Essential Questions for High School Graduation: Teaching, Learning and High School Coursework

Percentage of school leaders rated as effective, using an evaluation system that includes multiple measures, such as the Administrator Evaluation component of the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM) (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Schools are led by effective principals and school leaders. Percentage of school leaders rated as effective, using an evaluation system that includes multiple measures, such as the Administrator Evaluation component of the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM)  (Education-to-Workforce).

Staff surveys that can be used to measure effective school leadership include the Effective Leaders subcomponent of the UChicago 5E’s survey instrument, Panorama Teacher and Staff Survey, or The New Teacher Project’s (TNTP) Instructional Culture Insight Survey. However, no research has emerged at this point to show that staff surveys are valid and reliable measures of school leader effectiveness, and survey measures run the risk of offering a biased or potentially politicized rating of a leader, underscoring the importance of examining multiple measures (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

The New York City Department of Education’s Framework for Great Schools draws on research from the Consortium of Chicago School Research, which identified key “essential supports” for school improvement, including effective school leadership, strong family-community ties, supportive environments, collaborative teachers, and rigorous instruction. New York City’s Department of Education collects data on each of these elements and reports the data in annual School Quality Snapshots available to the public through online dashboards. Schools receive a rating (excellent, good, fair, or needs improvement) for each element based on (1) parent and teacher surveys, and (2) quality reviews conducted by experienced educators who visit and evaluate the school. To evaluate school leadership, for example, reviewers determine how well school resources are aligned to instructional goals, how well the school meets its goals, and how well leaders make decisions. This qualitative assessment is complemented with data from a parent and teacher survey that asks questions about effective school leadership (for example, whether teachers say the principal communicates a clear vision for the school). The two data sources combine into an overall rating of the school’s leadership. Dashboard users can drill down to view the detailed survey responses, scores on the Quality Review, and qualitative data behind these scores. In an article by The Hechinger Report, Daniel Russo, a principal in the Bronx who oversaw the dramatic transformation of one of the city’s most troubled schools, attributed this success to the school’s concerted application of the framework (Education-to-Workforce).

Ensure program directors and school principals have the capacity to provide instructional leadership that supports effective teaching (Alliance for Early Success).

Louisiana’s Mentor Teachers, who are local educators who have the knowledge and skills to effectively coach and support new and resident teachers in their districts (Louisiana Department of Education).

Educators reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the student body. Educational staff composition by race and ethnicity (%) compared to student composition by race and ethnicity (%) (Education-to-Workforce).

Same-race student-teacher ratio by race/ethnicity (Data sources: Local school, LEA or SEA human resources, administrative and/or enrollment data) (Education-to-Workforce Framework and StriveTogether 2021).

Educational staff composition by race and ethnicity compared to student composition by race and ethnicity (Education-to-Workforce Framework and StriveTogether 2021).

Percentage of program sites that support a language other than English (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Percentage of program sites where children from focal populations are exposed to staff in their program who reflect their own identities (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Percentage of workforce members who are fluent in the language spoken by the children they serve (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Bright Futures Education Partnership’s Systems-Level Indicators: The Bright Futures Education Partnership adopted seven systems-level indicators that focus on identifying systemic racial disparities, and include indicators of school funding, same-race teachers, bilingual teachers, teacher credentials, teacher experience, school discipline, and the digital gap (Education-to-Workforce).

A study published in Education Next found that students randomly assigned to classrooms led by same-race teachers experienced improvements in math and reading achievement by 3 to 4 percentile points . This suggests that racial matching between teachers and students can enhance academic performance (Education Next).

Research from North Carolina indicates that Black students taught by same-race teachers had reduced rates of exclusionary discipline, such as suspensions and expulsions. This pattern held across elementary, middle, and high school levels, suggesting that teacher-student racial matching can influence disciplinary practices (Constance, Lindsay and Hart, Cassandra 2017).

A study examining the effects of teacher-student demographic matching found that Black students matched with same-race teachers exhibited fewer internalizing behaviors, such as anxiety and low self-esteem, and fewer externalizing behaviors, such as acting out. This indicates that racial matching can positively affect students’ social-emotional well-being (Murray 2023).

Research indicates that matching high school students with same-race teachers improves the students’ college enrollment rates. This highlights the potential long-term benefits of teacher-student racial matching on post-secondary educational attainment Delhommer 2022).

Districts have plans to recruit educators from underrepresented populations (National Education Association).

Districts have plans to retain educators from underrepresented populations (West Ed).

Engaging young men of color in early childhood education initiatives, like the Literacy Lab’s Leading Men Fellowship (Results for America).

Teacher preparation programs can recruit a more diverse cohort of teachers by: (a) Setting an ambitious but achievable annual diversity goal for enrollment; (b) Making sure faculty ‘owns’ this goal; (c) Establishing partnerships with diverse districts interested in operating “grow your own” programs to encourage students of color to enter the teaching profession. This can give candidates a head start by offering opportunities like career-technical education and free college-in-high-school coursework; (d) Establishing partnerships with community colleges; Targeting teaching prospects as early as possible (even high school); (e) Offering grants, scholarships, or other financial support aimed at encouraging enrollment in teacher preparation programs or to ensure persistence through graduation (National Council on Teacher Quality, Program Diversity and Admissions). 

Teacher preparation programs can retain more candidates of color through graduation by: (a) Establishing mentorship programs to support teacher candidates after they have enrolled in a teacher prep program; (b) Supporting affinity groups or clubs for teacher candidates of color and others interested in pursuing a career in education; (c) Employing a racially diverse faculty within the school or department of education; (d) As early as possible, securing clinical placements in classrooms led by teachers of color (National Council on Teacher Quality, Program Diversity and Admissions).

State policy supports recruitment of promising future educators, including underrepresented populations (National Education Association).

Making educator diversity data visible and actionable to all stakeholders (Education Trust).

Setting clear goals at the state, district and teacher preparation levels to increase educator diversity (Education Trust).

Investing in efforts to retain teachers of color that improve working conditions and provide opportunities for personal and professional growth (Education Trust).

Percentage of teachers surveyed indicating satisfaction with the conditions of employment (National Education Association).

Percentage of teachers surveyed indicating satisfaction with the terms of employment (National Education Association).

Teacher retention: Percentage of teachers who return to teaching in the same school from year to year (Education-to-Workforce).

School leader tenure: Percentage of school leaders who have served in their current positions for less than two years, two to three years, and four or more years (Education-to-Workforce).

North Carolina’s Teacher Working Conditions Survey offers a systematic way to capture teachers’ perspectives on the conditions in which they work (NC TWC Survey).

Districts have differentiated pay structures for clearly defined roles and responsibilities that account for hybrid/varied educator roles within a school (National Education Association).

Districts offer financial incentives for educators working in hard-to-staff schools (National Education Association).

Districts offer incentives for teachers to take on differentiated or hybrid roles (National Education Association).

Districts offer teachers starting salaries comparable to other professionals with similar skills, knowledge and education. Additionally, education support professionals (ESPs) are paid at least a minimum wage (National Education Association).

State and/or district contributions for health coverage increase at least enough to keep up with health care inflation (National Education Association).

State or district provides access to affordable, quality health insurance for education employees and their families (National Education Association).

State or district recognizes highly effective teachers through awards and additional pay, like the Texas Teacher Incentive Allotment (Teacher Incentive Allotment).

States and/or districts have differentiated compensation structures that provide higher rates of pay for teachers demonstrating the most effectiveness, such as Texas’ Teacher Incentive Allotment (TEA Teacher Incentive Allotment).

Students have access to teachers who have earned credentials demonstrating their knowledge and preparation for teaching (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of courses taught by full-time equivalent (FTE) teachers (that is, teachers other than substitutes or those with emergency or provisional licenses) (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of courses taught by teachers certified to teach the given subject or grade level (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of courses taught by full-time equivalent (FTE) teachers (that is, teachers other than substitutes or those with emergency or provisional licenses) (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of courses taught by teachers certified to teach the given subject or grade level  (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of preparation program graduates surveyed indicating satisfaction with their preparedness to serve as the teacher-of-record (National Education Association).

Districts partner with teacher preparation programs on teacher residencies and induction (National Education Association).

Preparation programs survey graduates about their preparedness to serve as the teacher-of-record and report their response rates (National Education Association).

Preparation programs use pre-service performance assessments to determine candidate preparedness prior to program completion and/or initial licensure (National Education Association).

Preparation programs work with local school districts to recruit high-achieving high school graduates to pursue careers in education (National Education Association).

Teacher preparation programs can improve performance on state licensing tests by: (a) Encouraging prospects to take their licensing tests early, even at the conclusion of high school while their knowledge of general subject areas is most likely to be fresh; (b) Conducting diagnostic testing (free of charge to the candidate) that will better guide their selection of content area coursework; (c) identifying the courses on a campus that will most likely address the general knowledge candidates will need to pass their licensing tests (National Council on Teacher Quality, Program Diversity and Admissions).

Teacher preparation programs can raise admission standards by: (a) Establishing and maintaining standards that limit admissions to college students who are in the upper half of academic distribution (generally speaking a 3.0 average or above); (b) Eliminating the common perception that the teaching major represents an easy path to a college degree, making necessary changes in coursework that send the wrong signal; (c) Recognizing that higher academic standards are likely to make a teaching major more attractive to many college students (National Council on Teacher Quality, Program Diversity and Admissions).

