Essential Questions for High School Graduation: Positive School Environment

Parental involvement in student’s education (e.g., parents’ awareness of student’s school attendance and grades). (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Mean scores on family surveys, such as the Panorama Family-School Relationships Survey or CORE Districts School Culture & Climate Survey parent assessment of school-community engagement (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

There are effective partnerships between schools and families, such that parents have access to school systems and are meaningfully included in school processes and student learning. (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of families and percentage of teachers or caregivers reporting positive relationship quality with one another, using a tool such as the Family and Provider/Teacher Relationship Quality (FPTRQ) parent survey. (Education-to-Workforce).

Invest in family engagement strategies that value parents as experts in their children’s development (Alliance for Early Success).

Set goals and track outcomes in ways that engage families in their children’s learning (Alliance for Early Success).

Co-locate or coordinate programs and services to improve family access (Alliance for Early Success).

Community schools operate as community hubs, bringing together many partners to offer education, health and social services, and youth and community development for children, young people, parents, and other community members during extended hours and weekends (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

Schools assist parents in gaining knowledge and skills to engage with fellow parents, faculty, staff, and community partners in support of high-quality education for each student (National Dropout Prevention Center).

The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network’s 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention: Family Engagement—Research consistently finds that family engagement has a direct, positive effect on youth’s achievement and is one of the most accurate predictors of a student’s success in school. Critical elements of this type of collaboration rely on effective, ongoing, and multi-dimensional, two-way communication as well as ongoing needs assessments and responsive family supports and interventions (The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention).

Schools build faculty, staff and administrator capacity to effectively engage parents in support of their children through formal professional development and establishing corresponding benchmarks to evaluate impacts on parents and students (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Contact: Maintaining current contact information is essential for connecting with students and families, especially those who might need support. Consider asking for current email, cell and home phone numbers and emergency contacts multiple times, such as at back-to-school events, parent meetings and the start of each semester. Attendance Works has developed a list of ideas and strategies for locating students and families who have not been in touch with their schools. (Attendance Works, Expanded Metrics).

School staff should also use in-person strategies (connecting at school events, parent teacher conferences, community events) and virtual strategies (phone calls home, two -way texting, virtual home visits) to maintain communications with families, not just students. If instruction is virtual, staff should connect to students at least three times a week, if not daily, since the lack of response could be a sign that a student or family may be experiencing challenges that require support. (Attendance Works, Expanded Metrics).

Schools and districts should monitor the extent to which students and their families have at least one adult they can go to for support. Provide families opportunities to offer feedback on the quality of their relationships to school staff and opportunities to inform decision-making. Harvard’s Guide to Relationship Mapping can be used to ensure all students have a meaningful connection to an adult in the school community (Attendance Works, Expanded Metrics).

Parent Engagement Strategies & Individualized Graduation Plans: In a survey conducted by researchers John M. Bridgeland, John J. Dilulio, Jr. and Karen Burke Morison, students who had dropped out of high school believed the communication between schools and parents needs to be greatly strengthened – that schools need to do more to invite parents in and be part of the solutions, and that parents need to do more themselves to be involved. One of the ways this deficit of parent involvement shows up is in truancy, where parents can be more involved by simply making sure their child shows up each day at school. When researchers asked focus group participants about their school’s follow-up policy for truancy and other acts of student disengagement, more often than not the respondents perceived that the schools did too little, or perhaps were overwhelmed with the numbers of such cases. (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Simple things such as teacher feedback to parents about class participation, missed assignments, grades and other issues can be critical to helping keep students on track. Although schools cannot be expected to address and solve weaknesses in the family structure, which survey shows is a common factor for students who drop out, they need to recognize and develop ways to address different types of family circumstances. This includes ways to bridge other school-family differences, such as in language, culture, educational attainment or reaching a single working parent. When additional educational choices are offered to students, which can include the restructuring of existing schools or the creation of new ones, these schools can incorporate into their new structure ways to improve parent involvement and school-home communication. (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Another way to further strengthen the linkage between school and home is for the schools to develop individualized graduation plans for each student, particularly for those at risk of dropping out. This additional step would help the parents become more aware of the specific requirements for their high school student so they can take the steps necessary to help ensure they are carried out to completion. This knowledge would also help empower the parent further to advocate for their child. (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Research from the U.S. Department of Education and others shows that the involvement of family members can have a positive influence on their child’s school achievement. It can help improve their student’s grades and test scores, as well as help make sure they actually attend school, complete their homework, and have a better attitude overall. (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

In The Silent Epidemic survey, seventy-one percent of young people surveyed felt that one of the keys to keeping students in school was to have better communication between the parents and the school, and increasing parental or guardian involvement in their child’s education. Less than half said their school contacted their parents or themselves when they were absent (47 percent) or when they dropped out (48 percent). Respondents suggested that increased parental involvement could influence very basic things – such as ensuring students came to school every day and attended their classes. Studies have shown that students with parents who are engaged in their lives – by monitoring and regulating their activities, talking with them about their problems, encouraging individual decision-making and being more involved in the school – are less likely to drop out of school. The communication links between parents and schools are critical if such involvement is to work effectively to monitor such activities, exchange information about school performance and problems, and ensure that such problems are addressed early and quickly. (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Dual Generation Strategies. The links between parent education, family income and children’s educational success further suggest the potential value in pursuing two-generation strategies, which seek to improve results for children by focusing simultaneously on school policies and programs, and on strengthening families through increased parental education and improved employment opportunities that reduce family poverty, as well as increased health insurance coverage for all family members. (Annie E. Casey, Double Jeopardy).

Caregivers offer consistent communication and emotional support to students around schoolwork (Wang & Sheikh-Khalil, 2014).

Parents/guardians are encouraged to meet regularly with their student’s high school counselor(s) to ensure their students have access to rigorous course work and are on a CCR diploma pathway (Alliance for Excellent Education, Paper Thin).

Students feel physically, mentally, and emotionally safe at school or campus (that is, safe from both physical threats and violence, as well as bullying and cyberbullying). (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students reporting high levels of physical, mental, and emotional safety in school climate surveys, such as the U.S. Department of Education ED School Climate Surveys (EDSCLS), the Sense of Safety subscale within the CORE Districts school culture and climate survey, or the School Safety subscale within the Panorama Student Survey

Percentage of students indicating they feel safe and cared for at their school (National Education Association).

Number of documented incidents that occurred at the school of: Robbery with a weapon; Robbery without a weapon; Physical attack or fight with a weapon; Physical attack or fight without a weapon; Threat of physical attack with a weapon; Threat of physical attack without a weapon; Rape or attempted rape; Sexual assault (other than rape); Possession of a firearm or explosive device; Shooting (regardless of whether anyone was hurt); Students, faculty, or staff deaths as a result of a homicide (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Whether any of the school’s students, faculty, or staff died as a result of a homicide committed at the school (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Whether there has been at least one incident at the school that involved a shooting (regardless of whether anyone was hurt)  (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of documented incidents of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] committed by a student that occurred at the school (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of documented incidents of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] committed by a school staff member that occurred at the school.

