Appendix A. Note on Qualitative Methods

Qualitative data was collected by four highly trained researchers. NYU Metro Center worked with BPS to identify four case study schools, and one researcher was assigned to each of the selected schools to conduct individual and group interviews with stakeholders involved in EFA. Case study schools represented a range of diverse factors, including the extent of implementation, type of implementation, varying school demographics, academic achievement, and neighborhood. Case study research was conducted during SY 2018-19, mainly in fall 2018. To begin establishing a rapport, the research team made a series of phone calls and sent emails to school principals, administrators, and family engagement coordinators to dis-cuss data sources and data collection methods.

During spring 2019, 16 BPS school principals involved with the EFA initiative were invited to participate in individual interviews. The remaining schools were Bates Elementary School, Grew Elementary School, Irving Middle School, Frederick Pilot Middle School, Harvard-Kent Elementary School, Philbrick Elementary School, Edison K-8 School, Edwards Middle School, Guild Elementary School, Gardner Pilot Academy, Holmes Innovation School and Sumner Elementary School.

Participants

The types of data collected for the four selected schools included the following: (1) Individual interviews with the school principal, (2) focus groups and interviews with families/parents, and (3) focus groups for 4th, 5th, and 6th grade teachers. Additionally, interviews with other key stakeholders, such as assistant principals and former EFA teachers now in different roles, were conducted in case study schools. The principals of the remaining 12 BPS schools implementing EFA were also invited to participate in individual interviews. Of these 12 principals, 7 consented to be interviewed. EFA central office staff and district support coaches were also interviewed.

Data Collection

Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured individual interviews and focus groups. The majority of interviews were conducted in-person and lasted 60-90-minutes. Interviewees were told that their responses would be anonymous and confidential. Protocols, influenced by relevant literature and BPS/EFA specific context, guided each interview that covered the success, impact, implementation and challenges of EFA. Each interview was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription company. Observational field notes were also taken by each researcher.

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed in two stages: preliminary analysis and focused analysis. The preliminary data analysis consisted of composing field notes and memos during and after each of the one-on-one interviews and focus groups. The focused data analysis occurred primarily after all the interviews were completed. All transcribed files were uploaded to Dedoose, a software program designed for computer-assisted qualitative and mixed-methods data, text, and multimedia analysis. The research team coded and themed the transcriptions from the interviews. Using Dedoose, the team conducted a focused analysis of the interview transcripts and analytic memos, identifying connections between the stakeholders across the data sample. Through this process, the researchers organized the data into the sub-themes that formed the main findings of the study.

Limitations

It is necessary to caution how practitioners and researchers should use or apply the findings of this research. First, the results of the study are limited to a small sample of school teachers, principals, coaches, and parents. As such, these qualitative findings are not generalizable, as all members of the school communities were not represented equally. While there are 16 EFA schools, only four schools were investigated as individual case studies. Although each of these schools were distinguishable from one another, their individual experiences may not reflect the overall EFA experience. Second, recruiting parents and families to interview was difficult. While three case study schools had parents and families represented in their findings, one school did not. Third, EFA students were not interviewed for this study due to permissions. The voices of students and more families could have helped confirm or disprove the findings of the study.

Every effort was made to collect a diverse sample of study participants at each case study site. Variations in sample size per case site is due in large to differences in school size, and teacher/ staff availability.

Parent engagement varied by case study site. While no formal parent interviews took place at Orchard Gardens, informal conversations and meeting observations with parents and school leaders was documented. Table 2 outlines total  participation by case study site.

Interviews were also conducted with 5 EFA coaches from BPS Central Office and 7 principals from non-case study EFA schools.

Appendix B. Case Study Sites Demographic Data SY 2017-2018

Appendix C. Programs and Coaching by School

*All schools receive coaching or other PD supports for the capstone

**School no longer requires intense coaching services, has opted out of intense coaching services, or is receiving other general supports from an EFA Senior Coach

*** Senior Coach helps principal and/or other leadership teams plan how EFA resources will be embedded in school’s strategic plan. EFA Senior Coach is involved in monitoring how those resources are used and supports leadership in troubleshooting when progress is not being made. Senior Coach may sit on school Instructional Leadership Team or Climate and Culture Team.

Appendix D. Teacher Satisfaction Survey

Methodology

The authors investigated teacher satisfaction with an understanding of the EFA initiative and its various components via survey. For this survey, teachers were asked to report their satisfaction levels with EFA and which aspects of the initiative they viewed as being successful. The authors then created summary descriptive statistics from teacher responses to the survey questions (e.g., mean response on a Likert scale item ranging from 0-5, with 0 being ‘Not at all satisfied’ and 5 being ‘Very satisfied’).

Findings

Tables 25-29 show demographic information for teachers responding to the survey (N=63). From Table 25, we see that most respondents come from the King, Orchard Gardens, and Sumner schools. Moreover, we note that most teachers teach grade 4. In terms of content taught, most respondents reported teaching ELA and Elementary – inclusion. From Tables 28 and 29, we see that most respondents are new to their current school; however, most teachers are not new to teaching, with the majority having over 10 years of teaching experience.