Chapter 9

SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS

adopt from: Educational Administration:

Theory, Research, and Practice, 9th Edition. by.
Wayne K Hoy (Author)
Presented by:
Hasna Rashifah (3415151942)
Dhia Rahid (3415150424)
Juliana Mulia Sari (3415150362)
Jihan Nuraini (3415150907)
Biology Education Thursday Class
 SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS CHALLENGING
ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES

How to develop a working definition of effectiveness.

Lynn Cheney Elementary emphasizes basic skills and has

high academic expectations and standards,
whereas John Dewey Elementary uses high-quality
motivational hands-on teaching, and discovery learning
techniques.
 SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS CHALLENGING
ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES

How to cope with shifting definitions of effectiveness.

During the 1970s, for example, schools emphasized social and

emotional growth and equity for all students, but with the reform
reports of the early 1980s, the public started demanding an
emphasis on efficiency, academic achievement, and employment
skills . During the 1990s as well as into the new century, the focus
continued on academic
achievement with a strong thrust for ways to ensure accountability.
Hence, as preferences, practices, and theories change, performance
that is judged effective today may be considered less important
tomorrow
 How to respond to multiple stakeholders with varying
definitions of effectiveness
A third challenge emerges from multiple stakeholders, such as
parents administrators, students, teachers, school board members,
businesspeople makers, news media, and taxpayers, with each
group offering different and frequently conflicting effectiveness
preferences. Administrators of education members, for instance, like
to emphasize how money is allocated and how teachers are
evaluated. In contrast, teachers prefer to emphasize teaching and
learning, arguing that effectiveness is rooted in instructional
methods, positive classroom climates, and relationships with and
among students.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF REFORM
Much to the dismay of school administrators, the report A
Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in
Education, 1983) found that academic achievement levels in
America's schools were not competitive internationally.

This burst of activity during the 1980s became known as the

"first wave" of educational reform.
A Nation at Risk set off an explosion of reform activity in
attempts to follow the commission's
recommendations, for example, their the school day
and year, established new career paths for teachers,
created competency tests for graduation, and
instituted various types of diplomas to recognize
different levels of student performance.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF REFORM
During the late 1980s, the substance of the reform movement
changed vinovskis, 1999) and a second wave of reform activity
started.
The National Governors Association and then-President
George H Bush met at the Charlottesville
Education Summit in 1989. The focus of their
reform was the establishment of national education
goals whose aim was to improve student
achievement through exemplary teaching in safe and
orderly schools.
A major change was to move from a so-called punishment-based systern to
one that rewards excel- lent teaching and student growth. The Blueprint
described five priorities (USDE, 2010).

1. College and Carerr Ready Students Regardless of income, race, ethnic or

language background, or disability status, every student should graduate from
high school ready either for college or a career

2. Great Teachers and Leaders in Every School. The research is clear

3. Equity and opportunity for All Students:

4. Raise the Bar and Reword Excllence

5. Promote Innovation and Continuous lmprocvement

 reaction to a so-called third wave of school reform became firmly
established during the 1990s. Known as "systemic reform," this
approach attempted to unite the earlier waves of activity with
dominating themes: change of many school elements
simultaneously and policy integrations and coherence around a set
of clear outcomes (Fuhrman, Elmore, and Massell, 1993).

Under the push of the third wave of school reform, the

concentration on school performance increased substantially, and
the heightened concern continues today Terms such as
"accountability," "academic achievement," "performance
standards, "assessments," "high-stakes tests," "teacher quality,"
and "student dropout rates" infused conversations among
educators, policy makers, busi ness leaders, and the public .
Moreover, systemic and whole-school reform came to dominate
the language of school improvement.
SOCIAL SYSTEMS AND SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS

the social system model can be used as a theoretical

guide to advance our under- standing of school
effectiveness and to assess the actions necessary to
promote school effectiveness. This point is illustrated
by considering each phase of the open-systems cycle as
a category of effectiveness indicators

Input Criteria
Performance Outcomes
Input Output Research
Transformational Criteria
Input Criteria
for schools include environmental components that
influence organizational effectiveness. Inputs can be
both fiscal and abstract.
school accreditation models relied heavily on input
indicators; t is, good schools had high percentages of
experienced teachers holding advanced degrees, pletti
support staff, low teacher ratios great libraries with
many books, and well-equipped beautiful modern
buildings. In brief, schools were judged to be effective
based on such indicators
Performance Outcomes
Organizational effectiveness has been defined
relative to degree of goal attainment

