Data Description & Analysis
Data description
The data that was analyzed for this research study:
From the NYSED Website was the NYSED Fact Sheets for educators about the ESSA, New York State’s Final Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Plan Summary from January 2018, a powerpoint from NYSED on “How Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is Determined Using 2016-17 Data” and Guidance on the Allocation of Title 1 Funds to public schools. These reports varied in length from a page to as long as 75 pages. These documents help summarize the State adaptation of the federal ESSA educational policy and guidance on funding to schools.
District and School Comprehensive Educational Plans are documents created by districts and their individual schools that online instructional focuses, areas of improvement and provide the blueprint to district and school organization. These plans were aligned with State plans and were over 30 to 60 pages in length.
From the New York City Department Of Education Data hubs were the 19-20 School Performance Dashboard and Quality Snapshot for BKHS which reviews school demographics, student assessment outcomes and stakeholder response surveys about the school. These are 1 page to about 5 pages in length.
High School Academic Policy Guide which overviews in detail the grading guidance high schools and graduation requirements. This document is about 85 pages in length.
From the NYCDOE, The Fair Student Funding & School Budget Resource Guide which overviews how fair student funding works including what formula is used to allocate funds to schools, understanding how the formula was created and the purpose of this funding. Included is the Fair Student Funding Report for BKHS. The guide is 69 pages in length and the report is about 2 pages in length.
The Arts in Schools Report from 19-20 School Year developed using survey responses from the Office of Arts and Special Projects (OASP) division of the NYCDOE summarized in a comprehensive report about the arts (visual arts, music, dance and theater) in NYC public schools at all grade levels. This report was 115 pages in length.
The Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts: Arts Education Manual for School leaders is a guide for school leaders to understand the specifics of an art education program such as needs, how to evaluate arts educators and guidance for creating and supporting arts programs in their schools. This was developed by the OASP and is 254 pages in length.
Research was also carried out by analyzing arts education articles that covered topics like educational policy, Critical Race Theory, art education teacher practice and funding to public education and ranged in publication year dates from 1995-2019. A total of 21 articles were analyzed and were published in peer reviewed journals: Art Education, Teachers College Record, Arts Education Policy Review, Studies in Art Education, The Urban Review and The Journal of Social Theory in Art Education.
What did the data tell us?
An analysis of the data for sub question 1 indicates that policy creates guidance on organizational planning for schools and districts to meet policy goals. In order to meet goals, a system of accountability is key to keeping schools and districts aligned with state and federal goals. The data collected is key to all decision making at state, district and school levels.
An analysis of data for sub question 2 indicates that the arts must be integrated into policy, resources for the arts are consistent year to year and school leadership must have a vision for the arts in their schools so they can successfully support and be accountable for their arts programs.
Sub Question 1: How does the ESSA relate to current support for the Arts Programs at Brooklyn High school?
After analyzing the data, three categories emerged: Structures created to meet Policy Goals; Supports and Resources; Professional supports for teachers. Each of these categories explained how supports were developed from the expectations to meet policy goals and whether or not they were applied to arts programs.
Structures created to meet policy goals
Structures created to meet policy goals identify the protocols, the district/school level plans, funding structures, and educational structures created at school/district level to meet the goals of state and federal policy. Subcategories that emerged from this category were: funding structures, accountability structures, measuring district/school progress and educational practices.
