2010 Public Opinion Survey on K-12 Education in Indiana

Indiana State Board of EducationFebruary 8, 2010

Jonathan A. PluckerTerry E. Spradlin

Rodney S. Whiteman

1

Center for Evaluation andEducation Policy (CEEP)

• CEEP promotes and supports rigorous program evaluation and nonpartisan policy research primarily, but not exclusively, for education, human service and non-profit organizations.

• In the area of K-12 education policy, CEEP’s mission is to help inform, influence and shape sound policy through effective, nonpartisan research and analysis.

• For more information about CEEP, go to: http://ceep.indiana.edu

2

Need for a Survey

• CEEP has conducted the survey in seven of the last eight years (2003-2008, 2010), with no external funding, to provide a standardized, empirical approach to gauge and measure the public perception of Indiana schools and related issues – this is NOT an advocacy poll

• Policymakers and education leaders in Indiana have expressed support for the continuation of this survey

• Year 7 survey was conducted to identify changes in the attitudes and perceptions of Hoosiers since 2003 and gauge opinions on K-12 education policy issues that are now being discussed in the 2011 session of the Indiana General Assembly

3

Telephone Survey• Conducted November 18 through December 4, 2010

• 612 residents of Indiana, all 18+ years old

• Random Digit Dialing (RDD) includes both listed and unlisted numbers

• Minimum and maximum quotas for county, age, and gender to ensure a representative sample of these variables– Gender balance reflected 46% male, 54% female– Race/ethnicity balance reflected: 80.5% white, 8.3% African American, and

5.2% Hispanic

• State and regional results are weighted proportionately to the Indiana population for race/ethnicity, gender, and age

• Phone surveys conducted by professional market research interviewers employed and managed by Stone Research Services

4

Survey Statistics

• Ratio of initial refusals to households successfully screened (1,252/915) was 1.4:1, which is lower than average for RDD samples and down from a 1.9:1 ratio in Wave 6.

• Overall sampling error of +/- 4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. In addition, the sampling error declines when responses are heavily one sided.

5

Survey Development

• A more concise 10-item questionnaire was developed for the Year 7 Survey

• Questions developed from a review of:– regional and national polls– Education Next/Program on Education Policy and

Governance Survey on Public Opinion and the Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Education Poll

– Issues being discussed by Indiana policymakers– Anticipated “hot topics” in Indiana

6

Item Revision

• 2003-2010 Survey questions have been reviewed by:Project staff Indiana policymakers and educational leaders representing

a breadth of perspectives and ideologiesStone Research Services

7

Summary of Year 7 ResuIts

10-question survey examining:A. Overall Education Quality and Governance (Q.1-Q.3)

B. School Funding (Q.4A-Q.5)

C. Teacher Evaluation and Compensation (Q.6-Q.9)

D. Virtual Education (Q.10)

8

(Q.1A) Indiana will soon rate schools using a letter grade rating system. How would you grade public schools in Indiana?

All respondents grading Indiana schools:• A/B: 38.3% C: 37.1% D/F:

12.7%

• By race grading A/B: Whites: 39.7% Non-whites: 31.4% African Americans: 28.3% (28.6% D/F)

• By Income grading A/B:<35K: 38.2% 35K-50K: 25.8%50K-75K: 32.6% 75K+: 47.7%

• By region grading A/B: Northern: 42.6% Central: 33.7% Southern: 41.3%

9

A/Excellent B/Good C/Fair D/F/Poor DK / NA0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

1A. Public School Quality in Indiana

2003200420052006200720082010

(Q.1B) How would you grade public schools in your community?

10

Respondents grading local schools:• A/B: 59.1% C: 22.9% D/F: 13.4%

Subgroups grading as A/B:• Whites: 63.0% Non-whites:

39.3%

• <35K: 54.9% 35K-50K: 51.9%50K-75K: 57.4% 75K+: 68.0%

• HS or less: 57.3% Some college: 51.7%

College grad or more: 69.4%

• With children in school: 64.8% With children NOT in school: 53.9%

A/Excellent B/Good C/Fair D/F/Poor DK / NA0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

1B. Community Public School Quality in Indiana

2003200420052006200720082010

(Q.2A) Over the past five years, has the academic performance of public schools in Indiana gotten better, worse, or stayed about the same?• All Respondents (2010):Better 20.2% Worse 25.9% Same 45.5%• All Respondents (2008):Better 27.8% Worse 20.6% Same 41.8%

• Age 35-44Better 16.6% Worse 41.2% Same 33.9%

• Whites:Better 21.3% Worse 25.3% Same 45.3%• Non-whites:Better 14.4% Worse 28.7% Same 49.2%• African Americans:Better 10.9% Worse 35.0% Same 49.7%

• MaleBetter 16.0% Worse 23.1% Same 52.7%• FemaleBetter 23.9% Worse 28.4% Same 39.3%

11

Better Same Worse DK / NA0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

2A. Change in Statewide Public School Quality in Idiana over Past

Five Years

2006200720082010

(Q.2B) Over the past five years, has the academic performance of public schools in your community gotten better, worse, or stayed about the same?

