Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DOCUMENT RESUME
ill) 090 648 BA 006 093
AUTHOR Horner, Wayne M.TITLE Feasibility Study -- Educational. Baseline. A Simulation
Notebook.PUB DATE May 74NOTE 24p.; Paper presented at National Seminar on
Year-Round Education (6th, Chicago, Illinois, April30-May 3, 1974)
EDRS PRICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.50 PLUS POSTAGEDESCRIPTORS Administrator Guides; Educational Assessment;
Educational Change; Educational Needs; *EducationalPlanning; *Extended School Year; *FeasibilityStudies; *Instructional Systems; Models; ProgramPlanning; Seminars; *Year Round Schools
ABSTRACTA review of assessment and planning aids is presented
to provide the local school district with a practical and atheoretical framework on which to base its planning for a feasibilitystudy of a year-round school program. The first and most crucialdecision that must be made is the determination that educationalprograming is the basis on which any school program will operate.Unfortunately too many school districts have attempted to determinewhat calendar design would be most appropriate for their community asa first priority. No such plan can be undertaken adequately withoutfirst determining the impact of the plan on the educational programof the district and the extent to which such a plan facilitates orinhibits the achievement of the community educational goals. It isimportant to incorporate educational baseline data-- includinginformation about the curriculum as a part of the feasibility study.Related academic information including student tost scores, dropoutrates, percentage of students in various programs, and otherpertinent data should also be a part of the study. (Author/DN)
F
x'
T ,
'"
leASAI_AID 110tICATIO.11AiLustutit
A:simuLAirloN tiovz
7%.
DEPARTMENT*, HEALTH,EDUCATION WELFARENATIONAL INSTITUTE OP
EDUCATION'Nis DOCUMENT HAS SEEN REPRObuCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED PROM1HE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINAt 1No IT POINTS Or VIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED 00 NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OF FICIAL NATIONAL, INSIITutt ccEDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY
rtrVr- "'X 1/4
'); 'arr. .k4'
'k _
4 'S
.,'` -'1,'"-- '`:' ''''''''''' - ',' 1,-'-''
: :-' ". t>I , ,' ,T,
''' - ,-- . 'it
1
i,:-` :
'-'':
:-1.!-.0,'i; '-., . ", riESEEu
7,
s
. ''..,,', ',4--;_--,,,,.'-,[. ... . . ...
6TH NATIONAL _SEMINAR ON. YRO-R.00*-E1)1,$040tON-,'.;-',' `, ' -' --.-...-,--.;..:-..I '
.,CHICAGO, /LLINOTS , . ; -,,,_:',----;
4 '...,..!.-..:-..
-,, ,!,..)
-44-9.-<<,,r;.t: r''',. I '',,'f'4AAPRI1, 30 MAY 3, 1974
," _-
4. ,_4" 4 f "by
WAYNE 14 l'1017011t HEAP.
:AA DIVISION OP cirpovidittt 'AND-41ISTRVq11014
COLLEGE 'OP MVOVIRGINIA POLYTHCHN..tO4...._:-0011
;4''
', '' 2- '--
'
, 7,' ., ',1'
-
.
,
. .
,
,
r
,- -
-'
.
T
4
r
!
,
7
' s
'
-
1
, 4 4 - ' ,
4 9-
"
.
4,
;TT ..-
'. :.
T/'
-,.
-4
, ,. - 4
`
.
_.4
1
.'-
". '
T
7
"
.
4
`
;'
7
T
1'
:,:7,
,7, ,
.1:
,.,
,
, '
7,,:1.,.,,',tt
4
..4.
4 . 4
'r,
t
T
'
.4 .
:'
',, r1":7
4 1'
''
e
'
'4
7
,
?
,
-r
,
. TT
-4
9 44 ..4
'.;4-;;''k
4,544. 4-
4 . T 4-1;
FEASIBILITY STUDY-EDUCATIONAL BASELINE
Dr. Wayne H. Worner, HeadDivision of Curriculum andInstructionCollege of EducationVirginia PolytechnicalInstitute arid State University
INTRODUCTION
The development of educational baseline data as an integral part of
a feasibility study for whatever purpose is obviously a most important
task. Three assumptions are presented here for the sake of clairifi-
cation.