Students have equitable access to experienced teachers. Research consistently shows that more experienced teachers make greater contributions to student achievement, especially compared to teachers who are early in their careers. After teachers gain about five years of experience, however, the difference between a more or less experienced teacher (that is, one with 10 versus 5 years of experience) is not significant. (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of teachers with less than one year, one to five years, and more than five years of experience. (Education-to-Workforce).

Qualified, experienced teachers for all students, especially the students who need them most (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

The Texas Teachers’ Incentive Allotment aims to incentivize effective teachers to work in high-need areas and rural districts by providing funding for districts to reward outstanding teachers with the potential for six-figure salaries, and to support their professional development (Teacher Incentive Allotment Texas).

Schools provide professional development for teachers to understand the principles of quality career development and job training teaching and learning and programs, develop the skills necessary to integrate this pedagogy in their classes and recognize the critical role the community plays to engage youth in activities that lead to career competencies (National Dropout Prevention Center).

Percentage of teacher leaders rated effective based on multiple measures of performance (National Education Association).

Percentage of teacher leaders who occupy hybrid roles (National Education Association).

Percentage of teacher leaders with a leadership endorsement/certificate (National Education Association).

Presence of an educator shortage (National Education Association).

Districts have pathways for teachers who want to remain in their teaching role but make a bigger impact and larger salary. For example, North Carolina’s Advanced Teaching Roles, including the Multi-Classroom Teacher-Leader Role (Department of Public Instruction for the state of North Carolina).

State codifies the Teacher Leadership Competencies and/or other standards for teacher leadership (National Education Association).

State includes a state-level endorsement/certificate for teacher leaders (National Education Association).

State provides resources to complete voluntary national certification and endorsements that promote teacher leadership opportunities (National Education Association).

The percentage of teaching positions that remain unfilled at the start of the school year (Tennessee Department of Education).

The number of applicants per open teaching position, a common measure used across districts.

Districts begin cultivation and recruitment a year prior to the present school year (National Education Association).

Districts have plans to recruit and retain accomplished educators (National Education Association).

Districts have plans to recruit educators for shortage areas, such as special education and second language acquisition (National Education Association).

Hiring high quality staff (Results for America).

State tracks educator shortages (National Education Association).

The percentage of students who have achieved at least a 3.0 GPA at the end of their 9th-grade year (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of students who have shown potential to be successful in advanced coursework who have successfully completed at least one course (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

Of students who participate in career and technical education (CTE) coursework, the percentage that concentrate in an in-demand pathway, as defined by regional labor market data  (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of eligible high school seniors who submitted at least two college applications (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of eligible high school seniors who complete the FAFSA by June 30 (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of high school seniors who are admitted to at least one “match” postsecondary institution (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of students who enroll at a postsecondary institution directly after high school; the percentage of students who enlist in the military, enter the workforce (in a position with family-sustaining wages), or participate in a registered apprenticeship (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

The percentage of students at postsecondary institutions who complete “gateway” (or entry level) courses within their first year (Education Strategy Group, Momentum Metrics).

Students with the same middle grade performance have different probabilities of being on-track for high school success or earning high grades in high school, depending on which schools they attend. Often, there is a perception that the same academic records may indicate different levels of performance if students come from one school versus another. For students with middle grade performance that is either very high or very low, middle grade performance predicts similar levels of success regardless of where they attended the middle grades. Students with particularly weak eighth-grade performance (i.e., GPA of 1.0 or below and attendance of 80 percent or below) are unlikely either to be on-track or to earn high grades in ninth grade, regardless of where they earned those low eighth-grade grades. For students with a moderate chance of being on-track, based on eighth-grade indicators, their actual on-track rates can range from 41 to 66 percent, a difference of 25 percentage points, depending on where they went to middle school, net of any high school effects (UChicago CCSR, Looking Forward to High School and College).

Schools’ contributions to student outcomes, including achievement, attendance, social-emotional learning, college enrollment, and earnings, using value-added models. Value-added and other growth models require linking schools or colleges to student outcome data (such as test scores from two or more academic years, so growth can be measured). As of 2021, all states included at least one approach to measuring growth on standardized tests in their school accountability plans under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The most popular approach was student growth percentiles (used by 24 states as of 2019); eight states implemented value-added measures (Education-to-Workforce).

Adopt momentum metrics as a core measure of success. District leaders need to prioritize postsecondary preparation and successful transitions as the ultimate measure of their systems’ success. This means holding themselves and their administrators accountable for improvement and sharing progress publicly (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Convene cross-sector leaders to review data and plan for improvement. First, district leaders need to ensure that their educators and administrators have access to the Momentum Metrics data. Then, they should convene school teams to analyze all of the Momentum Metrics, determine root causes, and set goals for improvement, while at the same time reaching out to community-based organizations, business leaders, and postsecondary representatives to jointly strategize solutions for closing identified postsecondary preparation and transition gaps (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Set goals for improvement. While all of the metrics are important, having too many priority indicators may diminish focus. On an annual basis, each district should select at least one indicator from the Preparing, Applying, and Enrolling areas to set a goal for improvement and focus capacity and resources to drive change (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Deploy capacity to offer direct student advising and assistance. Capacity, whether internal to the district or through a partnership, is necessary to target individual student supports. Districts should either employ an individual directly responsible for monitoring student data, working with school educators and administrators, and coordinating outside advising supports, or work with partners that can bring that capacity (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Integrate metrics into regional postsecondary attainment strategies. As communities work to meet attainment goals and prepare students for the workforce, it will be critical that students are able to seamlessly transition from high school to postsecondary education and training. The momentum metrics should be used as leading indicators of whether the community is on the path to meet its attainment goal (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Partner with postsecondary institutions to address gaps. The Momentum Metrics are crucial for telling the story of what is, but not what has to be. The data should be used as a flashlight to see what hurdles stand in the way of student success and identify how students of color and low-income students fare compared to their peers. However, it’s not enough to stop at illumination; schools and districts need to partner with their local postsecondary institutions to facilitate seamless, successful transitions (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Identify policy barriers that impede progress. District leaders should communicate to the state when barriers arise for supporting students’ postsecondary preparation and transitions. For instance, unnecessary prerequisites may hinder the ability of students to enroll in advanced coursework, even if they have previously been identified as having potential. States can issue waivers around these requirements or institute regulations that automatically enroll students in advanced courses if they have shown potential (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Communicate about the most predictive indicators of student progress and success. District leaders should organize appropriate communications targeted at students, families, and educators to make them aware of the critical leverage points in a student’s path to and through postsecondary education and training (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Administrators, educators, and partners have access to the data on student progress (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Administrators, educators, and partners know the key momentum points for students’ postsecondary success (for instance, they know to what extend students of color are enrolling and succeeding in advanced course work, which students in their district have a postsecondary plan, etc.) (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

District leaders target interventions to students who have fallen behind academically

District leaders provide opportunities to expose students to their postsecondary options (e.g., college visits, college fairs, work-based learning, etc.) (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

District leaders work to ensure that students are applying to multiple institutions and selecting one that will be a good fit for them (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

District leaders work to improve student financial literacy and ensuring students complete FAFSA (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

District leaders review student data to understand how high school outcomes and postsecondary outcomes differ by student group (Education Strategy Group, The Momentum Metrics).

Prioritize, support, and invest in results-driven initiatives to transform low-performing schools into high-quality teaching and learning environments in which all children, including those from low-income families and high-poverty neighborhoods, are present, engaged, and educated to high standards (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

State leaders incorporate the Momentum Metrics into the state longitudinal data system. Whether these data are available should not be up to the individual priorities or capacity of districts. States should immediately begin collecting information and building tools to visualize data not currently in their longitudinal data systems so that both local administrators and state level policymakers have actionable insight into students’ progress to successful postsecondary outcomes (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders use the Momentum Metrics to track progress toward meeting the state’s postsecondary attainment goal. The measures provide valuable information on the progress the state is making to meet its postsecondary attainment goal. State leaders should create a dashboard to monitor progress across all of the measures and visualize the trajectory of students on their path to postsecondary matriculation (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders create incentives for districts to set and meet metric goals. In a time of significant competing priorities and budget reductions, communities will need incentives to prioritize the identified metrics. This is especially true if the metrics are not a component of the state’s accountability system. States should consider grant competitions, using federal stimulus dollars, or other award approaches to encourage districts to set and meet annual improvement targets (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders analyze statewide data to identify and promote bright spots. The state education agency—potentially in partnership with the state’s higher education agency—should produce an annual report that highlights the state’s progress in moving each of the metrics and points to specific schools, districts, or communities that have demonstrated significant year-over-year improvement and identify gaps in the metrics, by race/ethnicity, income status, and geography (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders target supports using research-backed interventions. There are research-backed strategies that practitioners and policymakers can implement to improve student outcomes for each of the metrics. States should use their programmatic funds and bully pulpit to promote strategies that have proven to be effective in improving students’ postsecondary preparation and success (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders facilitate peer learning networks. To facilitate the use of the identified research-backed interventions, as well as to learn from the bright spot districts, states should consider developing peer learning networks around specific metrics. This will give educators and administrators a way to learn not only about what they should do, but also importantly, how they can implement the strategies (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders create supportive policies. The state’s role in setting the appropriate enabling conditions for success is paramount. State leaders must identify policy approaches that inspire action and remove barriers to improve students’ postsecondary preparation and transitions. This includes both strategies for increasing data transparency and use and policies that research has shown will lead to student success, especially for students of color and those from low-income families (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

State leaders communicate about the most predictive indicators of student progress and success. State leaders should organize appropriate communications targeted both at the public and school and district officials to make them aware of the critical leverage points in a student’s path to and through postsecondary education and training (Education Strategy Group, From Tails to Heads: Recommendations for State Leaders).

