Frank C. Worrell. Ph.D

1

What Do We Know About Our Male Students and

How Can We Use Data for Decision Making and Intervening with School Problems?

Frank C. Worrell. Ph.D.

2

Outline

• This presentation is divided into three subsections. – Section 1 focuses on how the scientific method is useful in

allowing educators to diagnose and intervene with school problems? It also highlights the probability of making incorrect diagnoses when we rely solely on feeling or gut instincts.

– Section 2 describes data from a variety of sources. To contextualize the problems of males, data are presented for male and female students on achievement as well as attitudes and behaviors related to school success. Data on effective teaching are also presented.

– Section 3 focuses on using data to intervene with students.

3

Fundamental Assumptions

• Student behaviour is a result of the interaction between the student and the school environment.

• Interventions work with most students if they are (a) appropriate,(b) conducted correctly and consistently, and (c) continued for a long enough time period.

• Teachers cannot change students behaviors without changing their behaviours in relation to the students.

• Effective teaching makes a difference in most students, in spite of student background variables.

• Achieving positive change in schools takes time and effort. Good schools are not made in a day.

4

Section IWhy is Scientific Approach Important?

• Imagine a student who is extremely disruptive in class. The school is considering expulsion.

• Why is he behaving the way he does?– If we know the answer to this question, we can help the

student rather than deny him an education.

• What interventions should we try and why?– Should we base our intervention stratgegy on what we

think or feel is wrong with this young man, or should we try a more systematic approach?

5

Possible “Causes” of the Student’s Disruptive Behaviour

• The student never learned how to behave appropriately in class.

• The required class work is beyond student’s current skill level.

• The student is being abused.• The student is getting tremendous support from

other students for the disruptive behaviour.• The student’s parent is dying of cancer.• The student has undiagnosed & untreated ADHD.

6

Which Explanation Feels Right?

• Even if we were to learn that the mother is dying of cancer, does that information rule out the other explanations? Definitely No!

• We need info or data or systematic observations:– What is student’s behavioural history in the classroom?– What are student’s skill levels?– When is student disruptive? One class? First period?– What is the family situation?– Have interventions been tried previously? Did they work?

And so on….– We can only intervene effectively when we have info.

7

Section II: What do we Know?

• We use casual observations all the time.– Our memory that school was “better” long ago.– Media reports about increasing crime statistics.– Media reports about the education crisis.– Casual observations in our classes, schools, and

communities.

• All of these types of casual or non-systematic observations which need to be verified by data.

• What data do we actually have?

8

Data from the Elementary School System

• The next three figures tell us the following:– More males than females are placed in secondary

schools.

– Males outnumber females in repeating the primary school grades until Standard 5. In Standard 5 and the other transitional years, females are more likely to repeat a grade than males.

– On average, more males drop out of primary school than females.

9

Common Entrance Results 1996/1997 (Central Statistical Office,1998)

05

101520253035404550

Percent

Jun. Sec. Schls 5-7 Year Schls Not Placed

MaleFemale

10

Repeater Rate by Gender and Grade(CSO, 1998)

0 5 10 15 20

Infants

Std 1

Std 2

Std 3

Std 4

Std 5

Std 6

Std 7

Percent

FemaleMale

11

Primary School Drop Out Rates by Gender and Grade (UNDP, 2001)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97

MaleFemale

12

Tentative Conclusions

• Even though the entrance examination results to secondary schools suggest that girls are worse off than boys, the picture is more complicated than that.

• Boys are more likely to leave the school system before the secondary school years.

• Boys may be more likely to accept placement in secondary schools when they are not ready to handle the work load and less likely to repeat to go to a “better” school.

13

Data from the Secondary School System

• The next four figures tell us the following:– Although more males than females are placed in

secondary schools (see slide 9), females aged 11 to 16 (Forms 1 to 5) outnumber males in secondary schools.

– Females aged 17 to 19 (Form 6) outnumber males substantially in secondary school.