Assumption 1
In orde. to deal with the concept of "educational baseline", it is
necessary first to define the componentn which will be addressed
in this portion of the simulation notebook. Since the term is general
rather than specific, the presentation will exclude or de-emphasize
certain components which might ordinarilly be incorporated in the
development of a total and comprehensive developmental model.
Exclusions are based upon the assumption that certain major:
components will be addressed in other presentations included as a
part of this notebook.
Assumption 2
It is assumed that the primary utility of the instrumeits developed
for the simulation notebook will be the assessment of current
programs in the light of predetermined goals for a school unit.
YRE 2
Needless to say, investigation of alternative forms of calendar
design, instructional reform, staffing patterns or facility
utilization are inappropriate if indeed, those charged with planning
the operation of schools have not der' mined, in advance, the
outcomas they wish to achieve in a school system.
Assumption 3
No one set of guidelines or instruments can be uniformly helpful.
Schools and their communities differ subsLantially in terms of
their wealth, constituency, size, economic and demographic char-
acteristics as well as a host of ether variables. Ideal models
for planning often presume certain pre-existing conditions which
make them unusable to many segments of a total population.
An awareness of this condition is present and certain adjustments
have been made in the materials presented to reflect that aware-
ness and in Ms attempt to provide tools which might be helpful.
FEASIBILITY STUDIES
The design and utilization of feasibility studies is not new to
education. It should be noted, however, that the majority of
these studies were not prompted by a desire to test a new or
modified structure against pre-established educational goals.
More often, extenuating circumstances in the community literally
forced examination of the concept of year-round education as a
possible solution to various problems.
YRE 3
Dr. Linda Leffel (1973), in a comprehensive research study
conducted in 1973, surveyed all currently operating programs and
found that over 1/3 of the operational programs identified
1
....to increase space or use school facilities twelve months",
as the major impetus behind the development of operating programs.
Conversely, Monroe and Farmer (1973), in their research for the
Virginia State Department of Education found "experts" throughout
the nation predicting:
....increased student achievement"
....improved student aLcitude"....curriculum revision/improvement"....individualization of curriculum"
as the four highest ranking predicted long range benefits of yeat
ro'rnd education.
The point of this discussion is that the design of a feasibility
study might well differ based upon whether or not the excercise
is undertaken as a theoretical/hypothetical investigation or as
an action-oriented response to a set of extant problems.
Edvlational theorists have,for no leng,ignored the difference
between the "theoretical/ideal" and the "pragmatic/ieal".
The design and instrumentation provided herein,hoPefully merges
the two extremes into a foremat which can be utilized or simpli-
fied relatively easily depending upon local school situations.
Planning for Change
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figure 1, Program Assessment Guide
yRE 4
Fag
5
6
Figure 2, A Planning Process 7
Figure 3, Planning Instructional Systems (System I, Phase 1) 11
Figure 4, Planning Instructional Systems (System I, Phase 2) 12
Figure 5, Planning Instructional Systems (System I, Phase 3) 13
Figure 6, Planning Instructional Systems (System II, Phase 2)14
Figure 7, District Planning Model (part 1) 15
Figure 8, District Planning Model (part 2) 16
Figure 9, Feasibility Study (A Planning Model) 17
Figure 10, Program Planning and Assessment 19
Feasibility Study-Educational Baseline 20
Summary 23
YRE 5
PLANNING FOR CHANCE
The following review of .assessment and planning is presented
to provide the local school district with both a practical and
theoretical framework upon which to base its planning (feasibility
study).