Number of allegations made against a school staff member of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] that occurred at the school, which were followed by a resignation or retirement prior to final discipline or termination (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of allegations made against a school staff member of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] that occurred at the school, which were followed by a determination that the school staff member was responsible for the offense (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of allegations made against a school staff member of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] that occurred at the school, which were followed by a determination that the school staff member was not responsible for the offense (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of allegations made against a school staff member of offenses [rape or attempted rape; sexual assault (other than rape)] that occurred at the school, which were followed by a duty reassignment prior to final discipline or termination (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of reported allegations of harassment or bullying of K-12 students on the basis of: sex; sexual orientation; gender identity; race, color, or national origin; disability; religion (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of reported allegations of harassment or bullying of K-12 students on the basis of perceived religion (disaggregated by atheism/agnosticism; Buddhist; Catholic; Eastern Orthodox; Hindu; Islamic (Muslim); Jehovah’s Witness; Jewish; Mormon; multiple religions, group; other Christian; other religion; Protestant; Sikh) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of K-12 students reported as harassed or bullied on the basis of: sex; race, color, or national origin; disability [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disabilityIDEA, disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of K-12 students disciplined for engaging in harassment or bullying on the basis of: sex; race, color, or national origin; disability [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-IDEA, disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Facilities that are safe, healthy, inviting, welcoming, and conducive to teaching and learning (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

Percentage of educators surveyed indicating they feel safe and cared for at their school (National Education Association).

Percentage of public school employees in each job category who have received in-service training on intervention techniques, such as restorative practices (National Education Association).

Schools report disaggregated data on incidents of student bullying on a daily or weekly basis (National Education Association).

Student-to-counselor ratio and access to school social workers.

Whether an LEA has a written policy or policies prohibiting harassment or bullying of students on the basis of all of the following: sex; race, color, or national origin; disability (LEA) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Web link to policy or policies prohibiting harassment or bullying of students on the basis of all of the following: sex; race, color, or national origin; disability (LEA) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Whether an LEA has a written policy or policies prohibiting harassment or bullying of students on the basis of: sexual orientation; gender identity; or religion (LEA) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Web link to policy or policies prohibiting harassment or bullying of students on the basis of: sexual orientation; gender identity; or religion (LEA) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network’s 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention: Safe Learning Environments—Safe, orderly, nurturing, inclusive, and inviting learning environments help students realize potential as individuals and as engaged members of society. All students need to be safe, physically and emotionally; to be expected to achieve; to be recognized and celebrated equitably for accomplishments; and to feel genuinely welcomed and supported. A safe and orderly learning environment provides both physical and emotional security as well as daily experiences, at all grade levels, that enhance positive social attitudes and effective interpersonal skills. A comprehensive discipline plan and violence prevention plan should include conflict resolution strategies and should deal with potential violence as well as crisis management. A safe, nurturing, and responsive learning environment supports all students, teachers, cultures, and subgroups; honors and supports diversity and social justice; treats students equitably; and recognizes the need for feedback, innovation, and second chances (The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention).

Build a School Climate that Fosters Academics. In a survey administered by researchers of The Silent Epidemic report, seven in ten surveyed favored increasing supervision in school and more than three in five (62 percent) felt more classroom discipline was necessary. More than half (57 percent) believed their high schools did not do enough to help students feel safe from violence. Students in the focus groups talked about how they could not do homework or pay attention in class because of the many disruptions, including the fear of violence. Seven in ten (71 percent) said their schools did not do enough to make school interesting (Civic Enterprises, The Silent Epidemic).

Districts educate all school personnel on intervention techniques in incidents of student bullying and harassment, such as restorative practices and Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports (PBIS) (National Education Association).

Programs like Communities In Schools (CIS) embed support within schools to assist at-risk students. CIS offers services such as mentoring, counseling, and basic needs provision. A multiyear study found that CIS effectively reduces dropout rates and increases graduation rates when implemented with high fidelity (Communities in Schools).

Districts allocate resources toward interventions around student safety issues (e.g., LGBTQ+ bullying and harassment) (National Education Association).

Percentage of students in K-12 reporting belonging in school, as measured by surveys such as the Sense of Belonging subscale of the CORE Districts school culture and climate survey, the Classroom Belonging subscale of the Panorama Student Survey, or the Elevate survey’s Affirming Identities and Classroom Community scales (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Individuals feel they belong and feel connected to their peers in their schools, postsecondary institutions, and workplaces. (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students reporting belonging in school, as measured by surveys such as the Sense of Belonging subscale of the CORE Districts school culture and climate survey, the Classroom Belonging subscale of the Panorama Student Survey, or the Elevate survey’s Affirming Identities and Classroom Community scales (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students experiencing mechanical versus physical constraint and seclusion (Data source: Civil Rights Data Collection) (StriveTogether 2021).

Percentage of students experiencing school-related arrests (Data source: Civil Rights Data Collection) (StriveTogether 2021).

Percentage of students receiving in-school or out-of-school suspensions (Data source: Civil Rights Data Collection) (StriveTogether 2021).

Sense of belonging and connection to school community (Data sources: Youth Risk Behavior Survey; local school climate surveys) (StriveTogether 2021).

Student perceptions of their school’s inclusion of their history, culture and racial identity (Data sources: Local school climate surveys) (StriveTogether 2021).

Percentage of teachers who have received professional development in culturally-responsive pedagogy (National Education Association).

Percentage of teachers who have received professional learning time in equity and racial and social justice (National Education Association).

Percentage of teachers who have received professional learning time in implicit bias (National Education Association).

Percentage of teachers who have received professional learning time in trauma-related practices (National Education Association).

Measurement of bullying, harassment and discrimination (Data sources: Youth Risk Behavior Survey; local school climate surveys) (StriveTogether 2021).

Schools annually report on school climate and student engagement (National Education Association).

Schools have data-driven, site-based school climate and student engagement plans (National Education Association).

Percentage of programs where classrooms demonstrate equitable socio-cultural interactions (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Percentage of system-level funding that is allocated to equity-focused activities targeted to children, families and/or workforce members from focal populations (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Results from publicly available school climate surveys (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

Districts dedicate professional learning time to culturally-responsive pedagogy (National Education Association).

Districts dedicate professional learning time to equity and racial and social justice (National Education Association).

Districts dedicate professional learning time to implicit bias (National Education Association).

Districts dedicate professional learning time to trauma-informed practices (National Education Association).

Districts allocate funds to advance educators’ awareness of implicit bias (National Education Association).

Districts allocate funds to advance educators’ competence in culturally-responsive pedagogy (National Education Association).

Districts allocate funds to advance educators’ understanding of equity and racial and social justice (National Education Association).

Districts allocate funds to advance educators’ understanding of trauma-informed practices (National Education Association).

Districts allocate resources to a workforce wellness and safety program, ensuring educators of color and LGBTQ+ educators feel safe and cared for in their schools (National Education Association).

State develops a policy that requires annual reporting by school on school climate and student engagement (National Education Association).

