Application of the Teddlie and Stringfield School Effectiveness Model

ABSTRACT The purpose of this descriptive, post hoc single case study was to understand how the five components of Teddlie and Stringfield`s (1993) school effectiveness model manifested themselves in school improvements efforts. This study used Teddlie and Stringfield (1993) five component school effectiveness conceptual model (focus on academics, orderly environment, monitoring of student academic profiles, supportive and persistent teachers, and dynamic leadership). I conducted semi-structured interviews with teachers, administrators, instructional coaches and students, produced several trend analyses, and analyzed school documents and academic records. From the information I collected at the site, I tested Teddlie and Stringfield`s (1993) school effectiveness model`s applicability to a school seeking transformation and identified other factors that may have contributed to the increase in student performance. The primary research question was &hibar;How did the five components of the Teddlie and Stringfield`s (1993) school effectiveness study manifest themselves in the school improvement efforts of This Is It Elementary School? Two sub-questions were: (1) What additional factors contributed to facilitating and sustaining school improvement efforts in this case? (2) In an effort to increase student academic achievement represented by the FCAT, (a) what challenges were encountered by students, teachers, instructional support staff and administrators and (b) how did the students, teachers, instructional support staff, and administrators overcome the challenges? This single case study investigated a high-performing elementary public school that served predominately African American students in a poor neighborhood and achieved impressive academic results in 2008-2009 and maintained similar levels of academic excellence in subsequent years. More specifically, this study documented the manifestation and maintenance of school improvement efforts at This Is it Elementary School covering the 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011 school years. The five components of Teddlie and Stringfield`s (1993) School Effectiveness Model (a focus on academics, supportive and persistent teachers, continuous monitoring of academic profiles, an orderly environment, and dynamic leadership) were evident at This is It Elementary School. The school`s focus on academics involved the restructuring of instructional time, curriculum alignment, and additional instruction. Their acquisition supportive and persistent teachers that were caring and demanding resulted in high expectations for student achievement. In addition, This Is It Elementary School used frequent assessments to drive instruction and they created a structured environment that was conducive to learning. The student`s appreciation for teachers was a by-product of the establishment of relationships. Dynamic leadership was also present. Dynamic leadership took the form of differentiated and instructional leadership. Administration mediated and buffered the staff from external district and federal mandates. Administration also monitored the fidelity of instructional practices. Before, during, and after the academic transformation, the staff at This Is It Elementary School faced the challenge of maintaining the pace of the district mandated curriculum map, an area where buffering was more evident. Administration revamped the district`s mandated curriculum map and customized the pacing of the standards to match the learning progression of their students. The findings in this case revealed two additional characteristics that proved instrumental in improving and maintaining student achievement: (1) rewards for high academic performance and (2) creative test preparation activities. Therefore, the school effectiveness model implemented at This Is Elementary School that led to the improvement in and maintenance of student achievement as represented by FCAT scores consisted of seven school improvement components: (1) focus on academics, (2) orderly environment, (3) monitoring of student academic profiles, (4) supportive and persistent teachers, (5) dynamic leadership, (6) rewards for high academic performance, and (7) test preparation activities.