In recent years, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) in the District of Columbia (DC) and the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) developed new measures to understand each high school’s impact on the higher education and workforce prospects of its students. These measures are known as “promotion power” because they use statistical methods to measure each school’s power to improve students’ long-term outcomes separately from the characteristics of the students it serves. DC and LDOE developed promotion power measures on multiple long-term outcomes. Although college or career readiness in high school, high school graduation, and college enrollment were key outcomes for both agencies, LDOE also measured promotion power for two longer-term outcomes: college persistence and earnings at age 26. Both entities relied on administrative data from the lead education agency (OSSE or LDOE) and the National Student Clearinghouse. Louisiana, which examined earnings, also linked individual-level data from the Louisiana Workforce Commission. Analyses of the promotion power measures in DC and LDOE found that high schools vary widely in their power to promote long-term student outcomes. Although schools effective in promoting one long-term outcome (like high school graduation) were also more likely to be effective at promoting other long-term outcomes (like college enrollment), many schools varied in their effectiveness for different outcomes. LDOE high schools that are especially good at promoting college enrollment and persistence, for example, do not necessarily promote strong earnings for their students at age 26. This finding highlights how assessing school effectiveness on multiple dimensions of long-term success is important to help systems more accurately assess both school effectiveness and equity of access to effective schools (Education-to-Workforce).

Students demonstrate growth on standardized assessments from beginning of the year to the end of the year (Education-to-Workforce Framework)

The percentage of students across a district, school and classrooms who meet their annual growth targets (Education-to-Workforce Framework)

Percentage of instructors demonstrating above average contributions to student learning, as measured by student growth on state standardized tests or other outcomes (for example, using value-added models or student growth percentiles). Note that value-added and other growth models require linking instructors to student outcome data (such as test scores from two or more academic years, so growth can be measured). The EW Framework cautions against using value-added data as the only measure of teaching effectiveness and recommends also including measures based on classroom observation and student survey data. When used for high-stakes accountability, measures of teachers’ contributions to student learning may have unintended consequences (for example, leading to practices such as “teaching to the test”) (Education-to-Workforce Framework)

Collective teacher efficacy: The collective belief of teachers in their ability to positively affect students. The effect size (1.57) demonstrates a strong correlation to student achievement (Hattie).

Student academic growth measured by standardized assessments in math and literacy. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher absences (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher engagement with professional development (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Opportunities for teacher leadership (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher retention/turnover (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Percentage of instructors demonstrating above average contributions to student learning, as measured by student growth on state standardized tests or other outcomes (for example, using value-added models or student growth percentiles) (Education-to-Workforce).

Teachers demonstrate instructional expertise. They demonstrate strong knowledge of content and pedagogy, display mastery of content knowledge and instructional strategies, convey ideas and information clearly, and are able to differentiate learning (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate strong communication skills. They demonstrate effective written and oral communication skills, display mastery of written grammar, usage, and organization, and speak clearly and precisely (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers apply feedback to improve practice. They are open to feedback and are able and willing to incorporate it to develop as a professional. They are committed to becoming an excellent teacher, seek and incorporate feedback from others with humility, and draw lessons from prior experience and apply to future endeavors (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate critical thinking. They analyze situations thoroughly and generates effective strategies, identify key issues, generate effective/creative strategies or responses to situations, and develop logical responses to address challenges (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate strong teamwork and relational skills. They are respectful of students and others in all situations, are aware of how one’s own background and assumptions can influence one’s perspective and interactions with others, strive to understand the opinions and experiences of others, and demonstrate the ability to effectively and appropriately interact with students and others in the school community (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Research indicates professional learning experiences that help teachers use their specific curriculum to make informed decisions for their students can result in transformational changes in teaching and learning (CCSSO, A Nation of Problem-Solvers).

Districts partner with teacher preparation programs on teacher residencies and induction (National Education Association).

Percentage of preparation program graduates surveyed indicating satisfaction with their preparedness to serve as the teacher-of-record (National Education Association).

Preparation programs survey graduates about their preparedness to serve as the teacher-of-record and report their response rates (National Education Association).

Preparation programs use pre-service performance assessments to determine candidate preparedness prior to program completion and/or initial licensure (National Education Association).

Districts align professional learning with standards, curriculum and assessments (National Education Association).

Districts have professional learning plans, including induction and mentoring, for teachers, education support professionals (ESPs) and specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) (National Education Association).

Districts integrate theories, research and models of human learning into the planning and design of professional learning (National Education Association).

Districts provide educators with targeted support based on formative and summative evaluation results (National Education Association).

Districts provide extra resources and assistance for those educators in hard-to-staff schools (National Education Association).

Districts provide funding for educators to access professional learning that addresses new education research and technology that will help improve instruction or support for students (National Education Association).

Districts provide ongoing professional learning and support to administrators, including training in equity and racial and social justice to better support Indigenous educators and students as well as educators and students of color (National Education Association).

Districts provide teacher leadership development (National Education Association).

Districts support regular, job-embedded professional learning opportunities (National Education Association).

Districts use a variety of student, educator and systems data to plan, assess and evaluate professional learning (National Education Association).

Districts implement scheduled job-embedded planning, instructional support and collaborative time (National Education Association).

Districts provide resources to guarantee dedicated time for teacher teams to plan and review student data to improve instructional results (National Education Association).

High-quality professional learning experiences are curriculum-based and directly applicable to teachers’ everyday work. Effective curriculum-based professional learning (CBPL) should include initial training aligned with specific curricular materials, regular collaborative planning opportunities for teachers such as unit and lesson internalization, lesson rehearsal, student work analysis and ongoing observation and feedback. (CCSSO, A Nation of Problem-Solvers).

Teacher evaluation systems that use Value-Add Measures to determine the impact a teacher has on student learning

Districts mandate successful completion of a residency program prior to obtaining initial licensure (National Education Association).

Preparation programs require school-based experiences beyond a semester of student teaching (National Education Association).

State provides funding for induction programs (National Education Association).

State provides funding for preparation programs to establish residency programs with local school districts (National Education Association).

State provides resources to grow preparation programs in minority-serving institutions (National Education Association).

Investing in hiring, training and retaining a high-quality and diverse workforce of educators (Urban Institute).

State provides funding and technical assistance to strengthen professional learning in areas with high concentrations of poverty, Indigenous students and students of color, with emphasis on mentoring, implicit bias and cultural competency (National Education Association).

State provides funding for job-embedded professional learning opportunities to help educators improve their instructional repertoire (National Education Association).

Some states, including Colorado and Louisiana, are making strides by incentivizing the use of curriculum-based professional learning (CBPL). To ensure meaningful impact, professional development must focus on concrete concepts, connect directly to daily lessons and provide pedagogical strategies with clear, practical examples for use in the classroom. (CCSSO, A Nation of Problem-Solvers).

Nebraska is increasing access to HQIM and training for educators through partnerships and incentive programs. Nebraska’s Instructional Materials Collaborative (NIMC) provides tools and resources for districts related to HQIM and curriculum-based professional learning. (CCSSO, A Nation of Problem-Solvers).

Students report having a supportive, engaging teacher who sets clear, fair, and high expectations, and helps them learn (Education-to-Workforce).

Students’ perceptions of their teacher’s effectiveness, using a survey instrument such as the Pedagogical Effectiveness subscale of the Panorama Student Survey, the Tripod Student Survey, the Ambitious Instruction and Supportive Environment domains of the 5Essentials Survey, or the Elevate survey’s Feedback for Growth, Meaningful Work, Student Voice, Teacher Caring, Learning Goals, Supportive Teaching, and Well-organized Class scales (Education-to-Workforce).