Fostering positive learning environments for students, including by reducing class sizes, developing programs that prevent bullying, moving away from punitive disciplinary practices and applying other trauma-informed practices (Urban Institute).

Students are exposed to racial and ethnic diversity within their schools. Student body composition by race and ethnicity (%). (Education-to-Workforce).

Student body composition by race and ethnicity (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Share of students attending high-poverty schools, by race or ethnicity (Urban Institute).

Use of research and data tools to understand school and workplace racial and ethnic diversity to understand equity issues and trends (National Equity Atlas).

Creating more equitable school attendance boundaries (Urban Institute).

Developing centralized school lottery application systems that prioritize school diversity  (Urban Institute).

Ending school and neighborhood segregation, including by expanding affordable housing in resource-rich neighborhoods and reforming zoning policies to allow for more diverse, high-density, mixed-income communities (Urban Institute).

Implementing more equitable school funding policies and advocating for reforms to state and federal funding (Urban Institute).

Rethink school district lines by enrolling students across district lines. District lines are responsible for roughly 60 percent of segregation in schools. State policymakers should invest in the creation or expansion of interdistrict transfer programs and magnet schools to enroll students across district lines. Controlled choice approaches can succeed with the right design elements to help advance integration rather than facilitating segregation. These elements include four things: (a) Free transportation to make program participation a meaningful option for all families; (b) Fair, transparent, and inclusive lotteries to ensure true diversity; (c) Ongoing, extensive multilingual outreach and communication to families in a wide range of neighborhoods; (d) School siting policies that ensure that historically underserved students are not asked to bear disproportionate commuting burdens (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Rethink school district lines by changing district lines. State leaders should consider changing existing lines. In many cases, shifting a district line by a matter of blocks can dramatically reduce segregation; in other cases, it may make sense to consider shifting to truly countywide school districts or pursuing other consolidation strategies. Strategically revising district lines can enhance diversity and improve resource equity (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Rethink school district lines by strengthening anti-secession laws to prevent continued district fracturing and segregation. Without careful attention, efforts to promote integration may be met with backlash and backsliding. This is what happened in Tennessee after education leaders pursued an innovative effort to consolidate Memphis Schools into Shelby County School District, which would have integrated school districts and increased access to resources for the predominantly Black students in Memphis (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Foster positive student experiences in integration efforts by promoting educator quality and diversity. A truly integrated school is staffed by diverse, high-quality, well-supported educators. State leaders should – every time they invest in an integration program – also do the following: (1) Publish annual educator quality and diversity data in the schools and districts impacted by the initiative, and how they compare to other schools in the surrounding district(s); (2) Set educator diversity, quality, and support goals in the schools and districts that participate, including timelines with interim targets; (3) Identify state resources to support educator quality, diversity, and support in schools and districts that participate; (4) Invest in opportunities to prepare, support, and retain teachers of color in the schools and districts that participate; (5) Require and fund ongoing, job-embedded, evidence-based professional learning for educators in schools and districts that participate, including support for understanding adult mindsets and asset-based pedagogies; anti-bias training; and diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging training (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Foster positive student experiences in integration efforts by encouraging meaningful student, family, and community engagement. State leaders should—every time they invest in an integration program— also provide guidance, training, and funding to local leaders that is focused on community engagement. This support should focus on four actions that will help educators in integrating schools: (a) Engaging families that live further from a particular school or who speak different languages. This is particularly important for magnet schools and other public, choice-based integration efforts, which cannot create diversity if diverse families are not aware of, connected to, and excited about sending their children to the schools; (b) Leveraging community-based organizations (CBOs) in both the “sending” and “receiving” communities to partner with a school to accelerate student learning and meet whole-child needs; (c) Creating parent and family advisory councils with power to participate in decision-making about a school’s programming, practices, and policies. These councils should include meaningful representation of families from underrepresented communities; (d) Providing ongoing financial and personnel support for the daily work of authentic community engagement (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Foster positive student experiences in integration efforts by ensuring all students have access to advanced coursework. Districts working to integrate schools are historically prone to segregate students within “integrated” buildings via biased academic tracking policies. State leaders should require—and fund—all schools, and especially those participating in an integration program, to do two things: (a) Conduct universal screening for participation in gifted and talented programs at the elementary level. For an example, see Maryland’s universal screening requirement; and (b) Implement automatic enrollment policies that put all students who demonstrate readiness on one or more of a wide variety of valid metrics (including grades, end of course assessments, standardized tests, and teacher recommendations) into advanced courses (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Students are exposed to socioeconomic diversity within their schools. Student body composition by income. (Education-to-Workforce).

Share of students attending high-poverty schools, by race or ethnicity. Students from families with low incomes and students of color achieve better academic outcomes when they attend more economically and racially diverse schools (Urban Institute).

Use of research and data tools to understand school and workplace socioeconomic diversity to understand equity issues and trends (National Equity Atlas).

Creating more equitable school attendance boundaries (Urban Institute).

Developing centralized school lottery application systems that prioritize school diversity  (Urban Institute).

Ending school and neighborhood segregation, including by expanding affordable housing in resource-rich neighborhoods and reforming zoning policies to allow for more diverse, high-density, mixed-income communities (Urban Institute).

Implementing more equitable school funding policies and advocating for reforms to state and federal funding (Urban Institute).

Civic engagement of high school graduates: Voter participation (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Civic engagement of high school graduates: Incarceration rates (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Civic engagement of high school graduates: Rates of volunteerism (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Civic engagement of high school graduates: Community organization participation and leadership (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Deeper learning skills of high school graduates: Knowledge (academic content, career, citizenship content, practical life knowledge) (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Deeper learning skills of high school graduates: Skills/ability (creativity; confidence; self-regulation, responsibility, goal-setting, reflexivity; social interaction/communication; critical thinking/problem solving; information and technology; resourcefulness) (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Deeper learning skills of high school graduates: Mission motivation to learn and be challenged/academic self-concept (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Deeper learning skills of high school graduates: Appreciation of and ability to engage with diversity/equity (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Percentage of students in K-12 reporting a high level of social-emotional skills (e.g., social awareness, self-management, growth mindset, self-efficacy) on surveys such as the CORE Districts SEL Survey social awareness scale, or percentage of students meeting benchmarks on teacher ratings of social skills drawn from Elliott and Gresham’s Social Skills Rating Scale (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of youth in K-12 with mental or emotional health needs as identified by a universal screening tool. For a list of mental health screening tools that may be appropriate for school-based use, see the following guide from the National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments: “Mental Health Screening Tools for Grades K-12” (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Self-management: Students are able to regulate their emotions, thoughts, and behaviors effectively in different situations; Percentage of students reporting a high level of self-management on surveys such as the CORE Districts SEL Survey self-management scale (grades 5–12) or Shift and Persist scale for children. (Education-to-Workforce).

Growth mindset: Students believe that their abilities can grow with effort; Percentage of students reporting a high level of growth mindset on surveys such as the CORE Districts SEL Survey Growth Mindset Scale (grades 5–12) or the Growth Mindset Scale developed by Carol Dweck, which may be used with children, teens, and adults (Education-to-Workforce).