The first instrument is taken from the Association of School
Business Officials (ASBO) Task Force Report and Recommendations(1969),
for development of an Educational Resource Management System
(ERNS). The instrument can be modified by adding descriptive
information to each force field continuum by placing numbers
along the continuum and by adding or discarding variables. In
this 'day the instrument can be used both as an assessment tool
and a goal setting device. Additionally, groups of parents,
teachers, administrators or other populations can compare status
evaluations and goal perceptions. Varying modifications such
as Q-sort can be used to place priorities on the various goal
statements. (See Figure 1)
Systematic planning includes not only goal setting and assessment
but a variety of other tasks leading to a decision to modify the
syStem or retain it as is. Dr. Leffel (1973 in her study which
compared characteristics of school districts operating year-round
programs with the planning styles they employed, described a
planning model and its components as follows:
The basic components of the model are depicted inFigure 2 (Brieve et.al., 1973). A description of each ofthe components is provided. These descriptions were usedto develop the planning procedures for year-round edu-cation in each component. In addition, procedural state-ments were drawn from a further delineation of specificaspects of the general planning model, year-round education
STATEMENT
MARKING SYSTEM OF
A-B-C-D-F
GRADED CLASSROOMS
K THRU 12
PRESCRIBED
CURRICULUM
ROTE LEARNING
FACTS AND SKILLS
EGG CRATE CLASSROOMS
AND TEXTBOOK LEARNING
STANDARD CLASS SIZE
AND PERIODS
ONE TEACHER FOR EACH
CLASS
CERTIFICATED TEACHERS
ONLY
180-SIMOOL DAYS
UNIFORM HOURS
FIGURE 1
WHERE IS YOUR SCHOOL?
WHICH WAY ARE YOU GOING?
CONTINUUM
STATEMENT
EVALUATION OF GROWTH
FOR EACH STUDENT,
NON-GRADED CMT1NUOUS
PROGRESS
---- LEARNERS ACTIVELY
PARTICIPATING
PROBLEM SOLVING
CONCEPT CURRICULUM
FLEXIBLE SPACE AND
MATERIALS
FLEXIBLE LEARNING
CONDITIONS
TEAMS OF TEACHERS
FOR LEARNING
DIFFERENTIATED HUMAN AND
TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES
YEAR ROUND, OPEN TO
COMMUNITY
ESTABLISHGOALS
a MODIFYSYSTEM
EVALUATEPROCESS
ANDPERFORMANCE
DEVELOP ANDI MK EMENT
PROCESS00JECTIVES
SELCCTALTERNATIVES
ASSESS'NEEDS
IDENTIFYRESOURCES
ANDRESTRAINTS
INFORMATIOt,
SYSTEM FORMULATEPERFORMANCE
OBJECT IVCSAND
PRIORITIES
ANALYZEALTERNATIVES
'GENERATEALTERNATIVES
Figure 2
A Planning Process
V
YltE 7
Yid 8
feasibility and evaluation studies, and educational plan-ning literature.
Planning Arena. Planning occurs within a frameworkwhich acknowledges that the goals and cultural values ofsociety will and should influence the educational goals andaccomplishments of the system. All school systems operatewithin an external environment which brings pressure tobear (3tufflebeam et.al., 1972). The planning processshould produce creative ideas, but it must also functionwithin established boundaries (Savard, 1967).
Information System. Central to the model is an inform-ation system which continlally feeds information into anddraws data from each of the components in the planningprocess. This system for storage and retrieval of infor-mation is designed by determining (1) what kind of infor-mation is needed for planning decisions, (2) what type ofdecision will be made with the information, and (3) whowill use the information to make a decision.
Establish Goals. This component of the planningprocess provides for the determination of educationalgoals. Educational goals are general statements of purposewhich give direction to all programs and processes of thesystem. A goal is defined as an explicit statement of whatis desired, and it must be capable of being measured andattained. Goals are classified as student performance goalsor process goals. Those which relate to what students willaccomplish by participation in the program of the systemare termed student performance goals. Process goals indi-cate what teachers, principals, and others will do tofacilitate the accomplishment of student performance goals.The goals determined within this component are priorityranked. It is important that the goals be established withinput from both within and without the school system sothat they may serve as a focal point for the system andcommunity. Major adjustments that involve or relate to thetotal school system and community must involve all who areinteracting to produce the change (Kreitlow and MacNeil,1970).
Assess Needs. This component of the planning processdetermines what, if any, discrepancy exists between thestate of the system as it is and as it is desired interms of the goals of the system. A need is defined asthe discrepancy which exists between where a system is andwhere it desires to go. This need is based on severalcategories of information gathered from a variety ofsources both internal and external to the system.
