Alternative Strategies for Identifying High-Performing Charter Schools in Texas

The Obama administration's recurring policy emphasis on high-performing charter schools begs the obvious question: how do you identify a high-performing charter school? That is a crucially important policy question because any evaluation strategy that incorrectly identifies charter school performance could have negative effects on the economically and/or academically disadvantaged students who frequently attend charter schools. If low-performing schools are mislabeled and allowed to persist or encouraged to expand, then students may be harmed directly. If high-performing schools are driven from the market by misinformation, then students will lose access to programs and services that can make a difference in their lives. Most of the scholarly analysis to date has focused on comparing the performance of students in charter schools to that of similar students in traditional public schools (TPS). By design, that research measures charter school performance only in relative terms. Charter schools that outperform similarly situated, but low performing, TPSs have positive effects, even if the charter schools are mediocre in an absolute sense. This analysis describes strategies for identifying high-performing charter schools by comparing charter schools with one another. We begin by describing salient characteristics of Texas charter schools. We follow that discussion with a look at how other researchers across the country have compared charter school effectiveness with TPS effectiveness. We then present several metrics that can be used to identify high-performing charter schools. Those metrics are not mutually exclusive—one could easily justify using multiple measures to evaluate school effectiveness—but they are also not equally informative. If the goal is to measure the contributions that schools are making to student knowledge and skills, then a value-added approach like the ones highlighted in this report is clearly superior to a levels-based approach like that taken under the current accountability system.

Associations between teacher support and students' fruit and vegetable consumption in low-income elementary schools in central Texas

Background. Similar to parent support in the home environment, teacher support at school may positively influence children's fruit and vegetable (FV) consumption. This study assessed the relationship between teacher support for FV consumption and the FV intake of 4th and 5th grade students in low-income elementary schools in central Texas. Methods. A secondary analysis was performed on baseline data collected from 496 parent-child dyads during the Marathon Kids study carried out by the Michael & Susan Dell Center for Healthy Living at the University of Texas School of Public Health. A hierarchical linear regression analysis adjusting for key demographic variables, parent support, and home FV availability was conducted. In addition, separate linear regression models stratified by quartiles of home FV availability were conducted to assess the relationship between teacher support and FV intake by level of home FV availability. Results. Teacher support was not significantly related to students' FV intake (p = .44). However, the interaction of teacher support and home FV availability was positively associated with students' FV consumption (p < .05). For students in the lowest quartile of home FV availability, teacher support accounted for approximately 6% of the FV intake variance (p = .02). For higher levels of FV availability, teacher support and FV intake were not related. Conclusions. For lower income elementary school-aged children with low FV availability at home, greater teacher support may lead to modest increases in FV consumption.^