Self-efficacy: Students believe in their ability to achieve an outcome or reach a goal. Percentage of students reporting a high level of self-efficacy on surveys such as the CORE Districts Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) Survey self-efficacy scale (Education-to-Workforce).

Social awareness: Students are able to understand others’ perspectives; understand social and ethical norms for behavior; and recognize family, school, and community resources and supports. Percentage of students reporting a high level of social awareness on surveys such as the CORE Districts SEL Survey social awareness scale, or percentage of students meeting benchmarks on teacher ratings of social skills drawn from Elliott and Gresham’s Social Skills Rating Scale. (Education-to-Workforce).

Cultural competency: Individuals are able to understand the perspectives of and empathize with others from diverse backgrounds and cultures. Reflecting the lack of developed tools in the field, the EW Framework is unable to recommend a specific measurement tool. In some contexts, it might be possible to adapt an existing measure for adults for use with youth. For examples, the HEIghten Outcomes Assessment for Intercultural Competency & Diversity or The Intercultural Development Inventory®. (Education-to-Workforce).

Civic engagement: Individuals exhibit the knowledge, skills, values, motivation, and activities that promote quality of life within a community and society at large through political and nonpolitical processes. Percentage of students reporting a high level of civic engagement on surveys such as the Youth Civic and Character Measures Toolkit Survey and Youth Civic Engagement Indicators Project Survey. (Education-to-Workforce).

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning’s (CASEL) best practices for building inclusive school environments through social-emotional learning (CASEL).

Whole-school culture-building strategies, such as using the first two weeks of the school year intentionally to build school culture, promoting school values in messages around the school, or playing music outdoors between classes to foster a positive environment (PACE, Enacting Social-Emotional Learning).

Promoting personal interaction to build trust and relationships, for example by greeting students by name and shaking hands at the beginning of school or class (PACE, Enacting Social-Emotional Learning).

Advisory periods that provide teachers and students time to form relationships, learn social skills, discuss issues like bullying, and process difficult events happening on or off campus (PACE, Enacting Social-Emotional Learning).

Organizing schedules and students to support relationships, for example by offering bridge programs for students just entering the school, grouping students into smaller communities or “families” within large schools, and keeping groups of students with the same teachers for multiple years (PACE, Enacting Social-Emotional Learning).

Inclusion strategies, such as organizing student volunteers to reach out to isolated or lonely students, and student clubs that specifically offer support to groups that might feel excluded at school (e.g., African American or Latinx students, special education students, or female students interested in computer coding) (PACE, Enacting Social-Emotional Learning).

Impact of teaching a growth mindset: Researchers Susana Claro and Susanna Loeb estimate that the average growth in English language arts and math scores corresponding to the difference between a fixed mindset to a growth mindset (an approximately two standard deviation change) are approximately 0.07 and 0.05 standard deviations in the corresponding test performance. Based on a rough calculation developed by Hanushek, Peterson & Woessmann (2012), these changes are equivalent to more than 35 days of learning. The difference is especially meaningful considering that the evidence that social-emotional barriers such as a fixed mindset can potentially be addressed by low-cost scalable interventions (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Positive behavior management and restorative practices that help teachers focus on why a student acted out, help students develop more appropriate skills, and in some cases, mend damaged relationships between educators and students. Strategies range from formal, packaged programs to everyday strategies such as “cooling off” rooms where students can get support and avoid suspension (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Setting and enforcing clear values and expectations, through direct instruction, specific programs or events, rewards systems for positive behavior, and visuals posted throughout the school. (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Targeted approaches for struggling, at-risk, or historically marginalized students, ranging from professional counseling, multi-tiered systems of support for struggling students, and programs meant to support equity, particularly for African American youth (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Elective courses such as music or PE as opportunities to model good communication and group interaction skills, and to form trusting relationships between adults and students (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Student clubs that specifically promote kindness, compassion, and positive behavior, with some clubs going further to support students facing trauma. Several schools also have leadership programs that teach students to model good behavior on campus, help other students, and mediate conflicts (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Afterschool programs and activities (e.g., music, yoga, sports) that are intentionally designed to give students opportunities to connect with students from other backgrounds, form relationships with adults, or relieve stress (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Strategies for creating a positive classroom environment, such as seating students in groups to reinforce norms of getting help from peers, taking on specific roles in a group, and learning to receive feedback (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Strategies for managing emotions, such as permitting students to redo homework assignments and tests to reduce pressure and show students they can improve over time with consistent effort. (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Modeling appropriate language and mindsets, for example by providing concrete protocols for how students should communicate with one another or by coaching students to say “I can’t do it YET” instead of “I can’t do it.” (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Staff leadership teams charged with overseeing the behavior and school climate approaches at the school (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Use of non-instructional staff in creative ways, such as staffing a “Listening Room” where students can find a trusted adult, training PE teachers as life coaches for frequently truant students, or explicitly recruiting staff members who are a good fit with the values of the school and the racial/ethnic makeup of the student body (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Opportunities for adults to learn about social-emotional learning, such as professional development on topics like growth mindset; staff meetings where educators model the kinds of behaviors and language expected of students, or pairing experienced teachers with new teachers for coaching on social-emotional learning practices (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Use of CORE survey data to guide and improve school efforts, often led by the staff leadership teams mentioned above (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

School- or staff-led local data collection efforts to provide more rapid or specific feedback, such as developing short student surveys, administered monthly, to track whether students feel safe, have friends, and have a trusted adult connection at school (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Schools with strong SEL practices tend to build on existing assets, such as an established program or particular individuals. For example, one outlier school uses a well-developed sports program as a primary vehicle for supporting social-emotional learning; another uses its strong music program. In each school, an existing program was re-purposed to help build student confidence, promote teamwork, build positive relationships with peers and adults, and improve student attendance and motivation. The specific content of these programs seems to be less important than the fact that they are authentic to the school’s strengths and needs, are deeply embedded in the school culture, and are explicitly designed to advance social-emotional learning (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Schools with strong SEL practices tend to implement with intention. Practices used to foster social-emotional learning and positive campus climate are implemented intentionally, not in a spontaneous or ad hoc manner. When formal programs are implemented, there are clear roles for staff, specific trainings, and purposeful rules and incentives. Appropriate levels of staffing and financial investment also appear to be important to success (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Schools with strong SEL practices tend to promote student agency and leadership. Educators in outlier schools believe that youth-led efforts help students engage and also promote positive behaviors and a school culture of trust and inclusion. Strategies range from buddy programs to kindness clubs and student-led lessons on respect (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

