Home Articles Reader Opinion Editorial Book Reviews Discussion Writers Guide About TCRecord
transparent 13
Topics
Discussion
Announcements

State Strategies to Improve Low-Performing Schools: California’s High Priority Schools Grant Program


by Thomas B. Timar & Kris Kim Chyu — 2010

Background: School accountability policies and high-stakes testing have created new demands on state policy makers to provide assistance to low-performing schools. California’s response was the Immediate Intervention/Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP) and the High Priority School Grants Program (HPSGP).

Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: This study explores the effects of the HPSGP on improving academic performance of the lowest performing schools in California. The study focuses on the organizational factors that influenced resource allocation decisions. The discussion addresses what might be done to ameliorate some of the key problems implicated in nonperforming schools.

Participants: Data for this study came from site visits to 15 schools that received HPSGP funding. Of the 15 schools we studied, 10 were high schools, and the remainder elementary schools. Eleven of the schools were urban, and four were rural.

Program Description: Schools in the bottom 10th percentile are eligible to apply for HPSGP funds. The State of California provided 655 schools with $400 per pupil each year for three years, with an optional fourth year. Participating schools also could apply for an optional planning grant of $50,000 in the initial year.

Research Design: Using qualitative case studies of 15 schools in California, the study compares HPSGP recipient schools that made significant academic improvement with HPSGP schools that remained stagnant. The site visits, which took place between February and May 2006, comprised structured interviews with principals, teachers, HPSGP and special program coordinators, and school site council members, as well as classroom observations and focus groups. During a two-day visit, at least five people at each school were interviewed.

Conclusion: This study found that organizational characteristics, such as leadership of principals, member participation in decision-making, and existence of coherent goals and plans, have a significant influence on the ability of schools to make effective use of grant funding and to achieve higher student performance. The study’s main finding was that improving schools were deliberative and purposive in their use of program funds. Nonimproving schools, on the other hand, were opportunistic, lacking a plan or vision for using funding to build effective regimes of teaching and learning.



To view the full-text for this article you must be signed-in with the appropropriate membership. Please review your options below:

Sign-in
Email:
Password:
Store a cookie on my computer that will allow me to skip this sign-in in the future.
Send me my password -- I can't remember it
 
Purchase this Article
Purchase State Strategies to Improve Low-Performing Schools: California’s High Priority Schools Grant Program
Individual-Resource passes allow you to purchase access to resources one resource at a time. There are no recurring fees.
$12
Become a Member
Online Access
With this membership you receive online access to all of TCRecord's content. The introductory rate of $20 is available for a limited time.
$20
Print and Online Access
With this membership you receive the print journal and free online access to all of TCRecord's content.
$145


Cite This Article as: Teachers College Record Volume 112 Number 7, 2010, p. 1897-1936
http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 15920, Date Accessed: 11/20/2014 3:43:19 PM

Purchase Reprint Rights for this article or review
Article Tools
Related Articles

Related Discussion
 
Post a Comment | Read All

About the Author
  • Thomas Timar
    University of California, Davis
    E-mail Author
    THOMAS TIMAR is professor of education policy and director of the Center for Applied Policy in Education at the University of California at Davis. His areas of specialization are politics and policy, finance, and governance. Recent articles include “A False Dilemma: Should Decisions About Resource Allocation Be Made at the State or Local Level?” in The American Journal of Education (May 2010); “Exploring the Limits of Entitlement: Williams v. the State of California,” in Peabody Journal , 80(3); and “School Governance in California: Shaping the Landscape of Equity and Adequacy” in Teachers College Record, 106 (11).
  • Kris Chyu
    University of California, Los Angeles
    KRIS KIM CHYU recently completed her PhD in education policy at the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles. Her research interests focus on policy analysis and implementation, finance, school organization, and school leadership.
Member Center
In Print
This Month's Issue

Submit
EMAIL

Twitter

RSS