Utilizing Secondary Student Voices to Address School

Climate

Megan Pell, M.Ed.&

Kathleen Minke, Ph.D., NCSP

Center for Disabilities StudiesNASP 2014 Annual Convention

Learning Outcomes:Participants will:

1. Learn how to utilize schoolwide survey data in the problem-solving process;

2. Review steps for conducting student focus groups in a secondary setting and

3. Receive recommendations for delivering challenging information to school staff and parents in ways that facilitate change.

.

2

Link to the NASP Practice Model

3

Overview

1. Background to Focus Groups Conducted at “Waterside High”

2. Why Focus Groups?

3. Focus Group Process at “Waterside High”

4. Data Analysis and Delivery of Results for “Waterside High”

5. Conclusion and Questions

4

“Waterside High”

Demographics:• Public school with 1,300+ students total, Grades 9 -12• Students

• Come from suburban and urban communities• Represent diverse ethnic/racial and SES backgrounds

Spontaneous High Profile Issues at the School:• Student-to-student assaults• Weapons and arson-related incidents

Looking at Climate in Multiple Ways• Has SW-PBS team and school climate committee but limited

communication between• Delaware School Climate Survey

5

Background to “Waterside High” Focus Groups:

6

Several high profile incidents at a high school

• Discussions among School Climate Committee Members

• Discussions with School Administration

Outreach to the DE-PBS

Project

1. Reviewed the HS’s Delaware School Climate Survey (DSCS)

2. Coordinated communication across stakeholder groups

3. Led and Reported on 3 Student Focus Groups

1. Reviewed the HS’s Delaware School Climate Survey (DSCS)

7

2011 Delaware School Climate SurveysStudent Survey Teacher/Staff Survey Home Survey

Part I

Teacher-Student Relations Teacher-Student Relations Teacher-Student Relations

Student Relations and Safety Student Relations and Safety Student Relations and Safety

Fairness of Rules Rules and Expectations Rules and Expectations

Clarity of Expectations

Teacher-Parent Relations Teacher-Parent Relations

Total School Climate Total School Climate Total School Climate

Part II

Positive Techniques Positive Techniques Positive Techniques

Punitive Techniques Punitive Techniques Punitive TechniquesSocial-Emotional Learning Techniques (SEL) SEL SEL

1. Reviewed the HS’s Delaware School Climate Survey (DSCS)

8

2011 Delaware School Climate SurveysStudent Survey Teacher/Staff Survey Home Survey

Part I

Teacher-Student Relations Teacher-Student Relations Teacher-Student Relations

Student Relations and Safety Student Relations and Safety Student Relations and Safety

Fairness of Rules Rules and Expectations Rules and Expectations

Clarity of Expectations

Teacher-Parent Relations Teacher-Parent Relations

Total School Climate Total School Climate Total School Climate

Part II

Positive Techniques Positive Techniques Positive Techniques

Punitive Techniques Punitive Techniques Punitive TechniquesSocial-Emotional Learning Techniques (SEL) SEL SEL

9

10

Specific DSCS items of concern at this school…

Teacher – Student Relationships

62% of students agreed that teachers care about their students

92% of teachers agreed (30% difference)

63% of students agreed that teaches treat students of all races with respect

88% of teachers agreed (25% difference)

Student – Student Relationships

26% of students agreed that students treat each other with respect

46% of teachers agreed (20% difference, both less than 50% agreement)

41% of students agreed that students get along

67% of teachers agreed (26% difference)

11

Specific DSCS items of concern at this school…

Fairness of Rules & Clarity of Rules

70% of students agreed that the rules are clear

64% of teachers agreed (6% difference, teachers more negative)

63% of students agreed that teachers treat students of all races with respect

88% of teachers agreed (15% difference)

Students Feeling “Safe” in School

46% of students agreed that students feel safe in this school

64% of teachers agreed (18% difference)

Global “Liking” Question

42% of students said they like the school.

74% of teachers said they like the school (32% difference)

Background to “Waterside High” Focus Groups:

12

Several high profile incidents at a high school

• Discussions among School Climate Committee Members

• Discussions with School Administration

Outreach to the DE-PBS

Project

1. Reviewed the HS’s Delaware School Climate Survey (DSCS)

2. Coordinated communication across stakeholder groups

3. Led and Reported on 3 Student Focus Groups

Structuring meaningful focus groups

“The focus group operates on the assumption that the whole is

greater than the sum of its parts. In other words, the choice of

focus groups is not justified simply by being an efficient

alternative to conducting, say, seven interviews in sequence.