To advance social-emotional learning, it appears that schools and districts need to invest in relevant staff positions and adult learning activities. Sometimes these decisions are made at the school level, but often, district support is needed to fund school-level positions or professional development. In addition, districts can invest in district-level personnel who coordinate or support social-emotional learning, as several CORE districts do. All of the outlier schools we studied received some form of professional development around social-emotional learning topics (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Districts—or other entities—can help by measuring social-emotional learning outcomes and providing support to use the data. The CORE districts have an annual survey to measure social-emotional learning outcomes and can use it to monitor school performance and provide targeted supports to schools. Districts use the survey data in a variety of ways: for evaluating school and educator performance, for public reporting to parents, and for grouping schools into cohorts for specialized training. As a result of these and other activities, administrators are quite aware of social-emotional learning outcomes and take them seriously (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Districts can help schools integrate social-emotional learning and racial equity efforts. While many of the educators in our study approach their work with a strong equity orientation, not all connect their specific social-emotional learning strategies to their equity goals. As a result, schools may be left with an incomplete or incoherent approach. This may be an area where district (or network) leadership can make a substantial difference, by addressing the issue head-on, inviting dialog, and explicitly articulating how social-emotional learning efforts relate to racial equity goals (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

More work is needed to help schools achieve a common understanding of social-emotional learning and to align social-emotional learning activities, both within a school and between the school and district levels. Certainly, this is an area where district leadership can make a substantial difference. In our study, we found the strongest conceptual and programmatic coherence in the district with the most comprehensive approach, which includes social-emotional learning standards for students and adults, use of the adult standards in personnel evaluations, use of social-emotional learning priorities and measures in school performance evaluations, relevant professional development, and financial investment in these social-emotional learning interventions. This level of formal alignment may be necessary to make social-emotional learning a true priority for school-level educators and bring coherence to varied practices and supports within a school or district (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Districts can provide support to help schools integrate social-emotional learning and subject area content—an area that even the strongest outlier schools are just beginning to explore. One CORE district has integrated social-emotional learning into its content standards. A few others have curricula that include or emphasize social-emotional learning topics. At the same time, some teachers in the outlier schools argue that social-emotional learning should be considered a pedagogical approach rather than a component of course curricula. Moving forward, policymakers and educational leaders could consider what content-specific social-emotional learning practice looks like and how to support it at scale (PACE, Students with Growth Mindset Learn More in School).

Individuals have access to and are able to mobilize relationships that help them further their goals. (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students or individuals reporting a high level of social capital on surveys such as the Social Capital Assessment + Learning for Equity (SCALE) Social Capital, Network Diversity, and Network Strength scales (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of students or individuals reporting a high level of social capital on surveys such as the Social Capital Assessment + Learning for Equity (SCALE) Social Capital, Network Diversity, and Network Strength scales. (Education-to-Workforce).

The EW Framework recommends consulting guidance by the Christensen Institute that describes emerging practices for measuring students’ social capital using a four-dimensional framework based on quantity of relationships, quality of relationships, structure of networks, and ability to mobilize relationships (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

A student has strong developmental relationships, that is, close connections through which young people discover who they are, gain abilities to shape their own lives, and learn how to interact with and contribute to the world around them. A developmental relationship is distinct from more generalized notions of positive relationships in that it is defined by the combination of five interconnected elements: express care, challenge growth, provide support, share power, and expand possibilities. (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

A student has access to the resources provided by developmental relationships. Resources can include things such as financial or material help, information, skill-building opportunities, guidance, and values and norms. The following social capital measure focuses on three types of resources: access to useful information, new connections, and skill-building opportunities (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Students have a web or network of developmentally-rich relationships that can provide access to valuable resources. There are several indicators that have been used to understand the quality of an individual’s social network, such as network structure, size, diversity, and strength (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Students have people in their network who are from different cultures, racial and ethnic backgrounds, economic backgrounds, and have different skills (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Students have people in their network they can go to for help, trust, and feel close to, as well as people who they feel less close to (i.e., weaker tie) but who may be influential in helping them access their goals or who may connect them to others (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Catalysts to Mobilize Relationships and Resources: The degree to which an individual has different relationships that help build their self-awareness, confidence, relationships-building skills, and possible selves (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Self-Initiated Social Capital: The degree to which an individual actively builds relationships and uses the relationships and the resources they have to reach their goals (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Relationship-Building Skills: The degree to which an individual is able to build positive relationships with others (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Networking Skills: The degree to which an individual purposefully uses relationships within their social network to reach their goals (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Personal Identity: The degree to which an individual has a clear sense of their personal identity (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Racial and Ethnic Identity: The degree to which an individual has a clear sense of their racial and ethnic background and what this identity means to them (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Sense of Purpose: The degree to which an individual has a clear sense of their life’s purpose (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Self-Efficacy for Reaching Life Goals: The degree to which an individual feels they can successfully reach their life goals (Search Institute, Social Capital Assessment).

Progress Towards Education or Career Goals: The degree to which an individual reports making progress towards their education or career goals (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Commitment to Paying It-Forward: The degree to which an individual engages in behaviors that demonstrate a commitment to paying-it-forward to others (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Collective Efficacy to Change Systems: The degree to which an individual feels that they can work with their program or organization to change employment and education systems (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Occupational Identity: The degree to which an individual has a clear sense of their occupational identity (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Job-Seeking Skills: The degree to which an individual engages in behaviors that may lead to securing employment (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

To measure concentration of social capital at a systems level, users could consider an index adapted from researchers Anil Rupasingha and Stephan Goetz.  Their index includes: the number of all associations per 10,000 population, including religious organizations, civic and social associations, political organizations, professional organizations, labor organizations, bowling centers, physical fitness facilities, public golf courses, and sports clubs. The measure also includes commercial and nonprofit associations drawn from Census Bureau County Business Patterns data. It also includes 

The percentage of voters who participated in a presidential, state, or county election (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Seeking Teacher/Professor Support: The degree to which an individual actively seeks social capital support from teachers, professors, and other campus staff (e.g., asks for information, guidance, and other forms of instrumental support) (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

The county-level census response rate in the person’s county (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

The number of charitable, nonprofit organizations with an office in the county (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Cohesiveness: The degree to which a person’s social networks are fragmented into cliques (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Economic connectedness: The degree to which low-income and high-income people are friends with each other. Studies have shown that children who grow up in communities with more economic connectedness (cross-class interaction) are much more likely to rise up out of poverty (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Civic engagement: Rates of volunteering and participation in community organizations (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Program Support for Social Capital Development: The degree to which an individual reports receiving forms of support as a result of participating in a program that is believed to promote social capital (e.g., skill building, increasing network size) (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Sense of Program/School Community: The degree to which an individual feels a sense of community within their program, school, or organization (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Psychological Safety: The degree to which an individual feels their program or organization provides a safe space for them to express who they are as an individual (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Volunteer Support: The degree to which an individual perceives that volunteers in their program or organization have provided them with social capital support (e.g., useful information, new connections) (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Seeking Volunteer Support: The degree to which an individual actively seeks social capital support from volunteers within their program or an organization (e.g., asks for information, guidance, and other forms of instrumental support) (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Students’ social capital in STEM education (derived from families, peers, teachers, and professional networks) demonstrably promotes their STEM educational outcomes and career paths. Inclusive STEM schools, mentoring, and after-school programs are some promising approaches that can enhance STEM social capital and outcomes of underrepresented students, particularly women, Blacks/Hispanics/Native Americans, youth with low socioeconomic status, and persons with disabilities (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

In out-of-school settings, offering after-school or summer programs, such as robotics team or science summer camp, can foster peer networks and pair students with STEM mentors. These out-of-school time programs are practical social capital building strategies that can reach a large number of students across the country, especially in rural communities (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Schools and nonprofit organizations can help cultivate social capital among young people through educational and non-educational programming (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Interventions such as zoning and affordable housing policies aimed at integrating neighborhoods and college admissions reforms to boost diversity on campuses can increase cross-class interaction substantially and are likely to be very valuable (Opportunity Insights, Social Capital and Economic Mobility). 

