BackgroundPromise Academies play a major role in the District’s plan to “Develop a System of Excellent Schools” (The School District of Philadelphia, 2014). These schools have been identified as “chronically underperforming” and selected by the District to under-go District-managed turnaround (SDP, 2010). Contrary to the popularity of turning around the lowest performing schools in Philadelphia and nationally, research on the effectiveness of turnarounds is limited (e.g.,Calkins, Guenther, Belfiore, & Lash, 2007; de la Torre, Allensworth, Jagesic, Sebastian, Salmonowicz, Meyers, & Gerdeman, 2012).

Project OverviewThe conceptual framework for this study utilizes a theoretical framework that integrates Policy Attribute Theory (Desimone, 2002—from the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) literature) and the Essential Supports (developed by Bryk et al. (2010) from the literature on effective schools) in order to shed light on the possible successes, challenges, and failures of turnarounds and how these success, challenges, and failures arise.

Methods_______________________Using a regression discontinuity design, I will analyze the impact of the Promise Academy turnaround model on student achievement and instruction and explore how the key mechanisms through which this CSR model works relate to the successes and failures of the five Essential Supports. Qualitative methods will be used to contextualize these findings and offer hypotheses to explain variation in both achievement outcomes and Essential Supports.

Research to Practice StrategiesThis study will use mixed-methods research to directly compare, contrast, and link two facets of success—academic achievement on the one hand and determinants of success represented by both the five Policy Attributes and the five Essential Supports on the other—as they apply to Promise Academies. In doing so, this study will aid the District in making “evidence-based revisions to the Promise Academy Model” (The School District of Philadelphia, 2014), and additionally make an important contribution to the growing literature on effective schools and build on Rowan et al.’s (2009) work that underscores the trade-offs in achieving academic success through CSR models (e.g., improving student achievement at the cost of professional

communities and innovation).Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Calkins, A., Guenther, W., Belfiore, G., & Lash, D. (2007). The Turnaround Challenge: Why America’s Best Opportunity to Dramatically Improve Student Achievement Lies in Our Worst-Performing Schools. Executive Summary. Mass Insight Education. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=ED538309

de la Torre, M., Allensworth, E., Jagesic, S., Sebastian, J., Salmonowicz, M., Meyers, C., & Gerdeman, R. D. (2012). Turning around low-performing schools in Chicago. Chicago, IL: Consortium for Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.

Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented? Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 433–479.

Rowan, B. P., Correnti, R. J., & Camburn, E. M. (2009). School improvement by design: Lessons from a study of comprehensive school reform programs. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Policy (pp. 637–651). New York, New York: Routeledge.

The School District of Philadelphia. (2014). Action Plan v2.0. Retrieved from http://webgui.phila.k12.pa.us/offices/a/action-plan

Situating Success: A Mixed-Methods Study of School Turnarounds in Philadelphia

Contact Information

Kirsten HillPenn GSE630.699.0915kihi@gse.upenn.edu

To what extent do varying

levels of Policy Attributes

mediate and moderate the

levels and success of the

Essential Supports?