Measures of student engagement/enthusiasm/ academic aspirations (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teachers demonstrate cross-cultural agility.  They are aware of how one’s own background and assumptions can influence one’s perspective and interactions with others. They strive to understand the opinions and experiences of others. They demonstrate the ability to effectively and appropriately interact with students and others in the school community (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers hold high expectations for students. They assume accountability for reaching outcomes despite obstacles, they demonstrate, the belief that students can perform at high levels, they focus on own capacity to impact situations rather than on external barriers, they understand challenges within larger context, and they take initiative to solve own problems (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate ability to develop a positive, culturally affirming, and supportive classroom culture, remain productive and focused on teaching when confronted with challenges, and display flexibility and willingness to adapt classroom culture building approaches to meet the needs of the school and students (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate the ability to build relationships with both adults and children. They act respectfully and collaboratively toward students, families, and staff, are aware of how one’s own background and assumptions influence interactions, and strive to understand the opinions and experiences of others (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Educator selection process: School leaders should determine the educator competencies that are most essential to success in their contexts, determine specific, observable ways candidates may demonstrate these competencies (indicators), and then map them to the selection model to determine how these competencies will be assessed. Cross-cultural agility and high expectations are critical competencies to assess: In The Opportunity Myth, TNTP found that teacher expectations significantly influence student learning and that teachers who share their students’ racial or ethnic identities have higher expectations. Thus, it’s important teachers understand how their identities can influence their instruction and that teachers work to develop and model high expectations for all. Additionally, TNTP recommends the following general selection competencies, as they also correlate to classroom performance: critical thinking, application of feedback, communication, and professionalism. As past performance is a generally reliable predictor of future success, TNTP also suggest assessing instructional expertise and classroom management. Finally, schools may also assess candidates’ school fit and ability to build relationships to ensure that candidates will thrive in their school setting (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

States and districts implement a validated student perception survey, such as Panorama or Tripod, to systematically collect student feedback. The data gathered informs continuous improvement efforts and integrates into teacher, leader, school, and district accountability frameworks (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of English learner students who are reclassified in five years or less, based on local reclassification criteria. The longer a student remains classified as an English learner, their risk of dropping out of school and having other adverse academic outcomes increases. In Arizona, for example, only 49 percent of long term English learners graduated high school on time, compared to 81 percent of long-term proficient former English learners and 85 percent of never English learners. (Education-to-Workforce).

Student enrollment by English language acquisition status.  For instance, when enrolling students in a California PK-12 public school, parents or guardians complete a home language survey. This survey identifies students who speak only English at home as English only (EO). Those students identified as having a language other than English at home are assessed for their English language proficiency within the first 30 days of enrollment. Based on this assessment, students who are determined to have sufficient English language proficiency to access the curriculum without additional support are identified as Initially Fluent English Proficient (IFEP), while those who require additional English language development support are identified as English learners (EL). Additionally, as students move through the grades, ELs that achieve English language proficiency are identified as Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) students (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who are (or have ever been) classified as English language learners (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who are classified as Long-Term English language learners (LTELs) (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who are classified as “At-Risk” Long-Term English language learners (AR-LTELs) (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who had been classified as English Language Learners but are now reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) (Californians Together).

Percent of English Language Learners who make progress towards English language proficiency.  The California Schools Dashboard has a measure called the English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI) which determines whether an English Language Learner has made adequate progress, as measured by the English Language Proficiency Assessment for California (ELPAC) (Californians Together).

Percentage of students who meet or exceed English Language Arts standards, disaggregated by English-Only students (EO), English Learners (EL), Initially Fluent-English Proficient (IFEP), and Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient (RFEP) (Californians Together).

Gap in English Language Arts performance between English-Only students and multilingual students.

Percent of multilingual learners who meet or exceed standards in English Language Arts (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who participate in a Dual Language Immersion or Developmental Bilingual Programs (Californians Together).

Percent of students who participate in programs leading to proficiency in two or more languages (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who are chronically absent (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who have access to expanded learning opportunities (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who have a caring adult relationship at school. (Tracked through student response surveys like the California Healthy Kids Survey) (Californians Together).

Percent of multilingual learners who experience chronic sadness or hopelessness in school (tracked through student response surveys like the California Healthy Kids Survey) (Californians Together).

Number of bilingual teacher preparation programs at state-approved education preparation programs (Californians Together).

Percent of bilingual preparation programs offering the PK-3 ECE Specialist Credential who offer a bilingual authorization (Californians Together).

Percent of teachers who have access to a supportive school environment and high-quality professional learning that includes designated and integrated English Language Development strategies (Californians Together).

Disaggregate data on English Learners: High school ELs may be described as falling into four groups: (a) Long-term English Learners. Such students have been classified as ELs for more than four to seven years (depending on state definitions), many since kindergarten. They are far more likely to qualify for special education services than are other ELs or non-ELs in Grades 6 to 12; (b) Newcomer students with interrupted formal education (SIFE). These recently arrived immigrant students have less than grade-level-equivalent education, often with low levels of literacy in their native language; (c) Newcomer students at or close to grade level. These students often arrive with high school transcripts and evidence of coursework that can transfer into academic credits; (d) Progressing ELs. These students entered U.S. schools in late elementary or middle school and are on track to exit EL status in the typical four- to seven-year time frame  (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Focus on Academic Language, Literacy and Vocabulary. Reading, writing and vocabulary exercises are essential building blocks for developing language fluency, but it is only part of what is needed. Students who appear fully fluent in English may nonetheless struggle to express themselves effectively in academic settings, as they lack the words and phrases needed to connect their ideas and discuss them with others (University of Massachusetts Global, Innovative Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners).

Link Background Knowledge and Culture to Learning. Numerous studies show that students perform better when their home culture and background knowledge are incorporated into the academic environment. When children and their families are represented and respected in the classroom, they are much more likely to be engaged and successful. Allowing students to express themselves in a safe environment and learn from one another is also a wonderful social-emotional learning opportunity that benefits the entire class, especially students of color (University of Massachusetts Global, Innovative Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners).

Increase Comprehensible Input and Language Output. English language learners learn both through the language they encounter (input) and the language they produce (output). Students should also be given ample opportunities to produce language, and they should receive direct feedback to increase their comprehension and improve their language skills (University of Massachusetts Global, Innovative Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners).

Promote Classroom Interaction. When teaching English language learners, keep in mind that vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation develop faster when there are opportunities for interaction in the classroom using the language being learned. But many new teachers make the mistake of simply presenting a lesson and then pairing students up to discuss without providing guidance. Teachers should explicitly model and practice academic language so that students can more fully engage with one another. Teachers should also provide ample opportunities for more structured classroom interactions with a clear purpose and goal (University of Massachusetts Global, Innovative Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners).

Stimulate Higher-Order Thinking Skills and Use of Learning Strategies. Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) are essentially critical-thinking abilities that go beyond rote memorization, concept formation and reading comprehension. Mastering HOTS is the ultimate goal of the learning process, as these competencies are needed to become an independent and creative thinker (University of Massachusetts Global, Innovative Strategies for Teaching English Language Learners).

Relationships, Self-Advocacy, and Routines. Before starting with the first “real” lesson, begin with relationships, self-advocacy, and routines. When focusing on relationships, start with names. Teachers should know how to pronounce student names—and students should know how to pronounce each other’s names. Also, students need to be fully seen. Educators must take time to learn about their students’ interests, families, and topics they love to study. Teachers should also share about themselves—share hobbies, family pictures, etc. Classrooms (especially newcomer classrooms) need to feel safe because we are encouraging students to be vulnerable each day when they are using a new language (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Increase Student Engagement and Interactions. To support student engagement, as well as the lesson and language objectives, liberally employ the use of visuals to reinforce both spoken and written words. Capitalize on the use of gestures, often exaggerated, for added emphasis, speak slower and be sure to enunciate your words, repeat important words or phrases, and be sure to use fewer idioms. Many ELL students have not attended schools in their new county and may be unfamiliar with cultural references. Take the time to thoroughly review texts to identify potentially confusing language and concepts so that you can build the background knowledge of your ELL students prior to exposing them to potentially confusing material (Kareva & Echevarria, 2013) (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Feelings of safety: We always consider content relevancy, the use of visuals, vocalization, facial expression, among others. However, what ELs need at first is to feel safe, comfortable, and confident in their new environment. The school system works in a completely different way in every country. Newcomers need to be shown how school works, classroom routines, how to sign in and out of school, how to move around campus, how to get their meals, how to login on their technological devices, explain schedules, share possible extracurricular activities in which newcomers could participate, etc. Newcomers need modeling, not only for the language but also for the culture. Newcomers need to be shown what to do and how to do it, what to say and how to say it. Teachers need to be aware of the cultural shock newcomers go through so they can help the process to run a bit smoother (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Every newcomer should have a mentor to shadow him/her during the first days of school, someone who can introduce them to their teachers, who makes teachers aware that this EL is in their class and will need some extra attention. In my opinion, cultural awareness should be the first teaching strategy. Newcomers are facing a new culture, and they also need to feel their own culture is valued. Thus, it is important to generate activities that allow students to share their culture, so they make comparisons and connections by sharing about a subject they master and a subject that is relevant.

Utilize Language-Learning Goals. Many educators are aware that the use of learning targets in the classroom is an instructional best practice and that students learn better when teachers utilize clear daily learning goals (Marzano, 2009; Reeves, 2010; Kareva & Echevarria, 2013). For ELL students, it is especially important to include both lesson and language-learning goals. The lesson objectives should be focused on the grade-level content while the language objective should align to one of the four domains of English-language development (ELD), which are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. A teacher’s experience with creating and using language objectives in their instruction is important to ensure that ELLs have equal access to the curriculum (Hudson, Miller, & Butler, 2006; Short, Echevarría, & Richards-Tutor, 2011; Marcos and Himmel 2016). When planning a lesson, everything should intentionally lead students to mastery of the learning targets while providing students with a variety of meaningful activities and high-quality instruction (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Stations are a versatile and practical way to provide students with practice on new skills they are learning and to differentiate instruction for newcomers with varying levels of language acquisition (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Building relationships with your students is the foundational component of successful teaching and learning, and there is a multitude of research that supports this idea. According to a review of 46 research studies, students that feel valued and appreciated are more likely to demonstrate both short- and long-term improvements in academic engagement, attendance, grades, and behavior, while also having a reduced dropout rate (Sparks, 2019). Begin forming relationships with your ELL students by learning about their individual culture, traditions, religion, hobbies, family dynamic, and background. Stay respectful of their personal boundaries and understand that they may need time to settle into their new environment before opening up. Having a positive relationship with a student’s family can also help support their education (Education Week, Thirteen Instructional Strategies for Supporting ELL Newcomers).

