Michael Hansen CALDER at the American Institutes for Research 6 th Annual CALDER Conference

1. Investigating the Role of Human Resources in School Turnaround:A Decomposition of Improving Schools in Two States Michael Hansen • CALDER at the American Institutes for Research 6thAnnual CALDER Conference February 21, 2013 Washington, DC Acknowledgements: This research draws upon work performed under contract with the Institute of Education Sciences (ED-04-CO-0025/0020). This work does not necessarily represent the views of any affiliated institutions, and any and all errors are mine.

2. The presumed role of human resourcesin turnaround • Turnaround, transformation models • Prescribe principal and/or teacher turnover • Teacher and principal quality are most consequential schooling inputs • Assume teacher/principal quality are static

3. Workforce turnover or human capital development? • Which of the two models dominates in past turnaround schools? • Results: • Evidence of elements of both models playing a role • Strong improvements among stable teachers • Strong incoming teachers, no evidence on weak outgoing teachers

4. Longitudinal Data Sources Florida • Math FCAT-SSS • Student-teacher linked • Spans 2002-03 to 2007-08 years North Carolina • Math EOG tests • Student-teacher linked • Spans 2002-03 to 2007-08 years • Principals

5. Time Span of Observation Window Baseline Period Monitoring Period TA CLPs MI NI How is School Performance Identified?

6. Descriptive Means of the Sampleof Low-performing Schools

7. Decomposing Performance Improvements across Workforce • Pre- vs. post-period • Turnaround (TA) vs. non-TA • 3 types of teachers in workforce: • Outgoing • Stable • Incoming

8. Identifying Teacher Groups Contributing to Performance Outgoing Stable Incoming Pre-period Post-period

9. What Workforce Dynamics Turnaround Schools?

10. What Workforce Dynamics Turnaround Schools?

11. Teachers: Evidence Suggestive of Human Capital Development

12. Observed performance in NC Schools

13. Observed performance in NC Schools

14. Principals: Similar Evidence of Human Capital Development

15. Results are Robust to Alternative Specifications • Are these results sensitive to: • How teacher groups are categorized? • How TA schools identified? • No qualitative changes to the estimated relationships

16. Same Patterns of Improvement Observed in Other Schools? • What about middling schools with low growth? How do they improve? • Replicate identification and estimation in schools that have higher levels of status, but quick improvement in school growth • Improvement of stable teachers most prominent in elementary schools; turnover in middle schools

17. Summary of Findings • Results show strong, robust gains associated with stable teachers • Evidence of high-performing incoming teachers, but not outgoing • Does not necessarily vindicate either of two workforce models, but suggests mix or spillover

18. Important Study Limitations • Descriptive investigation of outlier schools • Not causal or representative • Improvements are absorbed into staff, though other interventions may be at work • Not an evaluation of specific treatment; not predictive of current efforts

19. Policy Implications • Current policy emphasizes human capital turnover • Best use of intervention efforts? • Can these successes be replicated? • Feeds into larger debate about teacher quality • Costs of improvement vs. replacement • Individual or context-specific effectiveness