c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel

Vlad Khmelkov Updates from VK RSS

  • Vlad Khmelkov

    Why use CEEA surveys?

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in Character Blog at 2:08 pm on July 29, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: character competencies, school climate, school culture, survey assessment

    In the weeks after the Summer Institute, we have prepared and posted on the IEE website two new documents about CEEA surveys. We hope they can clarify why schools might choose the Culture of Excellence & Ethics Assessment™ Surveys as their assessment tools of choice when measuring school climate and culture.

    The first document is a series of FAQs, with straight-forward answers about what CEEA surveys measure and how one could use them. For example:

    What does CEEA survey measure? As the name suggests, CEEA surveys measure the extent to which the climate and culture of a school are conducive to the development of student competencies of excellence and ethics, or their performance character and moral character. In addition, CEEA surveys measure whether the school climate is safe, supportive, and engaging for students; whether staff engage in supportive collegial relationships; and the extent to which the school engages student families in support of student learning.

    The second document is a conceptual description of the components of CEEA surveys. It tries to provide a brief research basis for the selection of the specific aspects of school culture included in the surveys. We believe that by focusing on those aspects of school culture that promote excellence and ethics, performance character and moral character, and by measuring them simultaneously along multiple dimensions and from multiple sources (student self-efficacy beliefs, perceptions of peers, perceptions of faculty; staff perceptions of themselves, of students, of colleagues, and of student families, plus the perceptions of the relevant constructs reported by parents), we have created a powerful instrument. The power of this assessment tool lies, however, not in its ability to identify individuals who underperform and are in need of improvement, but in its rich findings about the school culture: these findings can serve as a basis for multiple in-depth conversations among school leaders, staff, and among students, helping all stake-holders to understand their current state and formulate their desired state.

    See, for example, the winter/spring 2010 issue of our newsletter, excellence & ethics, for one school’s powerful story of how they used survey data on the culture of their school to engage staff and students in reflections about the school, formulating what to do to improve it, and committing to real change.

    For a discussion of why cultural assets, such as those measured by CEEA surveys, are essential for all schools working on improving teaching, learning, and collegial relationships see, for example, CEP White Paper on Developing and Assessing School Culture.

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    The Science of Genius

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in Character Blog at 10:51 am on July 19, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: continuous improvement, high standards, talent vs practice

    Marthe Seales has just reminded me of this great source for ideas and discussion on the role of genes versus practice in achieving great success — the Blog on Freakonomics. Check it out:

    http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/the-science-of-genius-a-qa-with-author-david-shenk/?emc=eta1

    The comments are fascinating, and there’s abundance of resources for those who need extension materials for Power2Achieve Focus Area 4: Commit to High Standards and Continuous Improvement.

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    DOE Proposes Doubling Federal Funding for Parental Engagement

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in IEE & Partners' News, Power2 Community at 10:51 am on May 18, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply

    U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced the Education Department’s proposal to double the amount of federal dollars set aside for family involvement. The Department also proposed allowing states to use federal funds to hold a competition to generate the best local ideas on family involvement.

    This decision creates additional funding opportunities for schools interested in Power2Achieve programming and extending it from school context to the family.

    In his speech, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan pointed out: “At various times, Congress and the department have promoted parent advisory council meetings, volunteering in school, school-parent compacts, and helping children learn at home. Yet these and other policies have rarely been shown to move the needle on student achievement. It is well-documented—and plain common sense—that parental involvement in a child’s education boosts student learning and improves both behavior and attendance. We know that children with parents who are engaged in their education are less likely to drop out.”

    The DOE press release is available here: http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2010/05/05052010.html

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    CEEA v4.2 Reliability/Validity Reflections

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in IEE & Partners' News, IEE Insider at 4:43 pm on May 10, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , CEEA,

    I just posted current validity information about CEEA v4.2 (formerly, CREE) on IEE’s website. Currently, 12 schools have collected the surveys from at least part of their student body and staff, and we had data from over 20 schools in the fall.

    The preliminary data results can be seen at: http://excellenceandethics.com/assess/CEEA_v4.2_ReliabilityValidity.pdf

    As I shared before, all scales, including the ones added in version 4.2, have Cronbach’s alphas that range from .83 to .94. These are excellent results for the internal consistency of the scales supporting reliability and validity of CEEA. Validity of a survey is further demonstrated by how well the pattern of relationships identified in the data confirms what can be expected theoretically. Let me mention just a couple of observations that point to strong validity of CEEA.