– Males who perform as well as their female counterparts in Common Entrance make up most of the lower third of the class in achievement in secondary schools whereas the females make up most of the upper third (Kutnick, Jules, & Layne, 1997).

14

Percentage of 11 - 16 year olds in Secondary School (UNDP, 2001)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

T & T

Tobago

St. Andrew/St. David

Nariva/Mayaro

St. Patrick

Victoria

Caroni

St. George

FemaleMale

15

Percentages of 17 - 19 year olds in Secondary School (UNDP, 2001)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Tobago

St. Andrew/St. David

Nariva/Mayaro

St. Patrick

Victoria

Caroni

St. George

FemaleMale

16

Achievement Results from a F-1 Junior Secondary Class (Kutnick, Jules, & Layne, 1997)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

High performing Middleperforming

Low performing

MaleFemale

17

Achievement Results from a F-3 7-Year Prestige School (Kutnick et al.,1997)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Percent

HighPerforming

MiddlePerforming

LowPerforming

MaleFemale

18

Tentative Conclusions

• On the basis of the data from the CSA and the Kutnick et al. (1997) study, one can conclude that more females are more likely than males to complete CXC and ‘A’ Level examinations.

• Females are also more likely to perform up to their academic potential in secondary school than males.

19

The Role of the Teacher

• We now have substantial evidence from studies in the United States that effective teaching makes a difference. This information is summarized in the next two slides (20 & 21).

• Slide 22 presents data on teacher effectiveness and Slide 23 presents data on teacher behaviors in local classrooms and male and female responses to the frequent teacher absences. These findings, from local studies, are summarized on Slide 24.

20

Can Teaching Make a Difference?(TVAAS, 1997)

C umu lativ e E ffe cts of T ea cher Sequenc e on Fif th

G rade M ath S cor es for T wo M etropolit an Sy stem s

44

63

83

61

80

9296

29

40

59

39

50

70

83

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Lo w- Lo w -Lo w

Lo w- Lo w -A vg

Lo w- Lo w -H igh

A vg- A vg-Lo w

A vg- A vg-A vg

A vg- A vg-H igh

H igh- H igh -H igh

Teac her S equence

21

Summary of Findings in Preceding Figure

• The single largest factor affecting academic growth of individual students is the effectiveness of individual classroom teachers - as seen in 2 separate school districts.

• Differences of 50 percentile points were observed in student achievement after only 3 years of effective teaching (i.e., 3 Highs).

• The effects of teacher effectiveness (TE) on student achievement are additive and cumulative.

• As TE increases, low-achieving students are 1st. to benefit.• The top 20% of teachers produce gains in all students.• Students of different ethnicities respond equivalently.

22

Characteristics of T & T Teachers Rated as Effective (Worrell & Pierre, 2002)

1. A belief that they can make a difference with students– They had a strong sense of self-efficacy

2. Conscientiousness– The teachers were organized, reliable, & efficient. They

planned for teaching and followed through on the plans.

3. Number of years teaching– Teachers got more effective with time in classroom.

4. Openness– These teachers were inventive, curious, enthusiastic,

original, & self-reflective. They tried different methods.

23

Teacher Classroom Behaviours from Kutnick et al., 1997

• Teachers did not communicate expectations for student behaviour and learning clearly to students.

• School rules were not on display, nor did students participate in generating them.

• There were many instances when teachers were not in the classroom in secondary schools.– When teachers were absent, female students were more

likely to engage in academic work than males.

24

Characteristics of More and Less Effective Teachers in T & T

• More effective teachers– Efficacious, conscientious, and reflective. Experience

counts if the first two are present.

• Less effective teachers– Poor communication of expectations for academics or

behaviors

– Frequently absent from class.

• Males use time less productively than females when teachers are absent.

25

Student Data Disaggregated by Gender

• Data on phonemic awareness and learning and adjustment behaviors are derived from representative samples of the student population (Hall, Watkins, & Worrell, 2002; Watkins, Worrell, & Hall, 2002; Worrell, Hall, & Watkins, 2002).