Rather, the method depends on the interaction of the group to

stimulate participants to think beyond their own private thoughts

and to articulate their opinions.” (Kleiber, 2004, p.91).

13

Collaborative Decision-Making Process

14

School Climate Committee Members

Discussions with School Administration

Student Selection Criteria

Permission Slip

Time Frame

Focus GroupQuestions

Selection Decisions Made Across Stakeholders

15

Focus Groups Needed to be Diverse

Primary Area of Diversity: Engagement in extracurricular and academic activities (3 groups)

1. highly engaged2. less engaged3. mixed engagement

Secondary Areas of Diversity (within groups):• Representation of grades 9-12• Representation of different demographics:

• racial/ethnic • gender

Permission Slip Process

16

Permission letters explained the what and why of the focus groups:• students were selected to share their “thoughts” about the school’s climate in one

of several focus groups• a school committee (of students, parents, and staff) has asked an outside agency

to conduct the focus groups to: • “gather some more information about how students see the school

climate” • give students “the chance to provide their point of view about how they

think [the school] can be the best it can be”

They also explained important details:• Dates, time, length of sessions• Protection of student individual identity in report• Voluntary participation; right to withdraw• Contact information for further details

17

•17 students total• 3 groups by academic and extracurricular engagement:

• highly engaged

• less engaged

• mixed engagement

• 9th grade – 12th grade representations across groups• 7 African-American, 8 Caucasian, 2 other• 11 female students, 6 male

Final Student Participation

Lessons Learned

18

• Provide school with templates for family outreach and requesting student participation.

• Be prepared to negotiate with parent-led group and administrative team regarding structure of the focus group activity.

• Consider multiple factors in identifying a diverse group (i.e., race and grade level were not the primary differences between students at this school).

Background to “Waterside High” Focus Groups:

19

Several high profile incidents at a high school

• Discussions among School Climate Committee Members

• Discussions with School Administration

Outreach to the DE-PBS

Project

1. Reviewed the HS’s Delaware School Climate Survey (DSCS)

2. Coordinated communication across stakeholder groups

3. Led and Reported on 3 Student Focus Groups

Determining the Questions

• Developed guiding questions to match main sections of the Delaware School Climate Survey

• Collaborated with administration and school climate committee to review the questions

20

Welcome Survey

21

Student-Student Relationships

22

Probe further for specific issues, as needed:

•Lots of high schools have groups or cliques that may not get along. Does this happen here?

•Does race or ethnicity play a part? How?

[Give respondents a chance to name a second or third problem so that you develop your understanding of the major concerns.]

Think for a minute about how students in this school get along with each other. What do you think the main problems are?

So that everyone has a chance to talk, please start with what you think the single biggest problem is that keeps kids from getting along better.

Student-Teacher Relationships

23

Focus students as needed:

Again, try to talk first about what you see as the main problem.

Now think for a minute about how students and teachers get along in this school.

What do you think the main problems are?

Rules / Expectations

24

Think for a minute about the rules in this school and the way students are treated when they break the rules. About one-third of students last year reported that the rules aren’t clear and aren’t enforced fairly.

What do you think causes students to feel that way?

We’ve talked a good bit about some of the problems, now we’d like to move to how to

improve things…

25

Student-Student RelationshipsWhat ideas do you have about how to help kids get along better at this school?

Student-Teacher RelationshipsWhat ideas do you have about how to help students and teachers get along better? *

Safety:What ideas do you have about ways to make students feel safer at school?

School Pride:What ideas to you have about ways to make students proud of this school?

Focus Group: Assessment and

Intervention- convey the message that your “organization wants to

listen” (Krueger, 2009,p.11)

- facilitators who demonstrate “empathy and a willingness to learn” can help to break down student caution in focus groups (Stewart et al., 2007,p.140)

- help members engage or participate in decision-making and/or change regarding their social conditionsBloor (2001, p.93)

26

The Facilitator – A Prepared “Outsider”

• Had experience with students of this age group/background

• Followed good group leader skills – summarized points being brought up– made sure all students have the opportunity to participate– found ways to engage all students– kept conversation on-topic

• Aware of potential to bias conversation and change accordingly

• Familiar with the specific focus group’s intent and background

27

Setting Up the Room

• Advisory period • Tables were positioned in a U-shape• Seating cards used to help identify participants• Welcome survey for each student• Door greeter to check and disseminate passes• Microphone in the middle of the table

(make sure to pre-test)• Give each participant a thank you token to take

28

Recording the Data

• Tested and familiarized ourselves with all the recording equipment ahead of time

• Coded all notes by who is speaking• Utilized multiple adults to provide support and feedback

to the facilitator– Validity checker during the focus group– Contributor to the debriefing process

• Facilitator took some notes in real-time but the data recorders took the most detailed notes and recorded the session.