Friending bias (i.e. the tendency for people to befriend people similar to them) can be influenced by policy changes as well. While more work needs to be done to identify what types of interventions reduce friending bias, there are a number of programs being piloted around the country that warrant further study: efforts to reduce the size of groups in which students interact and limit the divisions created by tracking in schools, changes in architecture and urban planning to foster greater interaction, and the creation of new domains for interaction via programs that seek to break down class barriers (Opportunity Insights, Social Capital and Economic Mobility). 

Providing relevant bridging social capital may make other programs that seek to increase economic mobility more effective. For example, recent programs that have had large impacts in helping families move to higher-opportunity neighborhoods or obtain higher-paying jobs provide bridging social capital and outperform traditional programs that focus solely on economic resources or skills. These results suggest that prioritizing the provision of adequate social support so people can take advantage of available economic resources may greatly amplify the impacts of existing programs to reduce intergenerational poverty (Opportunity Insights, Social Capital and Economic Mobility). 

Policy initiatives and programs aimed at enhancing opportunities for students to connect and engage with more interest-sharing peers and professionals in STEM fields could help them develop extended social networks that can support their educational and career pathways in STEM. ISTEMSs represent one of the latest comprehensive schoolwide reform models that offer opportunities for students, particularly underrepresented groups, to participate in a STEM-specialized learning environment with interest-sharing peers  (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Policymakers and educators can develop and expand programs that promote STEM-oriented interactions among peers and parental involvement in STEM education both at home and at school. Creating and supporting STEM-focused clubs or study groups, in and out of school, is one approach (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Policymakers and educators can introduce STEM-related materials or activities to the existing well-established student organizations such as Girl Scout STEM Programs and Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) STEM Programs (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

To promote parental engagement in STEM, they must have expanded access to STEM learning resources and activities, especially for those parents without a college degree and those who are not working in STEM fields. Equally important is providing training and professional development in STEM for educators and social service providers, such as public librarians or museum staff, whose tasks involve engaging parents in their children’s learning activities (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Policy initiatives can create and facilitate well-designed mentoring programs that pair students (in particular women, under-represented minorities, low-SES students, and people with disabilities) with STEM educators or professionals who are knowledgeable and passionate about supporting students’ educational and career development. Training and supporting those STEM educators or professionals in providing mentorship can help them be effective mentors for their mentees. Also helpful is partnering schools with industry organizations to offer internships for students to shadow professionals in real-world STEM settings (Leveraging Social Capital to Broaden Participation in STEM).

Individuals have access to health, mental health, and social services provided by educational institutions and employers. Schools can be a critical source of support for students’ physical, mental, and social-emotional health. For example, three out of four students who ever access mental health services do so through their school (Education-to-Workforce).

Ratio of number of students to number of health, mental health, and social services full-time equivalent (FTE) staff (for example, school nurses, psychologists, and social workers) (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

The U.S. Department of Education’s National Teacher and Principal Survey collects data on the number of FTE nurses, psychologists, and social workers among a sample of schools (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Proportion of youth experiencing poor mental health (Data Source: Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System) (StriveTogether 2021).

Percentage of youth with mental or emotional health needs as identified by a universal screening tool. For a list of mental health screening tools that may be appropriate for school-based use, see the following guide from the National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments: “Mental Health Screening Tools for Grades K–12” (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Physical health/fitness of high school graduates (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Rate of teen parenthood (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Rate of drug/substance use/abuse (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Eligible schools are enrolled in free and reduced-price school breakfast and lunch programs (National Education Association).

Number and type of in-school health workers (National Education Association).

Percentage of specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) surveyed indicating satisfaction with time dedicated toward collaboration (National Education Association).

Percentage of programs offering health, mental health and social services, or staff or consultants providing infant and early childhood mental health consultation (IECMHC) services (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Proportion of schools with behavioral/mental health services and on-site staff (StriveTogether 2021).

School structure and resources, including the following indicators: General population support services (e.g., guidance counselor, college counselor, employment assistance, emergency funds, disability support); ELL or dual-language program(s) offered; Special education and support for students with disabilities; Advanced coursework (e.g., AP, IB, dual enrollment/early college); Ability tracking; Career pathway programming for students (e.g., internships, credentials, vocational education, job fairs, job readiness programming); College connections (e.g., visits to school by college representatives, college centers); Behavior management system (e.g., PBiS systems and fidelity, restorative practices); Health and mental health services; Socioemotional/leadership development interventions; General population programs/interventions (e.g., reading programs, incentive systems); Online learning; Curriculum/teaching materials (not infrastructural); Curriculum development (including for cultural relevance); Teacher and staff professional development (including on data usage, collaborative and systemic analysis of student work, formative assessment practices); Specials (physical education, electives, extracurricular activities, and enrichment programming); Student affiliation or decision making bodies (e.g., GSA, student government) (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Districts provide adequate resources for student-to-specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) to collaborate with teachers, education support professionals (ESPs), parents and students (National Education Association).

Districts provide student-to-specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) with adequate time to collaborate with teachers and education support professionals (ESPs) (National Education Association).

School-based supports for child health and well-being, such as physicals, vaccinations, dental and vision care, therapy and other mental health services (Results for America).

Providing access to health care (Rhode Island Kids Count).

Districts require a favorable student-to-specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) ratio (Optimal ratios include: school counselors – 250:1; school nurses – 750:1; school psychologists – 500-700:1; school social workers – 250:1) (National Education Association).

State and/or district pays for school-based health workforce, including nurses and counselors (National Education Association).

In addition to ensuring students receive the academic supports needed for postsecondary, social and emotional supports are needed as well. A recent survey by Gallup found that 37 percent of adults believe social and life skill supports would be most helpful in preparing students for college, while another 38 percent believe social and life skills would be helpful in preparing students for the workplace. Nationally representative surveys of teachers and administrators show that they believe social and emotional development is critical for success in school, work, and life, but that only a minority of schools are integrating such learning and development into school culture, climate, and curriculum (Bridgeland, Bruce, & Hariharan, 2013; DePaoli, Atwell, & Bridgeland, 2017).  (Civic Enterprises, Building a Grad Nation). 