Identify Resources and Restraints. This componentof the planning process provides for the identification of
YRE 9
positive factors which will support (resources) and thosenegative factors which will hinder (restraints) a systemin achieving its stated goals. Positive and negativefactors internal and external to the system must be identi-fied. In addition, the potency of the factors and thepossible resolution of restraints should be considered.
Formulate Performance Objectives and Priorities.This component of the planning process requires the trans-lation of the general educational goals into manageableand specific statements of desired student outcomes. Theseobjectives must relate to the goal, be measurable or obser-valbe, and specify the conditions and criteria for the desiredachievement. All objectives are not equally important inachieving system goals and Oust be priority ranked(Tempkin, 1970).
Generate Alternatives. The planning process re-quires the creative identification of as many ways aspossible for achieving each of the objectives. An impor-tant characteristic of a systematic planning process islooking at several alternative ways to achieve objectives.
Analyze Alternatives. In this component of theplanning process, each alternative is analyzed in terms ofits ability to achieve the objective within the frameworkof the resources and restraints internal and external tothe system. Two basic types of criteria are establishedfor the evaluation process. The first type includes allcriteria which deal with the alternative's ability to con-tribute to improved student performance and maximum objec-tive achievement. The second type criteria evaluates thealternative in terms of cost; time to plan, develop, andimplement; and the socio-psychological factors of interest,acceptance, risk, and political feasibility.
Select Alternative. This component of the planningprocess requires a decision on one alternative within theframework of the criteria established in the preceding com-ponent. Human judgment plays a key role in this component.
Developand Implement Process Objectives. Thiscomponent of the planning process provides for identifi-cation of the process objectives necessary for the alterna-tive selected to become operational. Each process objec-tive serves to break down the total job to he done intomanageable parts (Knezevich, 1969). Specifically, eachprocess objective identifies (1) the major activity in-volved, (2) an outcome which should result from theprocess, (3) who is to assume responsibility for implemen-tation, and (4) when the outcome can be observed. Theprocess objectives serve to establish guidelines alongwhich implementation should proceed. Process objectivesprovide the necessary control for goal attainmenC(Cook,1967).
YRE 10
Evaluate Process and Pccformance. This componentof the planning process provides an evaluation design toenable decision makers to have accurate information regard-ing the extent to which the alternative is in realitymaximizing goal attainment. The evaluation design shouldinclude an analysis of the student performance objectives,process objectives, and planning process.
Modify System. This component of the planningprocess provides for changes in the system based on infor-mation provided by the evaluation component and the modi-fication of planning procedures as needed. The entireFrocass is an interacting one, and modification should ta'Ae?lace at any time when information becomes available thata change in the system or planning process should occur(Neal, 1971).
The components in the model are to be followed inthe order presented for the most logical and systematicplanning to occur. However, planners may begin the planningprocess in any component.
While the theoretical model is helpful in that it provides a basic
and sound conceptual design for planning, the operationalizing of
the model is infinitely more difficult and important. The way in
which any school district transfers from theoretical model to a
functional study capability culminating in the decision to operate
a year-round program is, of course, a critical task.
One such model is provided for review. The model is generalized
and could be used as a feasibility study mechanism in most school
districts with minor modification.(Figures 3,4,5,6)
Three additional simplified models are presented. The first,
(figures 7, 8) deals with an actual planning mechanism leading to
a decision on year round programming with a simultaneous optional
plan to accommodate student populations using alternate plans.
The second, which is actually a subsystem of the firsts illustrates
the Activities underway which resulted in the proddction_of a
'feasibility study under pressure of time (lesi than three months);(n8. 9)
SYST
EM
I
PLA
NN
ING
INST
RU
CT
ION
AL
SYST
EM
S
PaN
SE I
'TH
E, `
Tit
r A
LB
AT
IooN
:X.E
D T
OD
EV
EL
OP t*.
A C
T 0
',N;
AD
M. S
TN
.r1:
PRE
P.7
.-R
E P
oS
PAPE
R.
