Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oea School Performance Report topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
OEA: Leadership, turnover and student behavior separate highest- and lowest-impact Kentucky schools
Summary
The Office of Education Accountability told the Senate Education Committee that highest-impact schools share established instructional systems, lower teacher turnover (15% vs. 21%), longer principal tenure (6 vs. 4 years) and stronger behavioral systems; OEA recommended statutory changes to CSIPs/CDIPs and expanded vendor options for CSI schools.
The Office of Education Accountability presented findings to the Senate Education Committee concluding that leadership, teacher turnover and school climate are primary drivers of differences between Kentucky's highest- and lowest-impact schools.
Chris Riley, research analyst for OEA, and Deborah Nelson, division manager for research, said their study—based largely on 2022–23 data and visits to 14 schools—found little difference in per-pupil spending between highest- and lowest-impact schools but meaningful differences in how funds are used and in staffing stability. "Teacher turnover in lowest impact schools was an average of 21%, which is 1.4 times higher than the average turnover of 15% in highest impact schools," Nelson said. She also said principals in highest-impact schools stay an average of six years compared with four years in lowest-impact schools.
OEA highlighted that highest-impact schools implement clear instructional systems—aligned curriculum, assessment, data analysis, instructional monitoring and teacher leadership—that reduce isolation and support struggling teachers. By contrast, many lowest-impact schools lacked these systems; OEA observed newer or out-of-field teachers struggling to implement rigorous curricula and, in some schools, leadership that did not consistently address performance issues.
Climate and student behavior emerged as strong distinguishing factors. OEA reported teacher survey differences on measures of student misconduct, relationships and enthusiasm, and noted that when principals address behavior challenges directly it supports instructional reforms. The presentation cited PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports) and local mentoring as successful strategies.
OEA recommended revisiting Comprehensive School Improvement Plans (CSIPs) and Comprehensive District Improvement Plans (CDIPs), suggested KDE (the Kentucky Department of Education) consider statutory changes so the department could provide more meaningful review and monitoring, and urged expanding the vendor pool available to CSI (Comprehensive Support and Improvement) schools. The report also noted limitations in existing teacher exit-survey data (House Bill 319 of 2023 requires exit survey collection but OEA said over one-third of districts provided no responses).
Committee members asked about professional development, Chromebook-related instructional loss, and whether OEA refers findings to investigators. OEA said professional development that connects directly to classroom practice and on-site mentoring were common features of higher-performing schools; Chromebook issues were described largely as repair/technical-support disruptions; and OEA said its research office generally keeps site-visit findings confidential from its investigations division to preserve candid feedback unless it encounters illegal conduct.
OEA concluded the practices that distinguish highest-impact schools are well established in education research but require sustained leadership, stable staffing and time to implement. The committee thanked OEA for the report and agreed to continue follow-up during the session.