• Other data are from the Secondary School Survey conducted by the School Leadership Center and summarized in this presentation (Worrell, 2002).

• Significant Differences are indicated by asterices.

26

Term 1 Phonemic Awareness Scores (Genders NOT Different in Any Term)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1st Year 2nd Year Standard 1

MaleFemale

27

Adjustment Behaviours* in Primary Schools 1

(Normative Sample Pilot)

0 20 40 60 80

Often loses or forgets things

Misbehaves when attending toothers

Improves only for a momentafter correction

Destroys or defaces books

Disrupts by fooling around

FemalesMales

28



0 20 40 60 80 100

Starts fights and rough play

Associates with troublesomestudents

Clowns around, plays sillytricks

Is often the cause of trouble

Uses bad language

FemalesMales

29



0 20 40 60 80

**Tries to dominate same agepeers

Lacks interest, just sits

Not shy but never seeks help

Too lethargic to seek help

Waits for you to greet first

FemaleMale

30

Adjustment Behaviours in Primary Schools 4(Worrell, Hall, & Watkins, 2002)

• Males and females were found to manifest the following adjustment syndromes across grade levels and ethnicity:– Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity (ADH)*, Conduct

Problems, and Underactivity

• Teachers rated males as having significantly more ADH behaviours than girls.

• Males and females did NOT differ on behaviours indicative of Conduct Problems or Underactivity.

31

Learning Behaviours in Primary Schools (Worrell, Hall, & Watkins, 2002)

• Males and females were found to manifest the following learning behavior factors across grade levels and ethnicity:– Attitude Toward Learning

• Behaviors related to anticipation of success, persistence, willingness to accept help, etc.

– Strategy Flexibility• Behaviors related to the way in which tasks are approached

(e.g., not working when in bad mood; using aches as excuse)

• Males and females did NOT differ on either Attitude Toward Learning or Strategy Flexibility.

32

Global, Math*, & English* Self-Concepts in Forms 1 - 5 (Watkins, Worrell, & Hall, 2002)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

English Self-Concept

Math Self-Concept

Global Self-Concept

MaleFemaleT & T

33

Reported Grades* Earned in School

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Govt

Assisted

FemaleMale

34

Hours Spent Studying Per Week*

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Govt

Assisted

FemaleMale

35

Homework Completion Rates* View 1

2.75

2.8

2.85

2.9

2.95

3

3.05

3.1

3.15

Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

36

Homework Completion Rates - View 2

2.75

2.8

2.85

2.9

2.95

3

3.05

3.1

3.15

3.2

Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

37

Unsupervised Time* vs Days Spent with Friends during School Week*

Girls have more time, but lime less.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Govt Assisted Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

38

Academic* & General Perceived Life ChancesGirls at Gov’t Schools are > Boys on both types.

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

4.4

4.6


MaleFemale

39

Academic & General Perceived Life Chances View 2

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

4.2

4.4

4.6


MaleFemale

40

Average Number of Extracurricular Activities (including sports)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

41

Average Number of Extracurricular Activities (excluding sports)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

42

Rates of Cutting Class* or “Breaking Biche”

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Govt Assisted

MaleFemale

43

Most Common Fears of Form 1 to 5 Students(Watkins, Worrell, & Hall, 2002)

• Females– AIDS– Being kidnapped– Not being able to breathe– Being threatened with a

gun– Murderers– Someone in family dying– Taking bad/dangerous

drugs– Being hit by a car or truck

• Males– AIDS– Not being able to breathe– Being threatened with a

gun– Taking bad/dangerous

drugs– Being kidnapped– Being hit by a car or truck– Someone in family dying– Dying

44

Section IIIHow Can We Use Data to Intervene

• Adopt a problem-solving process– Never assume that you already know the answer.

• Explore Problem– Consult all appropriate stakeholders including students

• Identify Problem accurately (frequency, severity, duration) – Collect objective data to assist in identifying specific problem, and

continue to collect data to assess if plan has worked.

