Friday, 14 January 2005 - 8:00 AM

This presentation is part of: Assessment Methods in School Settings

Assessing and Addressing Gaps in School Staff Knowledge of the Social Environment of Students

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a newly developed ecological assessment tool, The Elementary School Success Profile (ESSP), increased the knowledge of school staff about dimensions of children’s lives that are associated with school success and can be targeted with evidence-based interventions.

Background. School-based ecological assessments assume that student well-being and performance are a function of their experiences in the social environment, and that gaps in school staff’s knowledge of students’ social environments can be enhanced with assessment data. The first assumption has been well documented by research; the second has seldom been examined. The current study compared pre-assessment knowledge among school staff of the social environment and physical and psychological well-being of elementary school students with findings from ESSP assessment data collected from parents and children.

The ESSP is an assessment tool for 3rd through 5th graders. It collects data from children, parents, and teachers about the neighborhood, school, peer, and family environments of students, and about their physical and psychological well-being, behavior, and school performance.

Methods. Sample: Subjects were a convenience sample of 21 at-risk students. Male and female African American, Hispanic/Latino, and White 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders were included.

Data Collection: The ESSP was administered to students, parents, and teachers. Pre-ESSP knowledge of one school staff member (usually the child’s teacher) about 28 child- and parent-report dimensions was assessed for each student. Researchers showed a sample ESSP profile to the teacher and gave examples of the questions included in each dimension. Teachers then indicated if they expected child or parent answers to correspond to high (protective), medium (cautionary), or low (risk) scores on the bar, or if they did not know what to expect.

Data Analysis: Pre-assessment expectations of high, medium, or low scores were compared to actual scores obtained from child and parent respondents. Descriptive statistics and correlations were used to assess levels of agreement and disagreement between teacher expectations and ESSP assessment results.

Results. Findings revealed that on average across the 28 dimensions, teacher expectations did not match ESSP results 60% of the time. The correlation between prior knowledge and observed data was only .11 (p < .05). Prior teacher knowledge was inaccurate for 75% of the neighborhood items reported by children and parents, and 66% of the items about physical and psychological well-being reported by children. Teacher pre-assessment expectations were most consistent with home social behavior data and child perceptions of teachers and school (34% and 44% mismatches respectively). Teacher expectations were more consistent with parent- than child-report data (r = .16 and .08, respectively). The magnitude and direction of differences by domain and source will be presented.

Implications. Ecological and intervention-focused instruments like the ESSP can contribute to breadth and accuracy of the knowledge base of school staff. Obtaining novel information about the dimensions of children’s lives that are salient to school success and can be targeted with evidence-based interventions is a critical first step toward creating more effective and productive learning environments.

See more of Assessment Methods in School Settings
See more of Oral and Poster

See more of Celebrating a Decade of SSWR (January 13 - 16, 2005)