This category is about how states, districts and schools have developed structures and protocols to ensure that they are aligned to policy guidance and goals. The main structures developed reflect the major areas of focus in the policy - having a procedure for equitable funding to schools, how schools and districts would be held accountable for student achievement and how that achievement would be measured. The ESSA policy from the federal level gives states a way to individually develop plans for their districts and schools to meet the goals of closing student achievement gaps by providing a common language for all levels to align their goals and planning to. This provides greater flexibility to states, districts and schools because they create goals and plans that are specific to their needs. States can achieve this flexibility by developing systems of accountability that the States, Districts and Schools are expected to follow. The New York State Education Department summarizes their plan for New York State schools by keeping in mind how accountability would be structured at each level - making student process and achievement the responsibility of the school and their district rather than the state or the federal level. With this in mind the NYS ESSA Plan developed indicators that would provided data and information about how the State provided for learning opportunities to students and the support necessary for differentiated learning; listing clearly what the expectations for progress and meeting annual goals are of the State, District and Schools; measure the effectiveness of supports to meet expectations; goals and plans would be aligned to policy goals and based on data and research (NYSED ESSA Plan Summary Jan 2018). The use of data is important in the structures created for this policy because the expectation is that all levels are using data to make funding, instructional, and school organizational decisions with this data - such as teacher practice, professional development, the creation of learning standards, organizing and allocated resources. A data driven culture is embedded in the practices at all levels with the hope to be transparent while also working with “real” information. The creation of the District Comprehensive Education Plan outlines and provides a blueprint for how the district can engage in a structured/systematic review and analysis of student progress as a way to identify and address where or what is causing poor student outcomes and what strategies to use to improve those outcomes. “...a data driven culture where instructional and organizational decisions are made based on students’ needs...analysis of assessments...strategic planning...resulting in greater student progress” (District Comprehensive Educational Plan).
Supports and Resources
Supports and Resources category outlined what was created and developed for schools and districts in order for them to meet policy goals. Subcategories that emerged from this category were: school level supports/resources, district level support/resources and state level supports and resources. Each level is responsible for the creation and provision granted to the level they oversee. Each level also has different supports and resources that they are responsible for maintaining. Accountability is key to the success of the implementation of policy and guidance is built around making all levels accountable for student achievement by giving different conditions of responsibility in the form of differentiated support. Greater flexibility means that the onus of student achievement falls to individual schools and districts. The districts and schools are responsible for identifying their areas that need improvement (which could vary district to district/school to school), classifying those schools in need of improvement and figuring out how to utilize resources to meet improvement goals aligned to policy. “This classification system is all about achieving equity. By identifying schools that need the most attention, NYSED and the district can focus resources on these schools.” (NYSED Fact Sheet for Educators). Goal making is a key part to the policy where annual goals are how schools and districts are held accountable to the goals they have created. These goals are created by the school and district through a needs assessment process. As long as the goals align with the overall policy goals, then schools have access to various supports and can show that they are (or are not) progressing in student achievement.
Professional supports for teachers
Professional support for teachers looks at the support provided and/or developed related to the professional learning for teachers to meet policy goals. This category discusses how policy goals influence the kinds of professional support and development provided to teachers and how that impacts their teaching practice. Professional supports such as instructional practice, preservice and continuing teacher training programs, support and resources specific to the recruitment of preservice teachers prepared to move into classrooms and support to retain continuing teachers are reviewed, changed and/or redeveloped to help educators meet policy goals. Teachers should be able to utilize student achievement metrics to inform their professional learning. Schools want to have staff that understands how to use data to inform their practice and to have professional development and learning centered around that data. Part of the policy is also to recruit a more diverse teacher workforce to meet the culturally responsive goals outlined in the plan. This would also address the number of qualified staff in school with the most need. A goal outlined in the NYS ESSA Plan Summary is to retain high quality teachers by creating pathways and incentives to keep teachers in schools, build their practice long term and give them pathways to teacher leadership in their schools. This includes the training for preservice teachers in programs that are better aligned to the needs of schools and districts and experiences that are more in line with the actual “real” classroom experience. For continuing teachers, this means creating more support to retain effective teachers through career incentives such as leadership pathways and more opportunities to grow teacher expertise to meet policy goals/district needs (NYS Final ESSA Plan Summary, 2018).
How do the ESSA provisions affect arts advocacy measures for arts programs at BKHS?
The categories that emerged for sub question 2 were operational support necessary for the arts, vision for the arts and arts integrated into policy. These categories focused on what was needed in order to advocate for arts programs related to the provision developed to meet ESSA policy goals.
Operational supports necessary for the Arts
There are specific and necessary supports to developing any high quality arts program. Subcategories that emerged from this category were instructional support, qualified staffing and programming accessibility.