Supporting Students’ Basic Needs: In an interview conducted with state-level members of the National College Attainment Network, members in four states (California, New York, Ohio, Tennessee) identified better support for students’ basic needs as a key state policy issue. When members discussed student basic needs, they included access to housing, food, transportation, and other supports necessary for postsecondary success outside of tuition and fees. Organizations considered the impact of a wide variety of student needs – from financial to social-emotional – on access and attainment outcomes. One member suggested that many access and attainment policies are “outdated and antiquated” and “don’t address the needs and wants of students today.” Another interviewee shared their belief that “students need to be at the table, with a voice, and with a vote” to ensure that more holistic supports are provided. Members across states highlighted policy efforts to support student mental health, assist with food, housing, and transportation, and ensure that students are retained throughout their postsecondary education because concerns about their basic needs are alleviated. (NCAN, Building Momentum at the State Level).

Individuals exhibit positive physical development and health. Physical development and well-being is both an outcome in itself and an important contributor to economic mobility and security. Research links healthy behaviors like physical activity to higher academic achievement (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students meeting benchmarks on self-rated surveys of physical health, such as the California Healthy Kids Survey Physical Health & Nutrition module. (Education-to-Workforce).

The EW Framework recommends measuring physical development and well-being using self-reports on surveys. Although physical fitness tests and activity trackers are viable alternatives to self-reports, survey data may be more feasible to collect at scale while mitigating potential concerns about shaming and privacy. As one example, California administers both a survey and a physical fitness test to K–12 students. However, it recently eliminated the Body Composition component of the test amid concerns about its value and risk for unintended consequences and is reassessing whether to continue with the test at all (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Periodically measure the extent to which the school is in compliance with its health and wellness policy and progress made in attaining the goals of the school’s health and wellness policy and make the assessment available to the public (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Rate of teen parenthood. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Rate of drug/substance use/abuse. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Recognize the importance of student health and wellness and establish a nutrition promotion and education program, physical activity, and other school-based activities that promote student wellness (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Include nutrition guidelines for all foods available on the school campus to promote student health and reduce obesity (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Create a school health and wellness committee composed of students, parents, faculty, administrators, school health professionals and community health organizations to ensure appropriate health and wellness programs are available to each student (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Inform and and update the public about the content, implementation and impacts of the school’s health and wellness policy (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Since 2003, every school district in California has been required to administer the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) at least once every two years and make the results publicly available. CHKS is an anonymous, confidential survey for students in grades 5 and above designed to help school communities identify students’ needs. It is based on a strengths-based framework drawn from resilience and youth development research. CHKS covers several dimensions of school climate and student well-being, including physical and mental well-being and safety. Although there is a core survey that must be administered, school districts can select supplementary modules for more in-depth questions on different topics or add a custom module to measure other topics relevant to their community.

Individuals have the oral, written, nonverbal, and listening skills required for success in school and at work (Education-to-Workforce).

K–12: Percentage of students demonstrating proficiency on assessments such as the College and Career Readiness Assessment, an assessment for grades 6–12 that measures critical thinking, problem solving, and written communications (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of students demonstrating proficiency on assessments such as the College and Career Readiness Assessment (CCRA+), an assessment for grades 6–12 that measures critical thinking, problem solving, and written communications (Education-to-Workforce).

Individuals have the problem solving, critical thinking, and decision-making skills needed in the workplace. Higher-order thinking (also referred to as critical thinking, problem solving, or decision making) is consistently ranked as one of the most in-demand workforce readiness competencies by employers across industries (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students demonstrating proficiency on assessments such as the College and Career Readiness Assessment (CCRA+), an assessment for grades 6–12 that measures critical thinking, problem solving, and written communications (Education-to-Workforce).

Remembering: Students recognize or recall knowledge from memory. Remembering is when memory is used to produce or retrieve definitions, facts, or lists, or to recite previously learned information. (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Understanding: Students construct meaning from different types of functions be they written or graphic messages or activities like interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing, or explaining (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Applying: Students carry out or use a procedure through executing or implementing. Applying relates to or refers to situations where learned material is used through products like models, presentations, interviews or simulations (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Analyzing: Students break materials or concepts into parts, determine how the parts relate to one another or how they interrelate, or how the parts relate to an overall structure or purpose. Mental actions included in this function are differentiating, organizing, and attributing, as well as being able to distinguish between the components or parts. When one is analyzing, he/she can illustrate this mental function by creating spreadsheets, surveys, charts, or diagrams, or graphic representations (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Evaluating: Students make judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing. Critiques, recommendations, and reports are some of the products that can be created to demonstrate the processes of evaluation. In the newer taxonomy, evaluating comes before creating as it is often a necessary part of the precursory behavior before one creates something (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Creating: Students put elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing. Creating requires students to put parts together in a new way, or synthesize parts into something new and different creating a new form or product. This process is the most difficult mental function in the new taxonomy (Anderson and Krathwohl, Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised).

Teachers use a variety of question types to gauge students’ understanding. When gauging students’ learning in math class, it’s essential to ask a variety of questions that encourage critical thinking, communication, and reflection. Open-ended questions can help you understand students’ thought processes and identify areas where they may need additional support. Probing questions can uncover students’ thought patterns and help you diagnose misconceptions. Higher-order thinking questions can assess students’ ability to apply mathematical concepts to real-life scenarios and make connections to broader mathematical ideas. Self-reflection questions can help students identify their own strengths and weaknesses and develop a growth mindset. Modeling and visualizing questions can encourage students to think creatively and develop their spatial reasoning skills. Finally, discussion and connection questions can foster a sense of community and help students see the relevance of math to their everyday lives. By mixing up the types of questions you ask, you can get a more comprehensive picture of your students’ understanding and provide targeted support to help them deepen their learning (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics).

Differences in the rates at which students from key demographic subgroups ever experience different forms of school discipline (office referrals, suspensions, expulsions, restraint, and exclusion) relative to those students’ representation in their school population as a whole (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Disproportionalities along the lines of key demographic characteristics in the level of school discipline experienced (for example, number of days suspended) (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of students subjected to disciplinary action in the past year (National Education Association).

Students (K-12) who received one or more in-school suspension: Number of students without disabilities who received one or more in-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) who received one or more in-school suspension: Number of students with disabilities who received one or more in-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students who received one out-of-school suspension: Number of K-12 students without disabilities who received one out-of-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students who received one out-of-school suspension: Number of K-12 students with disabilities who received one out-of-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students who received more than one out-of-school suspension: Number of K-12 students without disabilities who received more than one out-of-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students who received more than one out-of-school suspension: Number of K-12 students with disabilities who received more than one out-of-school suspension [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) who were expelled (with educational services; without educational services; because of zero-tolerance policies) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students without disabilities who were expelled (with educational services; without educational services; because of zero-tolerance policies) [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities who were expelled (with educational services; without educational services; because of zero-tolerance policies) [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students without disabilities who were transferred for disciplinary reasons to alternative school [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities who were transferred for disciplinary reasons to alternative school [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students who received corporal punishment (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of K-12 students without disabilities who received corporal punishment [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of K-12 students with disabilities who received corporal punishment [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of instances of corporal punishment that K-12 students received (disaggregated by students without disabilities, students with disabilities) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of instances of out-of-school suspensions that K-12 students received (disaggregated by students without disabilities, students with disabilities-IDEA, students with disabilitiesSection 504 only) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of school days missed by K-12 students who received out-of-school suspensions [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-IDEA, disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) who were referred to law enforcement agency or official.

