SRI Education researchers surveyed Holyoke Opportunity Academy (HOA) staff in spring 2024. Overall, 13 out of 17 staff members responded to the survey, for a school response rate of 76%.
All school staff, including school leaders, teachers, aides, office staff, guidance counselors, and social workers were surveyed. Many items were only asked of specific respondent types, such as only teachers or only staff who serve as primary people. Respondent types for these items are indicated in the displays below.
Most displays below summarize school means. Your school’s mean is represented by a closed circle. Other schools in the Engage New England initiative are represented by open circles. You can hover over your circle to see the precise mean for your school. You can also use the autoscale button at the top of most displays if you want to zoom in to the display. The home button at the top of these displays (represented by a house icon) will reset the display to its original settings.
Survey items addressing similar concepts were combined to create a high-level composite measure which we refer to as a construct. Constructs are identified in the displays. Not all survey items fit into a construct. These individual items are grouped by topic below.
For each construct and individual survey item, we include the construct definition or survey item and the response scale.
Download a full 2023-2024 item-level report here.
The following display shows the percent of respondents in each school who are teachers, those who are student support staff, and those who are school leadership. The remaining respondents (Other School Support Staff) are aides or administrative support staff.
These constructs and items represent teachers’ perceptions of academic expectations and staff perceptions of student-staff relationships and workplace trust and satisfaction.
The academic press construct represents teachers’ perceptions that school staff expect all students to strive for high levels of academic performance by setting high academic expectations, challenging students to work hard, and encouraging students to persist.
The student-staff relationships construct represents staff members’ perceptions that school staff foster positive relationships with all students. High levels indicate that staff members perceive they are caring and respectful toward students, talk to students about the future, and check in with students about their lives outside of school.
*Asked only of teachers.
**Asked of all staff other than school leaders.
These constructs and items represent the degree to which teachers agree their school has clear instructional structures that guide teaching and learning.
The instructional vision construct represents teachers’ perceptions that their school has a clear instructional vision that helps guide their work in the classroom and their development as a teacher.
The schoolwide competency-based instructional systems construct represents teachers’ perceptions that the school has well-developed competency systems that guide instruction including common language to talk about the competencies and rubrics that define different levels of mastery and help teachers understand student growth.
The student understanding of competencies construct represents teachers’ perceptions that students understand the competencies and the expectations for demonstrating mastery.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
The following construct and items represent the frequency with which teachers report that they received specific types of coaching and support from someone on their school’s instructional leadership team during the 2023-24 school year.
The instructional support construct represents the frequency with which teachers report participating in a variety of coaching and support activities from someone on the school’s instructional leadership team, either 1:1 or in a group setting with other colleagues. These activities include looking at student work to clarify performance expectations or to determine next steps for instruction, receiving feedback on lesson plans based on student work review, reviewing lessons to identify critical elements for student learning, and practicing instructional strategies.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
The following item represents the degree to which teachers agree that observation feedback they received during the 2023-24 school year helped them identify specific ways to improve their teaching practice.
Notes: Item asked of teachers who receive feedback on their teaching from someone on their school’s instructional leadership team based on a classroom observation.
These items address the frequency with which teachers report utilizing specific competency-based instructional practices during the 2023-24 school year.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
For the following construct and items, teachers were asked to report how many of their classes during the 2023-24 school year included assignments that exhibited different aspects of rigor and purpose.
The academic rigor construct represents teachers’ reports of how many of their classes include assignments that address complex items that lack an obvious answer, require multiple drafts so students can strengthen their argument and make their final product clearer, and challenge students to do their best work.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
The following items represent the number of times that teachers report asking students to engage in specific authentic activities during the 2023-24 school year.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
The following items represent the extent to which teachers agree with statements about their instructional self-efficacy aligned to initiative priorities.
Notes: Items asked of teachers only.
Survey items in this section were only asked of school staff who reported having an assigned caseload of students whose academic progress they support as part of a formal primary person system.
The following display shows the percent of respondents in each school who report serving as a primary person.