    Individuals tend to perceive themselves more positively than others, especially if they are asked to report on ability, rather than actual behavior. In these data, just as one would expect, students on average report much higher perceptions of their own Competencies of Excellence/Ethics (3.74/3.82), compared to their reports of peer behaviors captured in the scales of Culture of Excellence/Ethics (2.88/2.91).

    When examining the pattern of bivariate correlations in student data, the highest predictors of student competencies and school culture are faculty practices impacting excellence/ethics and faculty support for & engagement of students. At the same time, Student Safety is barely correlated with students’ reports of competencies and strongly correlated with their perceptions of student culture. Again, taken together, this pattern of relationships confirms what would be expected theoretically.

    There is a similar pattern in the faculty data. Faculty give highest responses on the items about their own practices impacting excellence and ethics (4.17 and 4.09). However, in the correlations data, we see that these same scales are just barely correlated with faculty assessments of student competencies and student culture of excellence and ethics (from .111 to .169). Instead, faculty perceptions of what other faculty do (measured by such scales as Faculty Support for & Engagement of Students, Faculty Beliefs & Behaviors) are all much strong predictors of student competencies and culture (from .412 to .553).

    For students, perceptions of peers (the Culture scales) are only modestly correlated with reports of students’ own competencies (from .269 to .306). In faculty data, however, student culture scales are stronger predictors of student competencies than any of the faculty practices/behaviors (from .610 to .688). This is to be expected, as faculty tend to think similarly about students and somewhat differently about themselves and colleagues. (In statistical and research methods language, one would refer to this pattern of findings as evidence of divergent/convergent validity).

    More work remains to be done to collect the remaining data and generate school CEEA (CREE) reports. While giving strong support to the validity of the instrument, these results also identify a range of concerns, such as the discrepancy in faculty’s beliefs about their own work and what happens around them in the school I just mentioned. When studied carefully and discussed with an open mind by school leadership teams and faculty, the CEEA reports should provide excellent entry points for serious dialogue and decision-making for improvement.

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    Fall 2009 EE newsletter is out

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in IEE & Partners' News at 5:01 pm on December 1, 2009 | 0 Permalink | Reply

    For those who missed the Fall 2009 excellence & ethics newsletter, I posted a link to it on our site. You can also go to it directly:

    http://www.cortland.edu/character/newsletters/EE_LETTER_Fall2009_final.pdf

    As always, great job, Tom and Marthe!

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    First CREE-P2L data now available

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in IEE & Partners' News, Power2 Community at 11:08 am on November 25, 2009 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:

    Last week, Cherry Hill Alternative school was the first to receive its CREE-P2L data report. Today, data reports have been delivered to the first three schools in Iowa that completed data collection.

    I have also finished the first round of reliability and validity analyses of CREE-P2L data, and the results are extremely encouraging. Chronbach’s alphas range from .85 to .90 in student data and from .87 to .94 in faculty data, which are excellent. I have posted these findings on the CREE-P2L page on IEE website.

    We are now in position to run data reports quickly for the remaining schools in Kansas and Iowa, and will do so as soon as we get word that they are done with data collection. It is exciting to report that the assessment component of Power2 programming is taking shape, and schools can begin to use their own data for benchmarking, reflection, and planning further efforts.

    • Share/Bookmark
     
  • Vlad Khmelkov

    Fall CREE reports delivered to Ignite

    Vlad Khmelkov posted in IEE & Partners' News at 9:52 am on November 21, 2009 | 0 Permalink | Reply

    This week the last Fall CREE report was delivered to Ignite. IEE has been providing assessment services to schools participating in Ignite programs since Spring 2007. Over 15 schools are scheduled to engage in pretest/posttest CREE-General data collection this year. The posttest will include an additional battery of items to capture the specifics of Ignite-Transitions program.

    Here is how Ignite describes their work:

    “Ignite partners with schools to create a structure to help implement a peer mentoring initiative where upperclassmen mentor the incoming class to impact their Academic Performance and Social Connectedness. Our hands- on, consistent, onsite training and coaching helps keep accountability, results and sustainability high for a school. The results speak for themselves. Ignite also teams up with the schools’ leadership team to help improve staff collegiality. Through coaching and training on promising practices, Ignite can help impact the climate and culture of a building.”

    Check out their redesigned website: http://www.igniteforschools.com.

    • Share/Bookmark