1 of 26

Addressing Systemic Factors in School Performance in CPS

December 3, 2024

2 of 26

Achievement and Accountability Presentations Arc of previous meetings

2

October 1

MCAS/Accountability Highlights (ELA & Math 3-8) & Celebrating Schools

October 15

MCAS Deep Dive, including High School & Science MCAS

November 19

Confronting our challenges & detailing next steps

December 3

Understanding the context contributing to school performance

3 of 26

Who/What to Why/How

3

  • CPS has several very high performing schools (celebrated on 10/1/24)
  • Multitude of data points shows CPS with high achievement and impressive growth data (detailed on 10/15/24)
  • CPS struggles with significant achievement disparities across demographics with massive gulfs between most CPS schools and a small number of outlier schools chronically underperforming (profiled on 11/19/24)

The Questions:

Guiding question: How do we maximize CPS students in higher performing seats?

What are the systemic factors that contribute

to disparate outcomes?

4 of 26

Defining Systemic Factors

4

  • “...underlying conditions and processes that shape the way organizations function…”
  • Technical: Policy
  • Adaptive: Cultural
  • Band of Control: Limited
  • Structural: District and community wide implications
  • Historical and circumstantial

5 of 26

Focus 1: Persistence of Disparate Outcomes

5

Focus 2:

Schools Requiring Significant Intervention

6 of 26

ELA MCAS, 2018-2024: Kennedy-Longfellow School

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

Average ELA MCAS Growth

2018

2019

2022

2023

2024

ELA Growth

MODERATE- LOW

MODERATE- LOW

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE-

LOW 6

KLO’s ELA MCAS achievement dipped to a five-year low in 2024. Growth has fluctuated within the moderate category over time.

7 of 26

ELA MCAS, 2018-2024: Fletcher Maynard Academy

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

FMA’s ELA MCAS achievement dipped to a five-year low in 2024.

Growth has consistently been moderate-high.

Average ELA MCAS Growth

2018

2019

2022

2023

2024

ELA Growth

MODERATE- LOW

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE- HIGH 7

8 of 26

Math MCAS, 2018-2024: Kennedy-Longfellow School

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

Average Math MCAS Growth

2018

2019

2022

2023

2024

Math Growth

MODERATE- LOW

LOW

LOW

MODERATE- HIGH

LOW

8

KLO’s math MCAS achievement has been more consistent. However, three of the last five years KLO had low growth.

9 of 26

Math MCAS, 2018-2024: Fletcher Maynard Academy

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

Average Math MCAS Growth

2018

2019

2022

2023

2024

Math Growth

MODERATE- LOW

LOW

MODERATE- HIGH

MODERATE- HIGH

HIGH

9

FMA’s math MCAS achievement has been more consistent.

Post-COVID, FMA has had moderate-high and/or high growth.

10 of 26

% of High Needs Students by School (2024)

Avg. of schools: 55%

10

11 of 26

Grades 3-8 2024 ELA MCAS Results:

11

ELA

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

+ % of High Needs Students Enrolled (sorted by High Needs)

The percentage of high needs students ranges from 34% to 86% across CPS schools.

High Needs: A student is considered high needs if they are designated as:

low income, an English Learner or Former English Learner, and/or a student with disabilities.

12 of 26

Grades 3-8 2024 Math MCAS Results:

12

MATH

% of Students Meeting/Exceeding Expectations

+ % of High Needs Students Enrolled (sorted by High Needs)

And … we see a wide range in outcomes across our schools.

High Needs: A student is considered high needs if they are designated as:

low income, an English Learner or Former English Learner, and/or a student with disabilities.

13 of 26

Systemic Factors

13

  • Controlled Choice Policy
  • Student enrollment
  • Enrollment trajectory
  • Number of schools
  • Concentration of high-need populations
  • Specialized program placements (high-need support programs)
  • Specialized program placements (instructional theme programs)
  • Facilities infrastructure (conditions)
  • Churn (students entering and exiting)
  • Facilities infrastructure (capacity)
  • Class size (hard caps)
  • Preschool programming and matriculation policies
  • Geography
  • Start and end times
  • After-school/extended day programs
  • Demand
  • Transfer policies
  • Waitlist policies
  • School performance
  • Staffing resources

14 of 26

Continuum of Control

14

Infrastructure (capacity)

Controlled Choice Policy

Class size

(contractual) Geography Enrollment Trajectory Enrollment

Staffing Resources Waitlist Policies Transfer Policies Start & End Times

Preschool & Matriculation Policies

Specialized Instructional Programs

Specialized High-Need Support Programs

Concentration of High-Need Populations

Number of Schools Performance Perception Demand

Infrastructure (condition)

Most Important

15 of 26

Systemic Cause and Effects on a District

15

A school district with a controlled choice policy premised on demand, with a declined but steady enrollment, with a strict contractual limit on class size

is likely to experience disparities with respect to enrollment at individual schools that can be exacerbated by flexible transfer policies leading to disproportionate rates of attrition and churn.

16 of 26

Systemic Cause and Effects on a School

is likely to see depressed demand under a

choice-based system that can be exacerbated by disadvantageous logistical considerations like

  • deteriorating infrastructure
  • tiered start/end times, and/or
  • availability of

after-school care or extended day programming.