- D
EC
ISIO
N.'
c01:
"Pla
tE
DIS
TR
I r
rr
,-L
OX
PA
PER
OR
RE
AC
TIO
N
PRI
Nttr
Ats
AD
MST
AFF
LE
VE
L
BO
AR
DC
M.D
1IT
TE
E
TE
e..-
-"T
CH
ER
LE
AD
ER
SHIP
QL
Z _
_FO
RM
AL
.,
SYSTEM IPHASE 2
PECtstoNTO
coNTINUF
FIGURE 4
PLANNING STAGE
DETERMTNATIoN ()I: KEY ISSUES TO En .
S V IED AND RESoLVED
B --"=muniNTHE
roNiFtcANce (--4""npospin
CHANGE
Cmu) slimy) BE INVOLVED TN DECISION,
--rpalialsrjraaamiln.em.~110'WHAT INFORMATIoN IS NEEDED TOMAKE DECISToN?
El-
, empapewrommoorms
WHAT INFORMATION (DATA) IS AVAILABLEUPON WHICH TO BASE DECISInii?
.111.1.0110,
HOW WILL ADDITIONAL-NECESSARiINFoRM-ATION/DATA BE GATHERED/DISTRIBUTED?
INIMIN1111071011.M.O111..."
?RR 12
A ESTABLisH TIME FRAME FoR STUDY DATESF(1i 1U AND RECOMNDATIONS
8,
-C_
is.
P,STABLIsHMENT OP coortmITY Anvzscrtyco!tmlirnEs
'ESTABLISH ADMINISTRATIVE-TAsk PGRCEs _
To DEAL WITH MAJOR VABIABLES
);;TAEonli.THActi,gE STUDY GROUP'S TO-BRALwITH WoR vARTA1LES
CoNsciLl wait-
MI
nt$,TniliuTK APPB0PBTATED'ATA '(SEE EVE- SYSTEM .MIS)
MigntIOATt!,4-1)14TAIOGIVAA110.'PBIATP;EXTEBNAL"l'OEARCII E. ETAL.-'DATA
RSTSWOHIRECaN,RF.PotitS ttnt M S coatitr,
co .Try .PRASE
3 -
SYSTEM IPHASE. 3
elersminow
D
FIORE 5 YRE 13
REVIEW a RECOMMENDATION PHASE
oRLEm VERIPICATIoN
PEvilW A) ALTERNATIVE$
AINONNIMMONINIM111M11114.-
REvfn) WPERTINENTMEARCII
REVIEW OF MIS (UTPUT .64\
INTERVIEW'
- ATTITUDE STUDIES-.....
INDEPENDENT REVtEW OP AVAILABLEDATA BY ADMINISTRATIVE STAPP
BACK Tn PHASE I
NO
Mom,BOARD
DEGISI0N
,10111MONIMIONOPMWINNISONIOWNWIIMMINP
DEVELOPMENTOF )
RECOMMENDATInNS
jL
RECAMNENDATIONS. smormn Jr(ADMINISTRATION
-ADM. STAPPDEVELOPREMOSENDATIONFOR BOARD
PRMED WITh
PLANNING FORACTION
GO TnPRASE 4
OPERATE PROGRAM
MA; AWENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
CoMMUNITYADVISoRYCONITTEE
ADMINISTRATIONADVISORY
COMMITTEE
..1/rnEasim
MAKING PROCESS
ADM. STAFF
1E14-
PLAN
R:1)11111PD
'MB 14
7
TEACHERAnvisnRycoreittrEg}
v_
RECOMMENDATIONDEVELOPED
ADM. STAFF
* 0000000 ****. ,f-
NOTE AOTIOWHALVOk-
LOW Ddiqr
APPROVE MTHmoDIftCATNA
DJamb 0-0IWOsitrIY
sithOg -61.1 THE-' fl( 141
1969
JA
NU
AR
YFE
BR
UA
RY
MA
RC
H
SCH
OO
LB
OA
RD
AC
TIO
N
QO
,44:
011
BO
ND
ISS
UE
FO
RN
EE
DE
D F
AC
ILIT
IES
AR
CE
CC
EC
TU
RA
LPL
AN
NIN
G
FISC
AL
PL
AN
NIN
G F
OR
SCH
OO
L Y
EA
R
CO
NT
AC
T W
ITH
PO
SSIB
LE
FON
DM
G A
GE
NC
IES
VIS
MT
ION
S
SPL
IT m
in (
OR
)R
EN
TA
L O
F FA
CIL
ITIE
S
PASS
(BID
DIN
G A
ND
PLA
NS
FOR
OD
NST
RU
CT
ION
BO
ND
ISSU
E
PRO
VIS
ION
STA
FFIN
G
-- F
OR
TE
MPO
RA
RY
impi
rgin
geom
o _
=3
CL
ASS
RO
OM
S
corr
.= W
ITH
USO
E, N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
LA
SSO
CIA
TIO
N A
ND
DE
PT. O
F PU
B.