In order to have a high quality arts program, there are specific needs to support the development and maintenance of the program. Arts programs need instructional support materials and resources, qualified staffing to deliver instruction and purposeful organization of programming to ensure students' learning is built upon sequentially so students demonstrate growth in their learning. To ensure the quality of the arts programs, having either consistent and/or adequate funding would be necessary to support the resources needed. With funding cuts, the arts tend to be the first to see cuts from their budgets - the covid revenue loss was only the most recent example of schools/districts cutting funding to the arts in order to save money for other areas of greater importance. Arts programs need to be reinvested in and policy should begin to reflect a way where funding to the arts is secure and available consistently year to year. Administrators must be more aware of the needs of non academic subject programs who have specific needs and functions that are different from the core academic subjects. Without these things the quality of the program can vary based on the level of commitment to these programs. The Arts in Schools Report from 19-20 school year notes,
In order to ensure quality teaching in the arts, a number of supports are needed, such as
certified arts teachers and/or cultural arts organizations to provide arts instruction, budgetary
funds to supports arts programming, and appropriately equipped space, as well as
assessment tools to evaluate student progress (p. 43)
Vision for the arts
Having a vision for the arts programs means that School/District/State have an understanding that the arts are necessary in public education and they have room for the arts in their planning. There must be specific purposeful planning for the arts at all levels (State, District and School) with each having different responsibilities to ensure the quality of arts programming. Subcategories that emerged from this category were school responsibility to the arts and state/district responsibility to arts. The principal is responsible for the daily operation of schools including decisions on instructional programming organization and how to support those programs with school resources. The District and State should provide guidance to schools that outline a vision for arts in their state and/or district for schools to follow and include in school planning. Principals have major decision powers particularly when it comes to how resources and time is allocated to different areas of the school. It is important for the administrator to not only understand what is necessary for a high quality arts program and why these things are necessary but to also have a purposeful plan in implementing them. The principal should have a goal or direction for the arts program that aligns with the school mission without compromising the arts learning to meet goals not relevant to the arts. The principal should rely on the expertise of their arts educator(s) in collaboration to build a strong program where all needs are met. The Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts: Arts Education Manual for School Leaders which provides specific guidance to administrators on art education. This guide was created by the Office for Arts and Special Projects - a division of central NYCDOE - notes this on the role of the principal, “...principal provides a vision for sequential arts instruction as part of the school mission for excellence...vision for the arts in their school should align with their CEP goals...[including] discipline specific support” (p.20). The State provides guidance to schools and districts on what is required, how they are assessed, what they are accountable for and what indicators used to measure student success. Schools and districts align their planning, organization and goals to the state guidance. If State guidance provides explicit requirements related to arts instructional needs such as having qualified staff teaching these programs at all grade levels), schools and districts would have to develop more purposeful organization and resourcing to their arts programs.
Arts Integrated into Policy
Policy provides the guidance for state, districts and schools in their planning and organization, but little is noted for the arts. Arts integrated into policy means that there would be specific and purposeful integration of arts programming needs into policy and plans. Subcategories that emerged from this category were adequate funding to arts programs and arts accessibility and inclusion. There needs to be specific and purposeful integration of arts programming needs into policy - including both district and school comprehensive educational plans and the state’s educational policy guidance. This includes consistent funding provided to arts programs, greater access to arts in public school education at all grade levels and the inclusion of the arts in school and district planning and achievement metrics. Current policy does not have enough specific language that requires schools/districts to adequately support their arts programs. The state only has a credit requirement but no quality of the program requirements or expectations. By specifying key necessities for an arts program such as having a dedicated space for arts only instruction, schools can better organize their programs and be held accountable to the quality of their program. Including a section for arts in both school and district planning allows for greater accountability and a purposeful approach to developing and maintaining arts programs in partnership with the arts educator. Recommendations outlined in the arts and schools report for the 19-20 school year to the Panel for Educational Policy (PEP) include, “Adoption of policies that support and assure PK-12 arts instruction and accountability...Include measurement of schools’ arts programming and instructional quality in principal and school review processes and ratings...Require arts statement and goal as part of the CEP” (p. 101).