as a bridge to partner with the Clarendon community museum, library, and community businesses and members. Through the above-referenced types of grant funds, technology was provided to the Saint’s Roost Museum and the Clarendon Public Library. Students use their technology skills to assist community volunteers at the museum and library and in the classroom. As an example, students used technology to assist museum volunteers in making place markers for museum items and in creating a database program for the inventory of all museum items. During the last six weeks of the school year, students on the yearbook staff worked with senior citizens in the community to teach them how to use computers and help them improve their technology skills.

TRSI was given much credit by elementary teacher partners as well as by secondary science and mathematics teacher partners for triggering new ways of thinking about teaching, opening new vistas in the minds of the teachers about how to make science and mathematics fun and enjoyable for students. One of the Region 16 TRSI mathematics specialists was cited as being especially helpful by visiting schools and getting teachers with like needs together to brainstorm solutions to common teaching and learning challenges.

Another example of how TRSI has stimulated practice leading to reform in CCISD is the 2-year project employing an outside consultant to train and assist mathematics and science teachers in the identification of gaps in the local curriculum in terms of how it “maps” on to the state curriculum (TEKS). This is a $20,000 effort over 2 years to be paid for out of district operating funds.

In general, it seems clear that CCISD has received substantial support via its relationship with TRSI for identifying, acquiring, and making use of a wide range of curricular and technology resources in the district’s programs.

Driver #4: Broad-based support from parents, policymakers, institutions of higher education, business and industry, foundations, and other segments of the community for the goals and collective value of the program, based on rich presentations of the ideas behind the program, the evidence gathered about its successes and its failures, and critical discussions of its efforts.

There is ample evidence that community leaders are active in supporting the Clarendon Consolidated Independent School District. Ways in which this manifests itself include the following:

•          Many of the school staff have deep and longstanding roots in the community. They appear to be known, respected, and appreciated for their continued residence in and service to the district and community. 

 

•          Parents from every campus are represented on a districtwide advisory committee. Some quotes from this informant group are included below: 

 

            •          “Clarendon is a small, strong, stable, tight-knit community. There aren’t too many people who live here who don’t want to.”  

 

            •          “The school administration goes out of its way to serve the community. The technology grant (‘Teaching an Old Town New Tricks’) is an example of that.” 

 

            •          “The public expects a high pass rate (on the state tests) in Clarendon.” 

 

            •          “Education is important in Clarendon. Local tax support for the college is an example of that.” 

 

            •          “There is a big following for out-of-town athletic contests.” 

 

            •          “Businesspeople open their establishments to school groups.” 

 

            •          “The schools ‘taking care of kids’ is the best thing they do for the Clarendon community.” 

 

            •          “The school is the heart of a little community like Clarendon.” 

 

            •          “Tell your readers that 

 

                        ∙          Kids are allowed to compete in an environment like this (Clarendon). 

 

                        ∙          We have a safe and secure learning environment here. 

 

                        ∙          Kids get exposure to common sense situations here that are not as available in the urban areas. 

 

                        ∙          We have a good work ethic here.” 

 

•          School officials speak of a sense of community pride in the schools. Evidence of this is supported by the large following that the athletic teams and music participants receive at out-of-town contests. 

 

•          A large percentage of the high school and junior high school students participate in one or more extracurricular activities, e.g. athletics, music, fine arts, community service, etc.  

 

•          School officials note that elementary parents are supportive of science and mathematics learning, while secondary (high school) parents are less supportive, at least of their children’s engagement in science and mathematics at advanced levels. 

While Clarendon College is a long-time fixture in the community, there appears to be little planned programming between it and the Clarendon school district. Students do enroll concurrently in selected classes, e.g., history, civics, government, etc. Otherwise, no joint enrollment or programming in mathematics or science was observed. Teachers enroll in graduate courses at West Texas A&M University (75 miles) or in Region 16-supported course offerings that may be delivered to the dedicated teleconference classroom in the CCISD junior high school.

Driver #5: Accumulation of a broad and deep array of evidence that the program is enhancing student achievement, through a set of indices that might include achievement test scores, higher level courses passed, college admission rates, college majors, Advanced Placement Tests taken, portfolio assessment, and ratings from summer employers, and that demonstrate that students are generally achieving at a significantly higher level in science and mathematics.