Performance outcomes contitute the quantity of

the schools service and product for student,
education, and other contituents and the quality
of each output.
Input Output Research
Input-output research, or production-function
studies, examine how educational resources or
inputs are changed into educational outcomes
Transformational Criteria
Transformational Criteria are the quantity,
quality, and consistency of the internal
processes and structures that transform the
input to outcomes.
Model Of School Effectiveness:
Improving Academic
Performance
 LEE AND SHUTES MODEL OF ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT
Student, School, and Environmental Factors
Affecting Academic Achievement

Student (Personal) Factors

Student Engagement
o Behavioral Engagement
o Cognitive Engagement
o Emotional Engagement
Student Learning Strategies
o Behavioral Strategies
o Cognitive Strategies
o Metacognitive Strategies
 Social-Contextual (Environmental) Factors
School Climate
o Academic Emphasis
o Teacher Interactions
o Principal Leadership
Social and Parental Influences
o Parental Involvement
o Peer Influence
Bryk and Colleagues: Model of Essential
Supports for Academic Achievement

Concepts of a Framework of Essential Supports for

Academic Achievement

Instructional leadership
Shared leadership
Professional capacity
Student-centered learning climate
 Lanjutan...
Concepts of a Framework of Essential Supports for
Academic Achievement

Parent-community-school ties

Instructional guidance

Relational trust

Social capital

Bonding social capital

Bridging social capital

 Relational Trust Across
The School Community

School Social System

Classroom Instructional Student

School Social System Guidance Performance
Leadership

Instructional Academic
Learnig
Shared
Enhanced
Parent-School-
Professional School-learning Community Engagement
Capacity Climate Ties

Bonding and Bridging Social Capital

Of the Community
 Hoy and Woolfolk Hoy: An
Organizational Model for Student
Achievement
 Feedback
Goal Theory
Goals are :
Specific
Challenging
Academic
Attainable
Emphasis Embraced

Collective Culture of Motivation Student

Efficacy Academic Responsibility Achievement
Optimism Effort
Trust in Persistence
Parent & resilience
Student

Cooperative
Students
Teacher
Parents
Relational Trust
Feedback
Hattie's Analysis of Academic Achievement

1. Teacher matter; they are the most powerful forces in

helping students to learn
2. Effective teachers are directive, caring, and
passionately engaged in the teaching-learning
process
3. Effective teachers are aware of what each student is
thinking, which enables them to construct meaning
and relevant experiences for their students.
4. Effective teachers know what they want to
teach, how to do it successfully, when each
student understands, and what to do when
understanding falls short.
5. Effective teachers use multiple perspectives to
convey ideas so that learners can construct and
reconstruct knowledge-it is the learner's
construction of knowledge that is critical.
6. Effective school leaders cooperate with their
teachers to create a school culture and
classroom climates conducive to learning.
Models of School Effectiveness:
Beyond Academic Performance
 Mott's General Model of Organizational
Effectiveness Paul Mott (1972)

Paul Mott (972) argued that effective organizations "produce

more and higher quality outputs and adapt more effectively to
environmental and internal problems than other, similar
organizations.
Paul Mott, sets forth a set of criteria for organizational
effectiveness that includes:
Quantity and quality of outputs.
Efficiency of production.
Adaptability and flexibility of the organization.
 Quinn and Quinn's Competing
Values Framework
The following four perspectives emerge for schools:
1. The Competitive View (Stable structure and Extemal Focus)
defines effectiveness in terms of how productive the school is
compared to other similar schools using such measures as student
test scores and value-added scores.

2. The Collaborative View (Flexible structure and internal Focus)

defines effectiveness in terms of collaborative and developmental
features of the school using such indicators as faculty
moralestudent social and emotional development, cohesiveness,
and openness and health of the school climate
3. The Control View ( Stable Structure and Internal Focus)
defines effectiveness in terms of how stable and reliable the
school is focusing on such criteria as efficiency, tight coupling,
and management of school community relations.

4. The Creative View (Flexible Structure and External Focus)

defines effectiveness in terms of how adaptable and innovative
the school is measuring such features as successful reform,
creativity, and uniqueness
 Administrator & Teacher Effects
Bossert (1988): maintains that strong principal leadership is
necessary to structure schools for effectiveness.

Philip Hallinger and Heck (1996, 1998, 2010. Heck, 2000, found
that principal leadership has measurable influence on student
achievement.

Kenneth Leithwood, Karen Seashore Louis, Stephen

Anderson, and Kyla Wahlstrom (2004) conclude that leadership
is second to classroom teaching in contributing to what students
learn in schools.
 Administrator & Teacher Effects
In contrast to principals, teachers directly
influence student learning through a variety of
classroom behaviors and activities.

Wiliam L. Sanders (1998) contends that the

single largest factor affectiveness of individual
classroom teacher
THANK YOU