16

A school serving a disproportionately high-need population

that is experiencing chronic performance challenges evidenced by measurable outcomes data…

17 of 26

Systemic Goals

A school district with declined but steady enrollment in a demand-based school choice context that has significant disparities in outcomes data

17

is obliged to be strategic

and proportionate in its assignment

of all students, but particularly its high-need populations to maximize the number

of high-performing seats across the school district.

18 of 26

KLo and FMA: Compare and Contrast

Kennedy-Longfellow School

Fletcher Maynard Academy

High Need Population

86 % ( # 1)

83 % ( # 2)

2024 State Accountability Percentile & Progress

23; moderate progress

45; substantial progress

2024 ELA MCAS: % of Students

Meeting/Exceeding

17%

26%

2024 ELA Growth

Moderate-Low (40)

Moderate-High (59)

2024 Math MCAS: % of Students

Meeting/Exceeding

29%

34%

2024 Math Growth

Low (35)

High (64)

Facility Capacity

28%%

78%

Demand

10yr avg. of 12th of 12

68% chosen by families identifying as low income

18

19 of 26

KLo and FMA: Two Distinct Paths

Kennedy-Longfellow School

Fletcher Maynard Academy

  • Facility capacity and condition reflects significant systemic challenges for CPS.

  • Cyclical loops growing out of aforementioned systemic factors.

  • Need to analyze Kennedy-Longfellow in a

historical and contemporary context to determine specifically what role the school can and should play within Cambridge Public Schools going forward.

  • Urgency: School assignment process being in January and the DVUS opens in September.
  • Schedule design process underway to capitalize on continuation of expanded learning time.

  • Strong student growth numbers attributable to solid teaching.

  • Strong data in specific demographics,

i.e. African American students, needs to be studied closely and possibly replicated.

  • Consideration of policy changes to provide families in surrounding neighborhood the opportunity to attend FMA.

  • Consideration of potential partnerships for extended day programming.

19

20 of 26

% Students Designated under McKinney-Vento Act (Unhoused)

20

21 of 26

Systemic Factors re: Kennedy-Longfellow (KLo)

21

Issue

Impact

Controlled Choice Policy (transfer, waitlist policies)

Kennedy-Longfellow lacks demand and suffers from significant reputational harm.

Student Enrollment

Low enrollment necessitates disproportionate mandatory assignments.

Enrollment Trajectory

Population studies and census data does not indicate likelihood of increased enrollment.

Class Size Limitation

Small strands at all schools with hard caps on class size exacerbate proportion of mandatory assignments.

Churn/attrition

Lack of choice-based assignments feeds further churn and attrition at disproportionate levels.

22 of 26

Systemic Factors re: Kennedy-Longfellow (KLo)

22

Issue

Impact

Concentration of high-need population

of students

Mandatory assignment skew significantly toward high-need demographics, resulting in significant imbalancing that undermines SES policies.

Specialized programming placements to support high-need students.

Despite some geographic synergy, the primary driver with respect to SEI programming placed at the KLo is available space.

Facilities infrastructure (conditions)

The facilities condition assessment essentially ranked the KLo building first with respect to urgency for renovations and repair.

Facilities infrastructure (capacity)

KLo occupies the second largest building (pre-new construction) in the district despite being the smallest (enrollment) elementary school.

Specialized program placement (thematic instruction)

Potential synergy with specialized instructional programs, i.e. language immersion, lacking.

23 of 26

Systemic Factors re: Kennedy-Longfellow (KLo)

23

Issue

Impact

After-school and extended day programs

Limited options and lack of core content incorporated into extended day programs.

Demand

KLo demand under existing Control Choice policy is lowest in recorded history.

School performance

Achievement, accountability, and growth data are effectively at low points when compared to all other schools across CPS.

Staffing resources

Reflective of the disproportionate high-need population of students KLo is serving, CPS has invested and/or retained significant resources in recent years, but specific strategy as to the basis of the investments

is wanting.

Start and end times tier

KLo is situated near other elementary schools on distinct start/end time tiers, which may have exacerbated its demand issues.

24 of 26

Kennedy-Longfellow School: What can we do?

The CPS leadership team has deliberated extensively over the circumstances surrounding the Kennedy-Longfellow with respect to achievement data, facility condition, enrollment trajectory, and overall posture within the district.

The status quo is unacceptable.

24

Back to guiding question:

How do we maximize the number of high-performing seats?

We believe there are very limited options with regard to KLo’s sustainability as an individual school community.

25 of 26

Kennedy-Longfellow School: What can we do?

  • Resolution should be determined in a timely manner to be fair to students, families, and staff, meaning January 2025 at latest.
  • Any transition must prioritize support for students transitioning to new school community
  • Potential transition must contemplate need for deconcentration of

high-need programming and opportunities for instructional synergies to maximize academic benefits to all students

  • Potential transition should prioritize retention of qualified staff and ensure reasonable and fair treatment

of all employees

25

  • Transition must include plans to minimize prospect of reinitiating cyclical challenges that inflicted harm upon KLo community
  • CPS must maintain a school presence at 158 Spring Street
  • Opportunity for renovations and repairs, noting the limitation of capital investment capacity due to ongoing payments for previous school construction and other capital investments
  • Opportunity for community engagement to discuss successor plans for the Kennedy-Longfellow building.
  • Ultimate goal: maximize the number of CPS students in high-performing seats.

26 of 26

Discussion

26