The basic indices that drive and shape the academic program at CCISD are almost entirely those from the Texas high stakes testing program. Attendance, dropout, and graduation rates are also monitored closely because they, too, impact the campus and district accountability ratings that the district receives from the state agency. High school completion rates will replace the year-to-year dropout rates in the new accountability ratings that will be announced beginning with the 2003-04 school year. Accurate dropout rates apparently are extremely difficult to measure with our society’s mobile population and because of the dramatic “disappearance” rates of students between the ninth and twelfth grades (see Table 10).

CCISD also collects and uses college admission test data (ACT and/or SAT test scores), percentage of students attempting a postsecondary experience, and surveys of recent graduates relative to their beliefs and opinions about the quality and appropriateness of their high school education at CCISD. Table 13 lists some additional indicators other than state test data. Trend-line conclusions should be drawn with caution because (1) this is only a 2-year “snapshot” of data on Clarendon, Region 16, and the state of Texas; and (2) CCISD had only started participation in TRSI activities and programming in the fall semester of 2000.

CCISD can point to a number of “good news” non-state-test indicators:

 

•          a steady attendance rate of 97.1 percent 

 

•          a small increase in the percentage of high school graduates, yet significantly higher than Region 16 or the state 

 

•          a modest increase in advance course participation by high school students 

 

•          two out of three (67.9 percent) high school students achieving state recognition for completing the Texas Recommended High School Plan of academic studies 

 

•          a dramatic increase in the percentage of students achieving TAAS/TASP equivalency  

Table 14 presents a different snapshot of the Clarendon schools. It was designed for the purposes of this case study. The analysis methodology is borrowed from the Comparable Improvement Index used by the Texas Education Agency. It attempts to present a picture of the district in comparison with nine other peer school districts in the Texas Education Service Center Region 16. The following major variables are used in this comparison:

 

•          school district size (PK-12 enrollment) 

 

•          district finances 

 

            ►          taxable property value per pupil (a measure of wealth) 

            ►          the local assessed tax rate (a measure of effort) 

            ►          per-pupil expenditures 

 

•          student body characteristics 

 

            ►          ethnicity 

            ►          economic status 

 

•          state test (TAAS) performance 

 

•          state accountability rating (AR) 

Seven steps were employed in conducting the analysis and building the descriptive data presentation (Table 14):

 

1.         Start with the 64 Texas independent school districts that are served by ESC Region 16. 

 

2.         Remove four districts that do not have high schools. (60 remaining). 

Table 13

Selected Comparisons of Non-HST Indices of Student Performance in CCISD: 1999-2000 and 2000-2001

 

Source: CCISD Academic Excellence Indicator System Report 2001 

 

3.         Remove ten districts farthest from CCISD on the enrollment size of the student body (PK-12 enrollment) (50 remaining). 

 

4.         Remove ten districts farthest from CCISD in the percentage of white students (40 remaining). 

 

5.         Remove ten districts farthest from CCISD in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students (30 remaining). 

 

6.         Remove ten districts farthest from CCISD on taxable value of local property per pupil (a measure of wealth of the district) (20 remaining). 

 

7.         Remove ten districts farthest from CCISD on the locally assessed tax rate per $100 of assessed value of property (a measure of effort). This final step yields a total of nine districts plus CCISD for comparison. 

In the data presented for 2000-01, when compared with nine other Texas ESC Region 16 similar school districts, CCISD

 

∙          ranks third out of 10 in enrollment 

 

∙          has the fifth highest percentage of white students 

 

∙          enrolls the seventh highest percentage of economically disadvantaged students 

 

∙          exhibits the seventh highest four-year dropout rate 

 

∙          in the financial area 

 

            ►          incurs the sixth highest per-pupil expenditures 

            ►          is fourth among 10 in local property values per pupil (a measure of district wealth or ability to finance education at the local level) 

            ►          is fifth among 10 in locally assessed tax rates (a measure of local effort to finance education) 

 

•          in performance on the state TAAS test (2001) 

 

            ►          is tied for first with two other districts (out of ten) in the percentage of all students passing (TLI > 70) the accountability subset of the state test (mathematics, reading, writing; grades 3-8, 10) 

 

            ►          is first in the percentage of students passing the mathematics test 

 

            ►          is tied for fifth (out of nine) in the percentage of students passing the eighth grade science test and is sixth (out of seven) on the tenth grade science (biology) test