.1N
ST
./B
UIL
DIN
G M
OD
IFIC
AT
ION
SN
ur c
oNsr
pmcr
ION
AR
CH
ITE
CT
UR
AL
CO
NSU
LT
AT
ION
ED
UC
AT
ION
AL
SPE
CIF
ICA
TIO
NS
STA
FF D
EV
ET
AM
EN
TIN
'SE
RV
ICE
CO
MU
CU
LU
M D
ESI
GN
-AN
DD
EV
EL
OP/
EN
T)
r,pr
vi'r:
1.T
hrig
oRN
AT
-10'
'141
rit,
At.:
46"7
1,V
,
CO
LIM
UN
TT
Y S
TU
DY
AN
D P
AR
TIC
IPA
TIO
N
11
=G
US/
'SE
PTE
MB
ER
OC
TO
BE
RN
OV
EIB
ER
3 D
EC
EM
BE
RJA
NU
AR
Y F
EB
RU
AR
Y M
AR
CH
APR
IL
,CO
NT
INU
E,N
OD
IFIE
D P
RO
GR
AM
ING
(SP
LIT
SIF
E,
RE
TC
..)
OR
NE
W B
ON
D E
LE
CT
ION
S
:CO
NST
RU
CT
ION
IN
PR
OC
ESS
FO
R N
EW
FA
CIL
ITIE
S (N
EW
PR
OG
RA
M P
LA
NIM
IC)
CO
NV
EN
TIO
NA
L P
RO
GR
AM
AD
MIM
ISq-
`RA
T/O
N
BU
ILD
ING
OF
MA
STE
R S
CH
ED
UL
E
CO
MP
'II:A
MO
NO
F PA
TR
ON
AN
D
%.,S
TU
DE
NT
"DA
TA
BA
SE
'C
OIO
UT
ER
', D
ESI
GN
ED
F:/:.
; 197
1B
UD
GE
T
PLA
NN
ING
UT
ILIZ
AT
ION
MA
INZ
EN
AN
CE
AN
D
OPE
RA
TIO
NS
PRO
JEC
TIO
N
SAL
AR
Y A
ND
BE
NE
FIT
'SN
EG
OT
IAT
ION
ION
OF
EQ
UIP
ME
NT
MA
TE
RIA
LS
CO
SAB
MA
TIC
AL
LE
AV
E, V
AC
AT
ION
AN
D P
RO
FESS
IO,L
EA
VE
PL
AN
NIN
PRO
JEC
TE
DPE
RSO
NN
EL
CO
STK
BE
NE
FIT
S ST
UD
FAC
UL
TY
AN
DST
AFF
ASS
IGN
-M
OT
S. A
DM
.ST
AFF
.4!
SSN
MA
Y
1,
YJU
NE
JUL
(B
UIL
DIN
GM
OD
IFIC
AT
ION
AN
D /
OR
CO
NST
RU
CT
ION
IN
PR
OG
RE
SS
':sor
teit,
,axe
mic
urm
DE
VE
LO
PME
NT
/RE
VIS
ION
TIN
IiM
MA
Y
1
TR
AN
SPO
PZA
TIO
,PL
AN
NIN
G A
ND
SCH
ED
UL
ING
7-C
UL
TY
OR
IEN
TA
TIO
NA
ND
"PR
ESC
HO
OL
" W
ICSP
.