29

The Groups

• Group 1: High Engagement– 8 students– Facilitator had to be sensitive to moving the group to next

topic• Group 2: Low Engagement

– 5 students– Facilitator had to be sensitive to making sure everyone

participated• Group 3: Mixed Engagement

– 5 students– Facilitator had to be especially sensitive to giving these

students opportunities to explain their own ideas

30

Lessons Learned

31

• Make sure the students and school know that certain topics, if discussed, may need to be reported (i.e., imminent danger to a child).

• Have multiple backups in place for audio and other data-collection methods.

• Anticipate some level of chaos so establish ahead of time how you will deal with interruptions and student transitions after the focus group (i.e., passes to class)

• Provide private opportunity for focus group

members to agree or disagree on the discussion points

• Be prepared to deal with “outliers” using good communication strategies.

Analyzing the Data

• Members of the PBS team (including those who were NOT part of the data collection):– Listened to audio files– Reviewed transcripts– Reviewed debriefing notes

• Worked as a group to identify themes that emerged across the interviews

• Came to consensus regarding global themes for a more succinct discussion with stakeholders

32

Report Writing

Final report was brief

•Report included five sections:• Background (1 paragraph, 1/3 pg)• Process (4 short paragraphs, 2/3 pg)• Results (2 ¼ pg, bulleted points)

• What Students Like About the School• Challenges at the School (kept to 2 main themes)

• Potential Avenues of Change (2 pgs., 3 main ideas)• Conclusion (1 short paragraph)

33

Findings

34

Sharing the Report

• Evening meeting• Multiple presenters with PPT and copies of report• Started with the positive aspects of the focus group (2

slides):– The initiative of the school to address challenges.– The enthusiasm of the participating students.– The positive feedback students shared with the school

• Then shared the negative student feedback (3 slides):– Used direct student quotes related to the feedback– Provided additional, specific examples cited by students to

illustrate their points• Concluded with recommendations regarding areas to

address and how (3 slides)– Each slides started with student ideas– Each slide included “Additional Project Recommendations”

35

Reactions the Report

• Helped affirm for some where changes should be made

• Generated support for focus groups as a method

• Members of SW PBS committee were discouraged and disengaged from conversation

• Difficult for adults to accept that students were so aware of some of the challenges

36

Lessons Learned

37

• Prepare adults in advance for the possibility of difficult messages from students.

• Make sure to address anyone unhappy with the results privately after the presentation.

• Be alert to adults’ emotional reactions.

• Have an “action plan” to move forward with responding to the problems identified. Make sure to follow through to regain trust

Conclusions

• Existing data (school climate survey) provide a good start point for problem-solving

• Focus groups are a viable method of learning details on student perceptions

• Careful provision of honest feedback can lead to change…after a period of “digestion”

38

Post-Script

• School staff developed more PD to help teachers better understand the SW PBS program.

• Student SW PBS group reached out to teachers directly regarding their SW PBS buy-in.

• School is developing more relationship-building interventions, including those in the advisory period.

• School is sharing student-led PBS activities with other secondary schools.

39

Questions?

40

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

41

Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (Vol. 5). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M. and Robson, K. (2001). Focus groups in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kleiber, Pamela B. (2004) Focus groups: More than a method of qualitative inquiry. In K. deMarrais & S.D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp.87-102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Krueger, R. A. & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications..

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stewart, D. W., Shamdasani, P. N., & Rook, D. W. (2007). Focus groups: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

See handout for additional free resources to help you conduct focus groups!

Thank You!

Delaware Positive Behavior Supports ProjectCenter for Disabilities Studies

University of Delaware

Delaware Positive Behavior Supports ProjectCenter for Disabilities Studies

University of Delaware

42

Megan Pell, M.Ed.mpell@udel.edu

Kathleen Minke, Ph.D., NCSPminke@udel.edu