Create a welcoming environment to celebrate the cultural background of your multilingual learners. This will ensure they feel valued and included in school life (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Engage with the families of multilingual learners to understand their backgrounds and involve them in the learning process (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Assess prior knowledge from any previous schooling (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Allocate a classroom buddy and a language buddy to support new arrivals (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Assess first language proficiency (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Use visual aids, gestures, and graphic organisers e.g. diagrams and pictures to help bridge language gaps and make content more accessible (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Undertake a language assessment as it will help to determine a learner’s proficiency in English, which can then be used to support their needs. The assessment will highlight any gaps in their language journey to target through interventions or classroom support (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Pre-teach concepts and key vocabulary in their first language and English using a translation app or website to translate (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Provide language scaffolding through techniques like sentence stems, word banks and modeling to support multilingual learners in constructing their own sentences and concepts (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

Translate key words and discuss the meanings with learners (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

The Bell Foundation has an ‘EAL strategy and great ideas’ page along with a ‘resource library’ page for strategies to use to support multilingual learners in class. You can search for the phase and topic you are teaching (Leeds for Learning, Strategies to support multilingual learners).

High school graduation requirements: There are a variety of ways that schools can address the competing demands of providing targeted instruction to ELs and ensuring they stay on track to earn the credits they need to graduate. Schools increasingly combine ESL instruction with content area instruction; that is, they teach both ESL and content curricula in an integrated way. This practice—grounded in research on second language acquisition—helps keep students on track to earning state-required credits without adding an additional class period for ESL. However, it can be challenging to combine English language development standards with academic content standards, especially within the confines of a traditional high school day. Some schools use block scheduling to allow for longer class periods that meet fewer times per week to ensure that students receive sufficient support to develop language and content skills in such courses. Still, some newcomers might find a five-year path necessary to complete all of the requirements, especially if they aspire to enroll in a four-year college (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

The Increasing Rigor of Pathways to Graduation: Raising graduation expectations—and in particular, making the default pathway a rigorous one that can lead to college admission—is intended to reduce the negative effects of tracking that have long been a barrier to success for ELs, students in poverty, students of color, and other groups. Nevertheless, in states where the demands of core coursework are extensive, schools may find their options to provide newcomers with ESL or remedial content courses limited by the number of periods available in the day. Enrolling newcomers in courses with grade-level-appropriate content from the beginning is a strategy that is supported by research and one that many schools are finding success with. But states should also consider whether they are providing sufficient support to schools for that approach to be successful (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Graduation Rates and School Accountability:  Policymakers attached high stakes to the ACGR in hopes of spurring high schools to improve their outcomes. However, those stakes may also have the unintended consequence of discouraging administrators from enrolling older newcomers who appear unlikely to meet the four-year ACGR metric—for example, those who need additional time beyond four years to earn a diploma or who might age out of eligibility to attend high school before obtaining one. One way states can try to mitigate that reluctance is to give schools credit for students who graduate in more than four years.  ELs are more likely than other subgroups to take advantage of extra years to graduate, so including extended-year graduation rates is an important way to signal to high schools that their efforts to help ELs graduate—even if it takes more than four years—will be recognized. Another step some states have taken is to set up different graduation rates for alternative high schools that serve students at risk of dropping out, often with more curricular and logistical flexibility than traditional high schools (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Insufficient data disaggregation for decision-making: While NCLB and ESSA greatly increased the amount of information that is reported on ELs and thus these students’ visibility to policymakers, the data may not be sufficiently nuanced. For example, graduation rates for ELs as a whole tend to lag behind non-ELs, but one study found much lower graduation rates for some groups of ELs, including Spanish speakers living in poverty and with disabilities, than for other groups. If data reporting does not sufficiently distinguish which students are struggling, practitioners will not be able to target resources appropriately (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Lack of research on whether the indicators states use for all students are valid for ELs. For instance, there is little research on whether the indicators that accurately predict whether students will drop out or persist to graduation are valid for ELs. One study investigated whether two indicators used by several districts in the Seattle, Washington, area accurately predict ELs’ risk of dropping out. One indicator was at least six absences plus at least one course failure in Grade 9, and the other was at least one suspension or expulsion in Grade 9. The study found that the indicators failed to flag many students, especially newcomers, who eventually dropped out of school (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Newcomer Placement and EL Programing: Enrollment in a new school is a critical event in the educational trajectory of newcomer ELs. States can support this process by reminding school personnel of their obligations to enroll eligible youth regardless of immigration status and provide guidance on how to collect sufficient information to place a student in a grade or in courses, as the above examples show. While responsiveness to the local context is important, some minimum boundaries are likely useful in all circumstances, such as requiring districts to carefully examine transcripts for transferable credits or providing a consistent definition of SIFE across the state (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Instructional Programs: The EL program model a school or district uses is generally a local decision. This makes sense, as local variables—including EL population characteristics, community and educator philosophies, and available resources—should guide such choices. But states can provide guidance on which models are most likely to lead to success. While there are no recent studies of the effectiveness of bilingual education for high school newcomers, the literature is clear that bilingual education programs that start in kindergarten—especially dual language programs that help ELs develop their native language to a high level of proficiency—produce better long-term academic results than do English-only programs. One study found that balanced bilinguals—students who developed English and their native language to equally high levels—were less likely to drop out of high school than English monolinguals or bilinguals without strong skills in both languages. ELs in bilingual programs are also more likely to reclassify as English proficient by high school than ELs in English-only programs. Knowing that long-term ELs are less likely to graduate on time than former ELs, bilingual education may be an effective way to improve graduation rates (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Reclassification of ELs as English Proficient: The decision to reclassify a student as a former EL has considerable ramifications. One research study showed that among students who scored just below or just above the cutoff signaling English proficiency, being reclassified had positive effects on ACT scores, graduation rates, and postsecondary attendance. This may be due to the fact that research suggests that students identified as ELs are systematically under-enrolled in grade-level or honors academic coursework. This being the case, two ways to ensure that students have access to grade-level, credit-bearing courses are to ensure that a state’s EL reclassification policy exits students as soon as is reasonable to do so, and to use the state’s other policy levers to motivate schools to be proactive in helping students achieve the proficiency criteria more quickly. Ensuring timely exit from the EL program also may prevent students from losing their motivation to finish school as they continue to be labeled ELs for years, even long after they self-identify as fluent in English (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Maximum Age of Compulsory and Free Public Schooling. Immigrant students who arrive in the United States during their high school years may be affected by a state’s maximum age of enrollment, especially those who arrive with fewer than four years before they will age out of the system and without evidence of transferable credits. Students should be informed of the options available to them and allowed to make their own decisions. In the mid-2010s, advocates and the media reported numerous instances of administrators blocking older immigrant students from enrolling in comprehensive high schools because of their age, among other reasons. Hearing several such complaints, New York State took action to provide clear regulations reiterating the state law requiring schools to allow students up to age 21 to enroll. Further, knowing that some schools diverted students to educational programs that met the letter of that law but were not equivalent to the standard high school experience, the state made it clear that all students were entitled to the full range of services that a comprehensive high school offers (such as special education, services for ELs, and career and college counseling). Districts were also cautioned not to force or steer students toward alternative programs, although students would be allowed to voluntarily opt into them (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Access to Credit-Bearing and Advanced Courses. Policies that increase access to advanced coursework—whether by requiring that all students have access or simply providing incentives to offer more of these types of classes—address historic patterns by which students in the process of developing English proficiency are denied access to academic content. Federal civil rights law requires ELs be given access to all of the same opportunities as their peers, including regular and honors academic classes, career and technical education, dual enrollment (college courses taken during high school), and advanced placement. However, having permission to enroll in a course is not sufficient to ensure access. It is frequently reported that a large share of general education teachers are unprepared to teach ELs in academic content areas.85 One study reported that staff in a Pennsylvania high school were reluctant to place EL students in upper-level content courses because they believed the teachers of those courses would not make the kinds of academic accommodations that would make the content accessible to ELs, a judgment the authors characterized as underestimating ELs’ ability to take on academic challenges. As much as setting higher expectations for ELs is an important goal, it is reasonable to be concerned about whether policies to increase access to high-level courses will have the intended effect if they are not paired with state and district policies to ensure appropriate instruction (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Teacher and Staff Quality and Training. Teacher quality is one of the most important factors in ensuring ELs’ academic success. The state role in setting standards for teacher training and qualifications is especially important given the wide variation within most states of district capacity to serve ELs. Schools with a small population of ELs, for example, might need the additional weight of a state statute—and state funds—to prioritize hiring EL specialists and providing training to general education teachers. States have a duty to ensure that ELs in such schools receive services comparable to those available to ELs in well-resourced, high-incidence schools (Migration Policy Institute, The Impacts of English Learners of Key State High School Policies and Graduation Requirements).