12

Better Same Worse DK / NA0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

2B. Change in Community Public School Quality in Indiana over Past

Five Years

2003200420052006200720082010

• All Respondents (2010):Better 24.7% Worse 21.5% Same 51.0%• All Respondents (2008):Better 29.4% Worse 16.0% Same 46.6%

• Age 18-34Better 27.3% Worse 17.0% Same 52.9%• Age 35-44Better 22.3% Worse 26.8% Same 45.7%

• Whites:Better 25.8% Worse 19.8% Same 51.9%• Non-whites:Better 19.1% Worse 28.2% Same 48.4%

• HS or lessBetter 20.9% Worse 24.7% Same 45.4%• Some collegeBetter 17.0% Worse 31.4% Same 44.3%• College grad or moreBetter 22.9% Worse 21.9% Same 46.6%

(Q.3) A school is placed on academic probation if they do not meet annual goals for student academic growth. Assume you have a child attending a public school that has been placed on academic probation by either the state or federal government. Which improvement strategy would you prefer?

Every subgroup’s top preference was “Transform School”

Preferences of ALL respondents:

• Transform school: 65.9%• Turnaround school: 7.6%• Offset tuition: 6.5%• Restart school: 5.4%• Close school: 2.1%• None/no preference: 12.6%

13

Offset Tu

ition

Transfo

rm Sc

hool

Turn

around Sc

hool

Restart

School

Close Sch

ool

None / No Pref

erence

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

3. Options for Student Success in Public Schools Placed on Academic

Probation

(Q.4A) Overall, do you think the level of funding for public education in Indiana is more than enough, enough, or not enough to meet the learning needs of students?

Responding “More than enough” or “enough”

All: 31.1% “not enough” = 65.5%

• Male 39.9% Female 23.5%

• White 33.0% Non-white 20.9%

• Children in school 26.7% Children NOT in school 35.0%

14

More Than Enough

Enough Not Enough DK / NA0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

4A. Adequacy of Public School Fund-ing in Indiana

2006200720082010

(Q.4B) When including all expenses, school districts spend about $10,000 per year per student. Do you think this level of funding for public education in Indiana is more than enough, enough, or not enough to meet the learning needs of students?

15

More Than Enough

Enough Not Enough DK / NA0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

4B. Adequacy of Schoold District Spending Per Student

2006200720082010

All respondents “More than enough”/“enough”: 45.0% “Not enough”: 47.8%

• By gender “more than enough”/“enough” Male 52.0% Female 39.0%

• By race “more than enough”/“enough” White 46.7% Non-white 35.6% (African American “not enough”: 76.4%)

• School-age children “more than enough”/“enough”:

In school 41.2% NOT in school 46.8%

• By region “more than enough”/“enough” and (“not enough”):

Northern 42.8% (50.7%) Central 43.2% (49.2%) Southern 55.7% (37.0%)

(Q.5) It has been suggested that one way public schools could save money is by negotiating or joining less expensive health insurance plans. Which of these health insurance options would you prefer?

All Respondents Join unless less expensive

negotiated 46.1% Negotiate own 27.4% Required to join 15.6%

All subgroups except by race/ethnicity held same order of preference

Join Negotiate Required• White 46.6% 28.2% 14.0%• Non-white 45.8% 22.5% 22.6%

– Black 49.2% 15.6% 28.3%– Hispanic 41.8% 36.2% 11.6%– Other 43.7% 17.1% 26.2%

16

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%

5. School District Health Insurance Plans

2010

(Q.6) Typically, a teaching license can only be obtained through participation in a college or university-based teacher preparation program. Would you support or oppose allowing anyone who is a college graduate the option of obtaining a teaching license by participation in a teacher-preparation program through a state-approved non-profit organization instead of through a college or university?

Responding “completely” or “somewhat” support All 55.2%

• Male 62.0% Female 49.3%

• White 54.0% Non-white 63.3%

• By education:HS or less 50.4%Some college 54.3%College grad or more 61.7%

17

Completely Support

Somewhat SupportNeither

Support nor Oppose

Somewhat Oppose

Completely Oppose

DK/NA

6. Support for Alternative Paths to Teacher Certification

(Q.7) In your mind, what do you think should be the purpose for evaluating teachers: helping them improve their ability to teach, establishing their salaries based upon their skills, or documenting ineffectiveness that could lead to dismissal? Choose all that apply. All respondents:Helping improve 88.9%Documenting ineffectiveness 74.3%Establishing salaries 59.1%

All subgroups shared the same order of preference

18

Helping T

each

ers Im

prove

Documen

ting Ineff

ective

ness

Estab

lishing S

alarie

s

None of T

hese

DK / NA

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

7. Purpose of Teacher Evaluations

(Q.8) Which of these factors should a teacher’s evaluation be based on? Choose all that apply.