FAC
UL
TY
AN
D S
TA
FF /N
SER
VIC
E P
RO
GR
AM
CO
NT
INU
ES
N ,O
F C
ON
TIN
UO
US
PRO
GR
ESS
PR
OG
RA
MT
RIA
LN
,R
EFI
NE
ME
NT
., E
VA
LU
AT
ION
AN
D D
EV
EL
OPM
EN
TO
F IN
STR
UC
TIO
NA
L M
AT
ER
IAL
S
CO
NT
INU
ED
PU
BL
IC iN
FOR
MA
T16
1bu
iliza
rcoN
i
SCH
OO
LO
PEN
SJU
LY
1,
/970
CO
srA
vrnr
cto
:BA
RD
AC
TT
O(i
al1E
R 8
1969
NO
VE
IBE
R
......
.....%
4
INFO
RM
AT
ION
IN IN-S
ER
VIC
ET
O: A
DM
INIS
TR
AT
OD
ISC
USS
ION
CE
RT
IFIE
D-
STA
FFPR
OB
LE
M
NO
N-C
ER
TI
AN
AL
YSI
S
STA
FF...
..00°
*4'4
......
.....0
00
C01
.01
INV
OI.
"I
100"
--17
.qr
rEcr
iort
OF
SIT
AT
ION
S
CO
MM
UN
ITY
Slu
DY
DIS
CU
SSIO
NS
GR
OU
P'IN
TE
RA
CT
ION
INFO
RM
AT
ION
&W
ITS
OR
IEN
TA
TIO
NC
OM
MU
NIT
Y
DE
VE
LO
PIN
G T
HE
INST
RU
CT
ION
AL
MO
DE
L
Otil
laID
AT
ION
S0
CE
NIR
AL
CO
NSO
LID
AT
ION
OF
BU
ILD
ING
DE
VE
LO
PME
NT
OF
CO
MPR
EH
EN
SIV
E-P
LA
N RT
TO
CO
MA
OF
arr
S
CO
NSI
DE
RA
TI
OF
PRO
POSE
DIN
STR
UC
TIO
NA
LM
OD
EL
S)&
SCH
=L
ING
.0,..
.....
alR
EPO
RT
AN
!)R
EC
OM
EN
DA
TI
TO
SCH
OO
L B
OA
RD
'AE18
The third system presents a display of the instructional and
program activities outlihing various program dimensions which
require assessment and evaluation resulting in curricular
decision for the coming year.
The entire sequance of activities occurred in a midwestorn
community during the 18 month period between January, 1969 and
August, 1970. The final outcome of the planning resulted id a
decision not to implement year-round scheduling. The process
did, however; result in a decision to completely revise the
school district's curriculum. Subsequent reorganization of staff-
ing patterns and space utilization combined with a $200,000
curriculum development project culminated in the design of a
sophisticated K-12 continous progress program which merged
differentiated staffing, flexible scheduling, open space and
technology in a totally new "learning systems" concept.
It is difficult, if not foolhardy, to propose a set of guidelines
for establishing an educational baseline for any community.
Recognizing the obvious difficulties in such a task and keeping
in'mind the assumptions and constraints outlined earlier, the
following suggestions are provided without further apOlogy.
UeN
JAN
UA
RY
FE
BR
UA
RY
PR
OG
RA
M-m
azaz
zo,..
10,9
69-7
0
MA
RC
HA
PR
ILM
AY
JID
IE-T
ax
FLA
W=
FO
R S
PLI
TS
CH
ED
ULE
OR
OM
ER
CO
NV
EC
TIC
VA
LIN
Ir
ST
AF
FIN
G A
ND
NE
GO
TIA
TIO
NS
+cc
'
1970
-7S
txV
ICE
S P
LAID
IING
PR
OG
RA
MD
ET
ER
KIN
AT
IO
/1`
mou
rnE
urS
PA
CE
PR
OS
EM
ON
SST
ZT
BY
rx.s
cAt.