Teachers demonstrate high-quality instructional practices and interactions with students.  One measurement approach is to conduct classroom observations of instructional practice, such as those that measure the quality of teacher–child interactions.

Teachers’ overall and subscale scores on an observation rubric associated with an educator observation system; examples of common frameworks include the Danielson’s Framework for Teaching and the Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model. (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of teachers rated effective based on multiple measures of performance (National Education Association).

Teacher coaching and professional development (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Percentage of educators surveyed indicating alignment among professional learning, standards, curriculum and assessments (National Education Association).

Percentage of educators surveyed indicating satisfaction with professional learning time and opportunities (National Education Association).

Percentage of educators who participated in job-embedded professional learning opportunities in the previous year (National Education Association).

Percentage of workforce members who receive training in culturally-responsive instruction, especially to understand a child’s developmental progress to inform instruction (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Percentage of workforce members who receive training on reducing or eliminating bias in their work (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Percentage of workforce members who receive training on trauma-informed care or responsiveness (STEP Forward with Data Framework).

Districts design, monitor and implement evaluation systems based on state framework in partnership with educators and their associations (National Education Association).

Districts align professional learning with standards, curriculum and assessments (National Education Association).

Districts use evaluations aligned with induction (National Education Association).

Districts use performance evaluations employing multiple measures (National Education Association).

Districts provide “peer assistance” or “peer assistance and review” (PAR) teams (National Education Association).

Districts have professional learning plans, including induction and mentoring, for teachers, education support professionals (ESPs) and specialized instructional support personnel (SISP) (National Education Association).

Districts integrate theories, research and models of human learning into the planning and design of professional learning (National Education Association).

Districts provide educators with targeted support based on formative and summative evaluation results (National Education Association).

Districts provide extra resources and assistance for those educators in hard-to-staff schools (National Education Association).

Districts provide funding for educators to access professional learning that addresses new education research and technology that will help improve instruction or support for students (National Education Association).

Assess the quality of learning environments, teacher-child interaction, teaching strategies, and children’s progress, and use the data for continuous improvement (Alliance for Early Success).

Districts provide ongoing professional learning and support to administrators, including training in equity and racial and social justice to better support Indigenous educators and students as well as educators and students of color (National Education Association).

Districts provide teacher leadership development (National Education Association).

Districts support regular, job-embedded professional learning opportunities (National Education Association).

Districts use a variety of student, educator and systems data to plan, assess and evaluate professional learning (National Education Association).

Providing training and classroom materials (Results for America).

State develops a comprehensive culturally-responsive teaching policy, covering equity and racial and social justice, to increase educators’ cultural and linguistic competence through pre-service education, licensure and ongoing professional learning (National Education Association).

State provides funding and technical assistance to strengthen professional learning in areas with high concentrations of poverty, Indigenous students and students of color, with emphasis on mentoring, implicit bias and cultural competency (National Education Association).

State provides funding for job-embedded professional learning opportunities to help educators improve their instructional repertoire (National Education Association).

State policy mandates multiprofessional collaboration on educator support and evaluation systems staffed by active pre-K through 12 educators (National Education Association).

State policy requires that evaluations be based on multiple measures of performance to determine effectiveness. Measures may include classroom observations, portfolios, leadership roles and professional learning (National Education Association).

State provides funding for “peer assistance” and “peer assistance and review” (PAR) teams (National Education Association).

Per pupil expenditures. For elementary and secondary schools, data are reported annually at the state, district, and school levels through the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) Per Pupil Expenditure Transparency website. Disparities in funding can be assessed vertically at the federal, state, and local levels, as well as horizontally between schools within the same district or postsecondary institutions within the same state (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Equity Factor, a measure that indicates variance in per-pupil funding within a state (see this brief by New America for more information) (Education-to-Workforce Framework). 

Equitable weighted student funding formula (Data sources: Local policy and practice assessments) (StriveTogether 2021).

Per pupil expenditures. The highest-poverty districts in the United States receive approximately $1,000 less per student than the lowest-poverty districts—even states that have implemented progressive funding policies based on student need have not all been successful in ensuring funding for students from low-income households exceeds funding levels for more advantaged students (Education-to-Workforce).

Equity Factor, a measure that indicates variance in per-pupil funding within a state (see this brief by New America for more information). (Education-to-Workforce).

Equitable weighted student funding formula (Data sources: Local policy and practice assessments) (StriveTogether 2021).

Equity factor, or the degree of variance between district per-student funding to state average (Data source: U.S. Department of Education) (StriveTogether 2021).

Increase school funding to boost graduation rates: Researchers at Michigan State University analyzed high school graduation rates over a seven-year period to see how public spending affected them. They found that extra spending of $437 per child on social programmes for low-income families, or $720 in educational spending, boosted high school graduation rates by one percentage point over the seven years (World Economic Forum). Other research has estimated that increasing per-pupil instruction expenditures by 10% would lead to an increase in graduation rates between 1.5% and 3.6% in these districts. 

Several years of sustained spending increases improved student outcomes. A robust body of research shows that across a variety of outcomes such as test scores, graduation rates, and college attendance, student performance improves with greater spending. Over the long term, students gain important benefits on economic outcomes such as wages. Benefits tend to be greater for lower-income students and districts (PPIC, Understanding the Effects of School Funding).

How—and to whom—spending is targeted matters. Policies that target district characteristics may not fully address gaps in spending and student outcomes, depending on how funding is targeted across students and schools within the same district. In California, spending is higher for low-income, Black, and Latino students—but current spending progressivity is not enough to close existing test score gaps (PPIC, Understanding the Effects of School Funding).

The labor market for educators may constrain spending policies and create tradeoffs. Often, high-poverty schools rely on lower-paid and less experienced teachers, but have smaller class sizes. Large-scale policies to increase spending on new staff—such as the class size reduction of the 1990s—may adversely affect experience and credentials over the short run, limiting potential benefits per dollar (PPIC, Understanding the Effects of School Funding).

The Government Finance Officers Association’s (GFOA) has developed a series of Best Practices in School Budgeting, which clearly outline steps to developing a budget that best aligns resources with student achievement goals. The five steps are presented below:

Plan and Prepare. The planning and budgeting process begins with mobilizing key  stakeholders, gathering information on academic performance and cost structure, and establishing  principles and policies to guide the budget process. Objectives include: (a) Foster collaboration between the academic and finance staff in the budget process; (b) Set expectations for the budget process and analyze the district’s current state; (c) Effectively communicate the process and corresponding decisions to stakeholders. Steps include: (1) Establish a partnership between the finance and instructional leaders. A  collaborative process increases the likelihood that the decisions made will be  supported after the budget process is over; (2) Develop principles and policies to guide the budget process. Budget principles  and policies formalize standards and fundamental values that should govern the  budgeting process; (3) Analyze current levels of student learning. The current state of academic performance must be assessed to determine what course of action to take; (4) Identify communications strategy. The budget process should include a plan to  inform participants, stakeholders, and the general public about how the budget  process works, why each decision was made and how to provide input in the process (GFOA, Smarter School Spending Framework).

Set Instructional Priorities. The budget needs to be rooted in the priorities of the district.  Intentionally created instructional priorities provide a strong basis for developing a district’s budget  and strategic financial plan, as well as presenting a budget document. Objectives include: (a) To develop goals using the SMARTER framework; (b) To determine gaps between a school district’s current level of performance and its desired level of performance; (c) To research practices shown to improve district performance to determine which practices might help it plan, budget, and attain its student achievement goals; (d) To identify the instructional priorities being considered to increase student achievement. Steps include: (1) Develop goals. Goals should be thoughtfully developed and structured to be  specific, measurable, and reasonable in order to provide a strong foundation for the  budget process; (2) Identify root cause of gap between goal and current state. By finding root causes  of problems, a district can identify the most effective solutions to achieving its goals; (3) Research & develop potential instructional priorities. The district’s instructional  priorities should be informed by practices proven by research and also be limited in  number to focus on items critical to optimizing performance; (4) Evaluate choices amongst instructional priorities. A district needs to weigh its  different options for achieving its goals against one another in order to focus on those  with the greatest potential for student achievement impact (GFOA, Smarter School Spending Framework).

Pay for Priorities. Current resources and expenditures must be thoroughly analyzed in order  to find capacity to pay for top instructional priorities. Objectives: (a) Developing a Staffing Analysis; (b) Developing a Cost of Service Analysis; (c) Developing a process to prioritize spending; (d) Weighing trade-offs between costs and benefits. Steps include: (1) Apply cost analysis to the budget process. A cost analysis and staffing analysis are  essential to identifying how the district might allocate its limited resources; (2) Evaluate & prioritize use of resources to enact the instructional priorities. Instructional priorities need to be thoroughly quantified as a first step to determining  how much money is needed to implement the priorities and where that money will  come from. Trade-offs need to be weighed to examine whether the costs, financial or  otherwise, of implementing an instructional priority are viable (GFOA, Smarter School Spending Framework).