All respondents:Student improvement 80.8%Principal’s observations 66.8%Improvement on tests 53.9%Student conduct 42.8%

Nearly all subgroups shared the same order of preference, except:

• College grad – 68.0%, 69.4%, 37.2%, 30.1%

• Hispanic– 92.5%, 72.7%, 79.7%, 46.3%

• Other minority– 86.1%, 49.0%, 62.6%, 55.4%

• All non-white– 90.8%, 72.9%, 74.1%, 42.7%

19

Studen

t Clas

sroom Im

prove

ment

Princip

al's O

bserva

tions of T

each

ing

Studen

t Testi

ng Impro

vemen

t

Studen

t Conduct

None of T

hese0.0%

10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

8. Factors Included in Teacher Evalua-tion

2010

(Q.9) Which of these factors should teacher compensation be based on? Choose all that apply.

All respondents top three:Student achievement 75.4%Teacher’s education 65.2%Principal’s observation 63.7%

Subgroups’ preferences in order on chart (top three in bold)• Male 77.4%, 56.3%, 61.4%, 61.2%, 63.6%• Female 73.7%, 59.0%, 68.6%, 65.8%, 54.1%• White 74.3%, 56.1%, 64.8%, 63.1%, 55.4%• Non-white 78.8%, 65.3%, 68.9%, 65.8%, 73.1%

All subgroups’ #1 preference was student achievement, except: College grads (Teacher’s education, 73.7%) 20

Studen

ts' Ach

ievem

ent in

Classro

om

Teach

er's Y

ears

of Exp

erien

ce

Teach

er's E

ducation Le

vel

Princip

al's O

bserva

tion of the T

each

er

Studen

ts' Im

prove

ment o

n Stan

dardize

d Tests

DK / NA

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%

9. Factors in Teacher Compensation

2010

(Q.10) Classes offered over the Internet are often called “virtual learning.” Which of the following do you feel are appropriate uses of virtual learning in high schools? Choose all that apply.

All respondents (in order on chart):88.3%, 84.6%, 71.3%, 58.0%, 53.9%

Most subgroups held same order of preference, except:• Male88.1%, 83.0%, 64.1%, 53.0%, 54.2%

• Age 35-4494.8%, 89.0%, 77.8%, 54.4%, 58.7%• Age 45-5485.9%, 86.0%, 71.1%, 64.7%, 51.0%• Age 55-6486.0%, 84.1%, 65.0%, 50.1%, 56.3%

21

Provid

ing Adva

nced Course

s

Support

for At-R

isk St

udents

Path to

Diploma for H

igh Sc

hool Dro

pouts

Recove

ring C

redits

from Fa

iled Course

s

Reliev

ing Sch

edulin

g Conflict

s

None of T

hese

DK / NA

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

10. Use of Virtual Education

2010

Conclusions

22

Conclusions

A. Overall Education Quality and Governance

Favorable ratings of schools down slightly with more Hoosiers viewing overall quality of schools across the state as average and showing no improvement

Yet, respondents still highly regard their own community schools

Though most say the quality of schools across the state has stayed the same, for the first time in the history of the survey more respondents say overall quality has “gotten worse” than those indicating schools have “gotten better”

Respondents want taxpayers dollars to remain in public education to improve schools and teacher/principal quality (via transformational model)

23

Conclusions (cont.)

B. School Funding

Perhaps due to economic conditions (e.g., high unemployment rates) and state budget cuts (including to public schools), more Hoosiers believe that current level of funding for public education is not enough

Respondents want local flexibility for school districts to find lowest-cost option for health insurance plans, but if less expensive option not available then school systems should join state plan

24

Conclusions (cont.)

C. Teacher Evaluation and Compensation

Hoosiers support broader options for teacher preparation programs and multiple measures/criteria for teacher evaluations and compensation

25

Conclusions (cont.)

D. Virtual Education

Citizens are very supportive of the use of virtual education, especially for providing advanced courses, supporting at-risk students with remediation/credit recovery, and a pathway to a high school diploma for dropouts

26

CEEP Contact Information:

Jonathan A. Plucker, Ph.D.Director

Terry E. Spradlin, MPADirector of Education Policy

Rodney Whiteman

1900 East Tenth StreetBloomington, Indiana 47406-7512812-855-4438Fax: 812-856-5890http://ceep.indiana.edu

27