Number of students without disabilities who were referred to law enforcement agency or official [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities who were referred to law enforcement agency or official [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of instances of referrals to law enforcement that K-12 students received (disaggregated by students without disabilities, students with disabilities-IDEA, students with disabilities-Section 504 only) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) who were arrested for school-related activity (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students without disabilities who were arrested for school-related activity [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities who were arrested for school-related activity [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL]  (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of instances of school-related arrests that K-12 students received (disaggregated by students without disabilities, students with disabilities-IDEA, students with disabilities-Section 504 only)  (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) subjected to mechanical restraint: o Number of non-IDEA students subjected to mechanical restraint [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities (IDEA) subjected to mechanical restraint [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) subjected to physical restraint (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of non-IDEA students subjected to physical restraint [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities (IDEA) subjected to physical restraint [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Students (K-12) subjected to seclusion (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of non-IDEA students subjected to seclusion [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), disability-Section 504 only, EL]  (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of students with disabilities (IDEA) subjected to seclusion [disaggregated by race, sex (male, female, nonbinary), EL] (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Number of instances of mechanical restraint, physical restraint, seclusion (disaggregated by students without disabilities, students with disabilities-IDEA, students with disabilities-Section 504 only) (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Out-of-school suspension and expulsion rates, disaggregated by race, disability, gender, and other student demographics (Civil Rights Data Collection, Office for Civil Rights).

Availability and participation in inclusive practices such as Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and restorative classroom management (Eliminating Disparities in School Discipline).

Ratio of mental health professionals to students, and implementation fidelity of restorative practices.

Schools treat students similarly and appropriately for disciplinary infractions (Education-to-Workforce).

K-12 institution suspension rate (California Department of Education & WestEd, Cradle-to-Career Data System Public Data Definitions).

Schools collect and publicly report demographic data recording behavior and behavioral interventions leading to disciplinary exclusion from school (National Education Association).

Suspension and expulsion rates (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Suspension rates disaggregated by gender, race, ethnicity, disability status, language status, and economic status. (Council of the Great City Schools).

Instructional days missed per 100 students due to suspensions disaggregated by gender, race, ethnicity, disability status, language status, and economic status. (Council of the Great City Schools).

Differences in the rates at which students from key demographic subgroups ever experience different forms of school discipline (office referrals, suspensions, expulsions, restraint and exclusion) relative to those students’ representation in their school population as a whole (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Disproportionalities along the lines of key demographic characteristics in the level of school discipline experienced (for example, number of days suspended) (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Rates of arrests and law enforcement referrals (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Behavioral reasons for discipline (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

Discipline equity gaps by student subgroups (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

Percent of total instructional time missed (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

Suspension, expulsion and overall exclusionary discipline rates and numbers of students impacted (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

Identifying and addressing disproportionate discipline in Maryland: In partnership with the Regional Education Laboratory (REL) Mid Atlantic, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) is systematically identifying and addressing disproportionality in exclusionary discipline. All local school systems in the State of Maryland have discipline review teams tasked with examining removals from the classroom and increasing the use of non-exclusionary discipline practices. Discipline data are disaggregated by race and ethnicity and disability status, allowing practitioners and researchers to understand disciplinary trends and examine school characteristics related to disproportionate discipline. MSDE is using data to identify resources and interventions that can promote preventive strategies and non-exclusionary behavioral supports, such as restorative justice practices and positive behavioral interventions and supports (Education-to-Workforce).

Schools offer alternatives to traditional behavioral interventions, such as restorative practices (National Education Association).

Schools use Positive Behavior Intervention Supports (PBIS) (Results for America).

Invest in public health strategies to create safe schools (Center for Policing Equity).

My Brother’s Keeper, a national program reducing exclusionary discipline and promoting equity for young men of color (My Brother’s Keeper Alliance).

Training and Professional Development. Professionals must receive comprehensive training on disability awareness, implicit bias, and positive behavioral interventions. This training should emphasize de-escalation techniques and the importance of understanding disability-related behaviors in context (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Revising Policies and Practices. Schools should replace zero-tolerance policies with restorative justice approaches that focus on repairing harm, fostering understanding, and building supportive relationships. Discipline policies must be flexible enough to account for the individual needs of students with disabilities. States should also continue to end laws allowing for corporal punishment, seclusion, and dangerous restraint practices (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Strengthening Legal Protections and Enforcement. Governments and advocacy organizations must ensure that schools comply with IDEA and Section 504. This includes robust monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to hold systems accountable for violations (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Increasing Resources and Support. Schools must be equipped with the resources to meet the needs of SWD including hiring trained special education staff, providing access to mental health services, and ensuring the availability of assistive technologies (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Promoting Inclusive School Cultures. Creating an inclusive school culture requires a commitment to valuing diversity and fostering empathy. Schools should involve students, families, and community members in decision-making processes to ensure that policies and practices reflect the needs and perspectives of all (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Data Collection and Transparency. Schools must collect and publicly report data on disciplinary actions, disaggregated by disability, race, and other relevant factors (EdTrust, Unfair Punishments).

Restorative practices invite young people to share what’s really happening and get support if they need it. In contrast, punitive discipline focuses on punishing the harm-doer, often adding to the problem that led to the hurtful behavior (The Hechinger Report, Punitive Discipline Makes School Feel Like a Prison, Not a Community).

Restorative processes help students understand the causes and impacts of their harmful acts and consider what they could have done differently. Further, educators are given an opportunity to demonstrate their full investment in their students’ growth as well as their complete commitment to deepening their own reflection practices. A community of care supports the building of trust and relationships in a way that includes both young people and adults (The Hechinger Report, Punitive Discipline Makes School Feel Like a Prison, Not a Community).

By helping young people (and adults) learn skills like managing anger, having empathy, challenging bias and practicing conflict resolution, we can prevent harm from occurring. But when harm does occur, and adults use harsh discipline to address it, they undermine SEL. We should model the strategies and values that we want students to learn and the values that we hope they will embrace — like compassion and respect for every person (The Hechinger Report, Punitive Discipline Makes School Feel Like a Prison, Not a Community).

Research shows that positive relationships and good communication make schools safer and more effective. It’s hard to create those good connections in schools where coercion, punishment and the threat of incarceration are everywhere. Schools do have security needs. Sometimes students must be suspended. But creating community is paramount (The Hechinger Report, Punitive Discipline Makes School Feel Like a Prison, Not a Community).

Districts allocate resources toward restorative practices (National Education Association).

State policy requires schools to collect and publicly report demographic data recording behavior and behavioral interventions leading to disciplinary exclusion from school. Disciplinary actions include in-school/out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, arrests and referrals to law enforcement (National Education Association).

Policies support the integration of behavioral health services in schools to address underlying issues before they result in disciplinary actions.