• Analyse Problem and Develop Intervention Plan– Use data collected and info from stakeholders in this stage.

• Implement Plan – Monitor the implementation of the plan to see that it is being carried out

as designed.– Use data to monitor changes and see if plan needs to be modified

• Evaluate Plan

45

Do NOT be Afraid of Data: Data in This Context Means Relevant Information

• Data can be behavioural:– Is behaviour in overactive category

• Hyperactivity, impulsivity, aggression, oppositional defiant

– Is behaviour in underactive category• Lethargy/diffidence, avoidance

– Does behaviour warrant more serious assessment• Delinquency, emotionally disturbed

• Data can be academic– Reading skills (e.g., decoding, comprehension)– Writing skills (e.g., punctuation, paragraphing)– Math skills (e.g., knowledge of tables; interpreting word

problems)

46

Data Can be Collected at Many Levels: Student, classroom, grade, or school

• What are students doing? • Are the behaviours consistent across teachers, periods? • What are students unable to do or not doing? • Is scaffolding necessary to assist students in completing

tasks?• How does this class compare to other classes in the same

grade or at the school?• Are there organizational or structural changes that can be

made to prevent unwanted behaviours before they occur?• In addition to consequences for negative behaviours, are

there incentives in place to promote positive behaviours?

47

At What Level Should the Intervention be Focused?

• If the problem behaviour is prevalent across school or large numbers of students, an individually-focused strategy will NOT work.

• In addition to using the problem solving, other questions need to be asked here: – Do other schools have the same problem and at what

level?– Have any other schools dealt successfully with the

problem?

• If the problem is academic, the curriculum needs to be revisited AND modified if necessary.

48

Trinidad and Tobago NOW has National Norms in the Following Areas

• CGU Officers can assess students in these areas:– Primary

• Pre-reading and decoding skills • Reading fluency/comprehension• Learning behaviours• Adjustment behaviours

– Forms 1 to 5• English, Math, and Global Self-Concept• Depression and Anxiety

– If your school completed the School Leadership Center’s Survey, you should have or will soon receive norms on some of the variables from this presentation.

49

Principals and teachers need to think about teaching and students differently

• To see the school as a community of learners, including the teachers, themselves.

• To involve students in setting rules as well as positive and negative consequences.

• To see themselves as facilitators and supporters and not merely as caretakers and guards.

• To make schools a reinforcement-rich environment.

• To realise that students who get into trouble are not “inherently evil,” but are in need of re-direction and appropriate consequences for their actions.

• To believe that they can and do make a difference in lives.

50

References 1

Central Statistical Office. (1998). Report on education statistics 1996/1997. Port of Spain, Trinidad: Author

Hall, T. E., Watkins, M. W., & Worrell, F. C. (2002) Reading assessments for elementary schools. State College, PA: CEDAR School Psychology Clinic, Penn State.

Kutnick, P., Jules, V., & Layne, A. (1997). Gender and school achievement in the Caribbean. Education Research Paper No. 21. London: Department for International Development.

51

References 2

TVAAS. (1997). Graphical summary of educational findings from the Tennessee value-added assessment system. Knoxville, TN: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, University of Tennessee.

United Nations Development Programme. (2001). Trinidad and Tobago national human development report 2000: Youth at risk in Trinidad and Tobago. Port of Spain, Trinidad: Author.

52

References 3

Watkins M. W., Worrell, F. C., & Hall, T. E. (2002) Secondary assessment tools. State College, PA: CEDAR School Psychology Clinic, Penn State.

Worrell, F. C., & Pierre, P. (2002). Characteristics of Trinidad and Tobago teachers who rate themselves as effective. Manuscript in preparation.

Worrell, F. C., Watkins M. W., & Hall, T. E. (2002) Behavioural rating scales for elementary schools: Interim manual. State College, PA: CEDAR School Psychology Clinic, Penn State.

Documents

Frank C. Worrell. Ph.D