兰德-Implementation-and-Outcomes-of-the-Appalachian-Renaissance-Initiative-in-Eastern-Kentucky-Schools_118页_992kb

Summary of the Appalachian Renaissance Initiative (ARI) in Eastern Kentucky Schools

Core Content

The Appalachian Renaissance Initiative (ARI) was a four-year (2014–2018) program implemented by the Kentucky Valley Educational Cooperative (KVEC), funded by the Race to the Top–District (RTT-D) grant from the U.S. Department of Education. The initiative aimed to improve teaching and learning in 17 districts and 99 schools across rural Eastern Kentucky through innovative, personalized learning approaches. The program focused on several key areas, including personalized learning, next generation classrooms, college and career readiness, educator effectiveness, kindergarten readiness, and health and wellness.

The ARI was designed to be flexible and voluntary, allowing principals, teachers, and students to choose which activities they would engage in. KVEC created a range of structures and mechanisms to support the initiative, such as the Innovation Coordinator role, summits for teacher collaboration, technologies like MondoBoards, and a social learning network called the Holler. These were intended to foster communication, capacity building, and collaboration among participants.

The RAND Corporation conducted an independent evaluation of the ARI, analyzing implementation processes, stakeholder participation, and student outcomes. The evaluation included surveys, interviews, and student achievement data from 2014–2015 to 2016–2017, with a focus on how the initiative was communicated, adopted, and its impact on schools and students.

Main Findings

1. ARI Activities and Communication

• The ARI included 26 different activities, with 17 aimed at principals and teachers and 9 focused on student learning.
• 14 activities were offered over all four years, while 12 were introduced in specific years.
• ARI created various communication structures, including:
  • ARI leadership team
  • Innovation Coordinators (new roles in each district)
  • Teacher summits
  • Technology tools (e.g., MondoBoards)
  • Social learning network (Holler)
• Knowledge and awareness of ARI activities varied significantly by district, with principals generally reporting more knowledge than teachers.

2. Participation in the ARI

• Participation goals were met for activities where KVEC set them.
• In Year 4, 33% of principals and 15% of teachers reported participation in any ARI activity.
• Buy-in from stakeholders was a key factor in participation, but only one-third of principals and teachers felt the ARI activities were aligned "a great deal" with their school improvement goals.
• Staffing challenges were reported as a major barrier, as teachers needed substitutes during ARI participation.

3. Effects on Student Outcomes

• Student achievement outcomes were analyzed across multiple grades and compared to non-participating schools.
• No strong signals were detected that the ARI led to significant improvements in student outcomes by the end of its third year.
• The evaluation noted that while some positive changes were observed, they were not measurable in terms of academic performance.
• Socioemotional growth and engagement were not assessed in this study.

4. Sustainability of ARI Elements

• Most stakeholders recommended sustaining the ARI and its activities.
• Technology and innovation-based activities were seen as particularly important for continuation.
• KVEC was identified as the best stakeholder to sustain most ARI activities.
• Funding and management strategies were suggested as necessary for sustaining the ARI.

Key Recommendations

• Ensure local-level implementation when leveraging regional education agencies.
• Direct and personal communication with teachers can increase awareness and participation.
• Intensive coaching or classroom support may enhance educator effectiveness.
• Activities should be aligned with school goals and student needs to increase stakeholder buy-in.
• Consider non-financial infrastructure constraints that may affect participation.

Context of KVEC and Eastern Kentucky

• KVEC is a nonprofit educational cooperative serving 22 rural districts in Eastern Kentucky, with over 50,000 students and 3,000 district officials, principals, and teachers.
• The region faces high poverty rates and limited economic opportunities, with many students eligible for the National School Lunch Program.
• There are no public colleges or universities in the KVEC service area, making the ARI an important initiative for college and career readiness.
• KVEC has focused on place-based innovation, improving local community assets to support sustainable development in education.

Conclusion

While the ARI offered innovative opportunities for improving teaching and learning in rural Eastern Kentucky, the evaluation found limited buy-in and mixed results in terms of student outcomes. Despite these challenges, the initiative was seen as valuable and recommended for sustainability, especially in technology and innovation-based activities. The findings suggest that effective communication, alignment with local goals, and support for infrastructure and staffing are critical for the success of similar education reform programs in rural settings.