Toward school improvement and fiscal equity: examining educational adequacy in a Southern California school district

UnrestrictedA purposeful sample of four schools within one Southern California district with approximately 80% poverty and 60% English learners documented the practices of successful schools in allocating resources toward student achievement. These schools, all of which had poverty rates above 50% demonstrated growth of around 20% in their AYP scores over the past five years. Data collection protocols were adapted from previous resource allocation studies in Wyoming, Washington and Arkansas (Picus, et al., 2008). Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected utilizing the Evidence-based Model and open-ended interview protocols as a basis for documenting resource allocation practices and instructional strategies of successful schools.; Current funding levels and allocations demonstrate that resources for GEUSD schools are inadequate or not at levels recommended by the Evidence-based Model complicating efforts to achieve an adequate education for all students. Primary elements of resource use at level less than the model suggests include: (1) class size; (2) instructional and administrative staffing; and (3) professional development. Despite these fiscal challenges, GEUSD has implemented a school improvement process employing many action steps found in the literature, which have lead to substantially improved student achievement. All four schools have implemented to some degree all of the 10 steps that Odden and Archibald (2009) assert are necessary for improving student performance.; A comparison of school and district practices to the Evidence-based Model and best practices identified in the literature revealed implications for educational leaders. The findings are paraphrased into six key areas that school leaders should allocate resources toward for improved student success: (1) assessment of the performance problems and setting goals; (2) changing the curriculum and setting a new instructional vision; (3) measuring and monitoring progress; (4) collaborative culture and professional development based on research and promising practices; (5) core and supplemental intervention instructional time and programs; and (6) widespread and distributed leadership