Implement Plan. The “strategic financial plan” is the long-term road map for implementing  the district’s instructional priorities. A “plan of action” describes how the strategic financial plan will  be translated into coherent actionable steps. Steps include (1) Develop a strategic financial plan. A strategic financial plan provides a three to  five year perspective on how the district will pursue its instructional priorities and  how success will be determined; (2) Develop a plan of action. Roles and responsibilities for implementing the strategic  financial plan should be made clear for greater accountability; (3) Allocate resources to individual school sites. Resources have the most direct  impact at school sites and should be allocated transparently and consistent with the  district’s overall strategy; (4) Develop a budget presentation. A budget document needs to be well organized  and also clearly lay out the challenges the district is facing and how the district’s  strategies and financial plan will address these challenges (GFOA, Smarter School Spending Framework).

Ensure Sustainability. The planning and budgeting process should be one that can be  replicated in the future in order to ensure the district remains focused and plans accordingly for reaching its student achievement goals. To ensure that the strategies and priorities are implemented with fidelity to the budget document, a school district needs to establish a system for evaluating results. Objectives: (a) Implement a system to monitor strategy implementation; (b) Evaluate the results of implementation throughout the year. A well-developed budget outlines the dollars and resources for implementing a plan of action to align student outcomes with resources for the upcoming fiscal year. However, there are numerous examples where excellent plans are improperly or incompletely put into practice. In some cases, the plan may never even get off the ground (GFOA, Smarter School Spending Framework).

The organization Brown’s Promise has five equity principles to guide their work to end patterns of school segregation and educational resource inequities: (1) Listen to people and communities most impacted – center organizations that are already deeply connected in directly impacted communities, including families, faith leaders, grassroots organizations, and especially students; (2) Focus on educator diversity in addition to student diversity. An integrated school is comprised of diverse students and adults; (3) Center the student experience in an integrated school – not just numbers of students of different races or ethnicities or family income levels; (4) Avoid unintended consequences such as reducing spending in districts serving concentrations of students living in poverty or diluting Black, Latino, or other minoritized group’s political power on school boards in an effort to create integrated districts; (5) Hold the state responsible education is ultimately the responsibility of the state, so avoid falling into a hyper-localism trap that prioritizes local control over the rights of historically underserved students (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Funding that is linked to compliance with common quality standards and is flexible, blendable, and sufficient for the continuum of services and supports needed to get children ready for school and to provide school experiences that help them become strong readers (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

Adequate school funding to ensure access to the resources that afford every child the opportunity to learn (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

State has an independent body of stakeholders that includes active pre-K through grade 12 educators and administrators who annually assess if state funding is sufficient to provide all students the opportunity to meet rigorous academic standards (National Education Association).

In 2012, California passed the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), a school funding formula overhaul which allocated funds based on pupil needs and eliminated many limitations on the use of funds, allowing “local control” over spending decisions. Research has found strongly significant impacts of LCFF-induced increases in district revenue on average high school graduation rates for all children, poor children, and all racial ethnic groups that experienced such changes. A $1,000 increase in district per-pupil revenue from the state experienced in grades 10–12 leads to a 5.3 percentage-point increase in high school graduation rates, on average, among all children. Researchers found similar magnitudes for poor children and by race/ethnicity: a $1,000 increase in per-pupil revenue from the state causes a 6.1 percentage-point increase for poor children, a 5.3 percentage-point increase for Black children, a 4.2 percentage-point increase for non-Hispanic White children, and a 4.5 percentage-point increase for Hispanic children (Learning Policy Institute, Money and Freedom).

Fund public schools fully and fairly by moving toward regional or statewide revenue. State funding policy should ensure that every district and school has the funding it needs to provide a high-quality education. The state must ensure that all students can attend school in buildings that are safe, healthy, welcoming places, and that students have access to a rigorous, high-quality public education within those walls. States must also ensure that education funding is targeted based on the level of student need so that all children have an equal opportunity to succeed. Districts with substantially greater student need should receive substantially greater funding; districts with similar levels of student need should receive similar levels of funding (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

State leaders should advance the goal of fully and fairly funding public schools by considering three actions: (1) Redefining “local” to mean a larger geographic area, which might be a county, an area served by a regional education service agency (which can have different names in different states, e.g., an intermediate unit, a Board of Cooperative Educational Services, etc.), or, where relevant, a metropolitan area, instead of a single school district; (2) Shifting away from local funding altogether, replacing those funds with state revenue for education; (3) Using some combination of these approaches, both redefining “local” and shifting away from this kind of funding (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Ensure integration and resource equity within districts and schools by adopting requirements that do three things: (1) Ensure integration. Districts should be required to demonstrate that all schools are within, for example, 5 or 10 percentage points of district-wide average student poverty for that grade span (e.g., all elementary schools should be within 10 points of the district-wide poverty rate for grades 1 through 5), unless doing so would require excessive commute times. (2) Ensure resource equity. Districts should be required to demonstrate to the state that they are using their resources strategically in order to meet the differing student needs in each school. This should include a demonstration that schools with more student need (including more students living in poverty, multilingual learners, and special education students) are receiving additional funding and staffing to meet those needs, and are not disproportionately relying on novice, out of field, or uncertified educators. (3) Ensure all school assignment changes advance equity and integration and protect against backsliding. When districts change school boundaries or school assignment policies for any reason (e.g., opening a new building, closing a school, redrawing boundaries to address changes in housing patterns and school capacity), or when a district changes a lottery process that governs public school choice, a state should review and approve the plan only after a demonstration that it will advance integration and increase the likelihood that all students get an equal educational opportunity, rather than exacerbating segregation or resource inequities (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Ensure integration and resource equity within districts and schools by provide funding and technical assistance. If a state is serious about equal opportunities for all students, it must also invest in local leaders’ capacity to meet expectations. This means providing money to support the work while also providing training and guidance to grow local leaders’ belief in and ability to achieve the goals. (a) State leaders should provide grants to support district leaders in planning for and implementing innovative strategies to advance integration and resource equity. (b) State leaders should provide technical assistance in the form of written guidance, communities of practice, and even place-specific consultation and deep implementation support. District leaders should be consulted in determining what sorts of assistance would be most helpful, but likely would benefit from support in identifying sources of federal, state, and philanthropic funds to pursue this work; legal requirements—and flexibilities—that support this work; and examples of other places that have pursued similar efforts and seen success. (c) State leaders should invest in the capacity of the state education agency (SEA), or other entity tasked with leading this work. High-quality technical assistance is challenging to provide. The SEA can only do this effectively if it has the necessary expertise, time, and resources, as well as trusting relationships with district leaders. This may be achieved by hiring or training experts within the SEA, by contracting with external partners, and/or identifying national partners as part of federally funded technical assistance programs (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Create an ecosystem that promotes integration and resource equity by collecting and reporting data. Transparency in the form of consistent and easily accessible data over time builds understanding about the persistence of segregation and resource inequities. State leaders should calculate share measures of integration and resource equity on school, district, and state report cards in a way that makes it easy to see districtwide patterns across schools. This data should cover the following categories: (a) Measures of socioeconomic and racial integration/segregation between schools for the district as a whole; (b) Property tax rates for the district’s taxpayers as compared to statewide rates and rates for adjacent districts; (c) Spending per student in the district as compared to statewide spending and spending in adjacent districts (d) Local spending in the district that is above and beyond the amount called for by the state funding formula; (e) Easy to understand data visualizations showing how the district allocates resources to schools, including, at minimum: dollars per student, percentage of novice educators, percentage of teacher vacancies, student-to-counselor ratio, student-to-teacher ratio, number of (high school) AP courses and seats offered. (f) Measures of socioeconomic and racial integration/segregation between schools and between districts statewide and for major metropolitan regions. (g) The percentage of students statewide attending school in highly segregated schools and districts. (h) The percentage of students statewide attending school in districts that do (or do not) promote equal opportunity for all by (1) deconcentrating poverty, (2) meaningfully targeting resources to meet the needs of students in high-poverty schools, or (3) both (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Create an ecosystem that promotes integration and resource equity by adding integration and resource equity to district accountability ratings. Change district accountability systems to include indicators that specifically hold leaders responsible for the things they are uniquely able to control, including measures of resource equity and integration. These new equity indicators should be generated in partnership with district leaders themselves, as well as students and families. They might include two key measures: (a) Deconcentration of poverty Districts would earn more points by reducing the range of poverty rates between the highest and lowest poverty schools in their district. For example, they could get all elementary schools within five points of the district-wide average for elementary schools; (b) Resource allocation Districts would earn more points by aligning the level of resources in a school with the level of student need in that school, either by spreading need evenly and allocating resources equally or by channeling resources (spending per student, number of certified, non-novice teachers and support staff per student, etc.) to the schools with greater student need. The specific measures would depend on the state context. For example, in a state with a funding formula that provides additional funds to the district for each student living in poverty, the accountability system could provide more points for the district as it gets closer to spending all funds generated by the low-income weight in the schools where those students are actually enrolled (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Create an ecosystem that promotes integration and resource equity by leveraging federal requirements and resourcing. State leaders should: (a) Support meaningful resource allocation reviews required by Title I of the Every Student Succeeds Act; (b) Train state and local education leaders on requirements under Tile VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1965; (c) Support district leaders in identifying, securing, and implementing federal grants that support integrated, well resourced public schools (Brown’s Promise, Fulfilling Brown’s Promise: A State Policy Agenda).

