0.3 Lindahl, r. (february 2009). school climate differences between  (Page 4/10)

School climate has been found to be related to student achievement in high-poverty schools (Haynes et al., 1993). Carter (2000) reviewed 21 high-performing, high-poverty schools (nationwide) and found that, among other things, principals in these schools were free to decide whom to hire, principals held high expectations, and the pursuit of excellence was the norm. These school administrators and faculty used data for student diagnosis and goal setting. Hughes (1995) found that effective elementary schools serving high-poverty populations had identified instructional leaders who communicate openly and who are supportive of teachers and of the academic program. Towns, Cole-Henderson, and Serpell (2001) examined four urban schools serving low-income populations with high academic success. All four schools had strong principals, high expectations for achievement, monitored student progress, maintained discipline, and strong parental involvement. Krawczyk (2007) found a positive relationship between student academic performance and teacher perceptions of the overall school climate. However, this relationship did not hold for all subcategories of climate, e.g., neither the teacher learning environment nor the student learning environment nor the student social and physical environments showed a significant relationship to achievement. Smith (2008) found a moderate positive relationship between both collegial leadership and academic press and both English and math achievement in high-poverty elementary schools. Kannapel, Clements, Taylor, and Hibpshman (2005) concluded that in high-performing, high-poverty schools, the school climate factors that related to academic success are: high expectations for students, collaborative decision making between the teacher and the principal, caring staff and faculty, parent/teacher communication, strong faculty morale and work ethic, a strong academic and instructional focus, and coordinated staffing strategies.

Fortunately, the Take 20 survey contained items specific to all issues highlighted in this review of the knowledge base on school climate. The study’s exclusive focus on schools serving low-income students met Taylor’s (2008) recommendation that school climate be examined in relation to specific student populations.

Analysis of the data

Because the schools in both groups represent the population, not a sample, of the eligible schools for that group, only descriptive statistics were necessary for the data analysis. Percentages of responses in each response category for each item provide clear and easy insight into the data.

Consistent with Taylor’s (2008) recommendation to look at specific climate factors rather than only at overall school climate scores, Tables 1 through 3 present the distributions of responses for the school-climate-related questions on the Take20 survey. For all tables, the response keys are identical: STA=Strongly Agree, SA=Somewhat Agree, NA/ND= Neither Agree nor Disagree, SD=Somewhat Disagree, and STD=Strongly Disagree. For many of the items of the survey, the greatest difference between the responses of teachers in Torchbearer Schools and those of their peers in Comparison Schools was the percentage of individuals who responded Strongly Agree; Torchbearer Schools teachers led this category on almost all items.