PT
AN
NIN
G A
ND
AS
SE
SS
ME
NT
41,1
isso
mM
!.%,
ik4f
tom
mlo
o.'
com
mus
th'F
AC
ULT
Y
)A
TT
ITU
DE
SS
TU
DY
AT
TU
UD
ES
FA
CIIZ
TIF
S D
EC
ISIO
NS
EQ
UIP
MJE
TT
AN
D M
AT
ER
IALS
RE
QU
ISIT
ION
S
rmi
FIN
AN
CIA
L P
LAN
PLA
N
TR
AN
SP
OR
TA
TIO
N P
LAN
ING
1-4
INF
OR
MA
TIO
ND
ISS
EK
DIA
TIM
C,
70-7
1
YRE 20
FEASIBILITY STUDY EDUCATIONAL BASELINE
I. Assessment of Goals and Performance
1, Goal Statements and Expectations
If not available use Figure 1 or comparable device.
School board policy and educational philosophy of the
district should provide the basis for proposed programming
current and projected. If goal statements do not accurately
reflect community expectations they should be changed.
If community expectations are not congruent with professional
educator's goals the community must be educated and expect-
ations changed. If administrators position is substaw.
tiaily different than community and accommodations are
not possible* the administrator should seek other employ-
ment.
2. Assessment of Current Educational Practice
(A) How well are current educational practices meeting
goals?
(B) What goals are not being met?
(1) achievement of students
(2) utilization of facilities
(3) utilization of personnel
II. Decision Making Based on Asking the Right Questions.
1. Generally what factors inhibit --the district from reaching
its goals?
(A) spade-(availAliiiity. tigl.ditY)
WIlliiabilOy-bf'it4ff
YRE 21
(C) parental attitudes
(D) fiscal problems
(E) administrative personnel attitudes and capabilities
(P) school board attitudes
(G) personnel training, eXperience and attitudes
(H) student and parent attitudes
. Specifically what faCtors are important in a decision
relating to year round schools?
(A) Why shoUld such a change be considered?
(B) Are these factors-recognized by the varioul populations
of the district? e.g. staff, parents, taxpayers,
school board, administrators?
(C) What are the financial implications of such a change?
-What are the staffing costs?
-Does the curriculum need to be modified?
-What are the transportation costs?
-What are materials and equipment costs?
-What modifications must take place in buildings?4- (air conditioning)
(D) What impact will such a change have upon, the community?
-Use of churches
-Use of recreational facilities
-Use of school facilities
-Economic impact upon local industry
-Neighborhood groupings
(F)-What impact will such a change have upon ongoing:
-Educational-programs
-Summer school program
YRE 22
-Red Cross swimming program
-Boy Scout and other seasonal camps
-Vocational work experience programs
(F) What impact will such a change have upon staffing?
-How many teachers want full employment?
-How many principals want students in the building
all year?
-How many secretary, food service' custodial and
transportation workers will be effected and in*what ways?
(G) What are the local, state, regional implications of
the change?
-Athletic conferences and regulations
-State department forms
-State aid formula
-Statutes governing compulsory attendance
(H) What will the impact be upon students?
-Summer employment
-Club and other group participation
-Attitudes about school
(I) What impact will such a change have upon-the family?
-Vacation habits
-Working parents
-Students in different schools
(J) What about the energy crisis?
YRE 23
SUMWY
The first and most crucial decision which must be made is the
determination that educational programming is the basis upon
which any school program will operate. Unfortunately too many
school districts have attempted to determine what calendar de-
sign would be most appropriate for their community as a first
priority,
Granted there are many legitimate reasons for considering a
year-round school program. It is possible and reasonable to
move toward A year-round program without requiring or even
considering the curriculum or changes in curriculum as a major
dependent variable.
It should be abundantly clear however, that no such plan can be
undertaken without first determining the impact of tho plan on
the educational program of the district-and OA extent to which
such a plan facilitates or inhibits the achievement of the
educational goals in any community.
As such, it is important to incorporate educational baseline
data including information about the curriculum (present and
hoptd-for) as a part of the feasibility study. Related academic
information including student test scores, drop-out rates, per-
centage of students in various programs and other pertinent data
should be a part-of the study. It is hoped the planning aides
presented'in this paptt will assist the district which wishes to
undertake serious study of-yearround education. There is no guts ion
that the'deWiCesi-CCUEilizedc will prodUce a-Substah4al and re-
levant- "edUcational-basitine'tor-your study; planhini (aid tfon.