Districts implement measures to broaden their tax base (National Education Association).

Districts use “pupil weights” in their base formula to adjust for diverse student needs (National Education Association).

State funds local efforts to diversify revenue streams (National Education Association).

Passage of voter-approved children’s funds at local levels (Children’s Funding Project).

State implements measures to broaden its tax base (National Education Association).

Access to resources: School finance equity (Birth to Grade 3 Indicator Framework).

The percentage of students who pass AP exams (Center for American Progress).

Schools and instructors use a standards-aligned core course curriculum that meets quality standards (as defined by EdReports) and is culturally relevant, centering the lived experiences and heritage of students’ ethnic or racial backgrounds (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

The Tier 1 curriculum, assessments, and instructional resources in use are closely aligned (Instruction Partners).

When and if appropriate, additional culturally and/or linguistically relevant materials are used alongside curricular materials to support students in making personal connections (Instruction Partners).

The school/system uses quality data and assessment resources consistently, cohesively, and strategically to drive instructional decision making for all students (Instruction Partners).

Schools and instructors use a standards-aligned core course curriculum that meets quality standards and is culturally relevant, centering the lived experiences and heritage of students’ ethnic or racial backgrounds (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

When and if appropriate, additional culturally and/or linguistically relevant materials are used alongside curricular materials to support students in making personal connections (Instruction Partners).

Schools adopt content-rich, developmentally appropriate curricula linked to standards and assessments (Annie E. Casey Foundation).

A high-quality curriculum not only provides a clear framework for teachers, but also ensures coherence across grades and schools. It is essential that legislators promote the selection and periodic review of evidence-based instructional materials and resources in districts. This will help determine if they meet students’ needs or if additional materials and supports are necessary. Don’t remove resources, even flawed ones, without providing educators with effective alternatives first. (Model state: Delaware) (Shanker Institute).

Students have access to Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), and dual enrollment courses.

Rate of completion of college-level courses/ credits in high school (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

The percentage of students who have shown potential to be successful in advanced coursework who have successfully completed at least one course. Participation in early postsecondary opportunities— Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), and dual enrollment—has been shown to increase high school graduation, postsecondary enrollment, and college persistence rates  (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

Number of AP, IB, and dual enrollment courses offered, overall and by subject (Education-to-Workforce).

Percentage of students in an early college course who take the relevant end-of-course test needed to earn credit (for example, AP or IB test), overall and by subject (Education-to-Workforce).

Student subgroup representation in AP courses. Black and Hispanic students disproportionately are underrepresented in rigorous course programs, depriving them of the opportunity to build strong academic transcripts required at elite universities and of the preparation needed to succeed in college. In 2016, Black students were 15.3 percent of all students in public schools, but just 7.3 percent of all students who took at least one AP exam. In that same year, Hispanic students comprised 26.4 percent of public school students but just 22.4 percent of AP test-takers (Civic Enterprises, Building a Grad Nation). 

AP courses are not the only rigorous classes to which Black and Hispanic have limited access. According to data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Civil Rights Data Collection, Black and Hispanic students represent 42 percent of student enrollment in schools offering gifted and talented education programs (GATE), yet just 28 percent of students enrolled in such programs (U.S. Department of Education, 2016) (Civic Enterprises, Building a Grad Nation). 

Rate of completion of college-level courses/ credits in high school. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

AP Leadership Team – Establish a committee of teachers and administrators to examine data, create and model an access-centered vision, and maintain a general continuity in policy and programming for the school’s AP classes (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Listening Session – Collect input from students on ways to improve the AP program and barriers to participation (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Ambassadors – Set up a program for students to take a leadership role in recruiting their peers for AP classes (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Boot Camp – Offer an event to build community, leadership capacity, and study skills in students enrolled in AP classes (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Information Event – Share information about AP with students and families, focused on AP course offerings and potential alignment with students’ educational and career goals (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Prep Sessions – Host review sessions by experienced AP readers or other successful AP teachers to support students as they prepare for AP Exams (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

AP Course Availability and Sequencing – Intentionally add AP courses that serve as a gateway for expanding access to rigorous coursework (College Board, Broadening Access to Advanced Placement).

San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) leveraged the data in the College Board’s AP Potential report to generate a series of customized reports that list the potential to succeed for every student at every high school campus for every AP course offered by the College Board. Rather than simply using the binary definition of AP Potential—either a student has potential or does not— SAISD went further by grouping students into 10 percentage point bands, starting at having a zero to 10 percent chance of passing the AP exam in a given course prior to enrolling to having a 90 to 100 percent chance. The school-level report lists the potential for all incoming students to help guide their advising practices around enrollment in advanced coursework, with school counselors targeting outreach to students who were identified with potential  (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

At the state level, the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) has launched an AP activation campaign to encourage students identified with potential to enroll in advanced coursework. Each year, the Commissioner sends a signed letter directly to every 10th and 11th grade student identified with AP Potential. Since starting the campaign, the state has seen an increase in the number of students enrolling in AP coursework, as well as in taking and passing AP exams (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

To break down historic access barriers, Washington became the first state in the nation to adopt an automatic enrollment policy for advanced mathematics, English language arts, and science classes in all high schools. The policy, known as Academic Acceleration, automatically places students who meet standards on state-level exams in the next more rigorous course in the corresponding content area. While intended to increase access to advanced coursework for all students, the policy is particularly aimed to support students who have been historically underrepresented  (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) defines dual credit as a system where eligible high school students enroll in college courses and receive both high school and college credit. These courses can be taught on high school campuses by approved instructors or on college campuses. The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) assigns service areas to public colleges, facilitating partnerships between high schools and colleges to offer dual credit opportunities (Texas Education Agency).

Houston ISD has implemented initiatives to increase student participation in advanced academic programs, including AP, IB, and dual enrollment courses. Notably, the district expanded the number of high schools offering the University of Texas’s OnRamps dual enrollment courses from 15 to 33, resulting in a significant increase in student enrollment and college credit attainment. These efforts aim to enhance college readiness and provide equitable access to advanced coursework (Houston Chronicle).

Educators design and conduct pre-assessments to gauge knowledge and skills before beginning a unit (Student Achievement Partners).

The school/system uses quality data and assessment resources consistently, cohesively, and strategically to drive instructional decision making for all students (Instruction Partners).

Assessment and evaluation honor multilingual learners’ (MLs’) primary languages and current English proficiency levels. There is a written policy to ensure that MLs are not held back in the curriculum sequence or small-group work based on primary language influence or current English proficiency level (Instruction Partners).

Each student has clear, individual learning goals and learning targets that teachers, students, and families/caregivers understand (Instruction Partners).

There is a clear and efficient data cycle process in place that supports leaders and teachers in collecting and analyzing student data as well as adjusting instruction based on what is and is not working (Instruction Partners).

Student data is gathered from multiple forms of assessment (e.g., universal screener, progress monitoring, curriculum assessment, teachers’ observation notes about skills individual students have and have not yet mastered) (Instruction Partners).

Data is analyzed collaboratively from each form of assessment alongside student goals to determine what is working and what may need to be refined to support students in moving toward skill mastery (Instruction Partners).

Student data is disaggregated and analyzed by demographics; team members use this data to ensure that the needs of students in priority groups are centered when making instructional decisions (Instruction Partners).

Relationship quality between student and teacher as measured through closeness, commitment, and complementarity (Jowett, S. et al., Teacher-Student relationship quality as a barometer of teaching and learning effectiveness).

The Student–Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS, Pianta, 1994, 2001; see also Koomen et al., 2012; Koomen & Jellesma, 2015) is the most often used assessment tool that has been specifically developed to examine teachers’ perceptions of relationships with their students through three relational dimensions: closeness (interactions and communications are warm and open), conflict (the degree of friction and discordant between the teacher and student), and dependency (the degree to which the student is overly dependent on the teacher). Its conceptual basis is derived from parent–child attachments. Bowlby’s (1973) attachment theory describes these attachments as either warm or secure, angry or dependent, and anxious or insecure (Jowett, S. et al., Teacher-Student relationship quality as a barometer of teaching and learning effectiveness).

The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network’s 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention: Mentoring/Tutoring—Mentoring is typically a one-to-one caring, supportive relationship between a mentor and a mentee that is based on trust. Mentoring offers a significant support structure for high-risk students. Tutoring, also typically a one-to-one activity, focuses on academic support and is an effective practice when addressing specific needs in collaboration with the student’s base teacher (The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention).

Students whose relationships with their teachers are characterized by high levels of support and low levels of conflict obtain higher scores on measures of academics, and behavioral adjustment than do students whose relationships with teachers are less positive. Prospective studies find that a more positive teacher-student relationship is associated with a greater sense of school belonging, lower levels of externalizing behaviors, improved peer relationships, and higher achievement. Longitudinal meditational analyses find that the effect of a supportive teacher-student relationship on achievement is due to the direct effect of teacher-student relationship quality on students’ engagement in the classroom (Wu, J. et al. Teacher student relationship quality type in elementary grades).