School Effectiveness Questionnaire

Abstract

The School Effectiveness Questionnaire (SEQ) is a psychological scale developed to measure and evaluate various dimensions contributing to the overall effectiveness of elementary and middle schools, with a separate edition available for high schools. Originally based on an instrument from the Connecticut State Education Department, the SEQ underwent four major revisions by the Detroit Public Schools Research and Evaluation Department, culminating in the 5th Revised Edition in 1990. The modifications incorporated current literature on school and instructional effectiveness and included items tailored specifically to the context of the Detroit Public Schools system. The scale identifies eight core categories essential for a high-functioning educational environment.

Keywords

School Effectiveness Questionnaire, SEQ, school climate, instructional effectiveness, Detroit Public Schools, school mission, student achievement, psychological scale, educational measurement.

Authors

Detroit Public Schools Research and Evaluation Department.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the SEQ is to systematically assess the perceptions of various stakeholders (including teachers, administrators, and parents) regarding the operational effectiveness of a school site. By quantifying responses across predefined categories, the instrument allows educational districts, such as the Detroit Public Schools, to identify areas of strength and weakness relative to established benchmarks of successful schooling.

The resulting data is intended for use in school improvement planning, facilitating targeted modifications to instructional programs, administrative practices, and the overall learning climate. The scale serves as a diagnostic tool for educational administrators focused on enhancing student outcomes and ensuring accountability across grade levels.

Construct

The SEQ measures the overarching construct of School Effectiveness, which is operationalized through eight distinct, interrelated sub-constructs, or categories. These categories reflect research-based factors known to influence student learning and institutional quality. The structure suggests a multi-dimensional model of organizational performance within an educational setting.

The eight effectiveness categories defined in the 5th Revised Edition are:

• School Learning Climate: Pertaining to the safety, morale, and general atmosphere of the school environment.
• Clear School Mission: Ensuring that institutional goals and responsibilities are clearly communicated to staff and parents and serve as a framework for decision-making.
• Instructional Leadership: Focusing on the principal’s role in encouraging, facilitating, and supervising staff efforts to improve teaching practices.
• High Expectations: The shared belief among staff that all students are capable of mastering basic skills and achieving identified standards, irrespective of home background.
• Effective Instruction: The use of varied teaching strategies, structured lesson delivery, and opportunities for practice and skill development.
• Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress: Systematic assessment, review, and analysis of student data (such as test results) to inform instructional modification.
• Home-School Relations: The degree of active parental involvement, support for learning objectives, and cooperation aimed at improving student achievement.
• Rewards and Praise: The consistent use of positive reinforcement to acknowledge and motivate academic improvements and achievements, ensuring students receive more praise than criticism.

Validity

Specific empirical data regarding the criterion or construct validity of the 5th Revised Edition of the SEQ is not detailed in the provided source material. However, the instrument’s development process suggests strong evidence of content validity. The modifications implemented were explicitly based upon extensive review of the existing literature on school and instructional effectiveness and items drawn from other established school effectiveness questionnaires.

The scale’s structure, which includes detailed definitions for each of the eight measured categories, further supports the theoretical grounding of the instrument, ensuring that the items align conceptually with the intended dimensions of school effectiveness.

Reliability

Information concerning the internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) or test-retest reliability for the 1990 edition of the SEQ is not available in the source documentation. Given that the instrument was developed for internal research and evaluation within the Detroit Public Schools, psychometric data may exist in supplementary reports not included here.

The scale’s iterative development, involving multiple revisions based on practical application and literature review, implies an ongoing effort to refine item clarity and consistency, which are foundational steps toward establishing reliability.

Factor Analysis

A formal description of the factor analysis used to empirically confirm the eight hypothesized effectiveness categories is not provided in the source material. It is assumed that the categories listed (e.g., School Learning Climate, Effective Instruction) represent the intended factor structure of the questionnaire, derived from the established literature on school effectiveness.

The structure of the instrument, where data analysis yields an average score and a percentage of positive responses for each category, strongly suggests that the scale is designed to be scored factorially, aligning specific items with their respective theoretical dimensions.

Instrument

Test Type: Organizational Assessment / Self-Report Survey.

Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire consisting of 72 items, utilizing a 5-point Likert scale response format.

Language Available: English.

Population Group: Educational Professionals (Teachers, Administrators) and Parents.

Age Group: Applicable to professionals working in Elementary, Middle, and High School settings.

Population Details: Specifically developed for use within the Detroit Public Schools system, with separate editions for Elementary/Middle Schools and High Schools.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their agreement with statements using the following response options: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Undecided or Does Not Apply, Agree, and Strongly Agree. Data analysis provides an average score and average percentage of positive responses per effectiveness category.

Keywords

Educational assessment, organizational climate, instructional leadership, psychometrics, student performance, home-school relations, educational research.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified.

Correspondence Address: Detroit Public Schools Research and Evaluation Department, Detroit, MI.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1990 (5th Revised Edition).

Permissions and Fee: Information on current permissions, licensing fees, and availability outside of the Detroit Public Schools system is not specified in the source document. Users should contact the original publishing department for licensing details.

Reference’s

Detroit Public Schools Research and Evaluation Department. (1990). School Effectiveness Questionnaire, Elementary/ Middle School Edition, 5th Rev. ed. Detroit, MI.

Items of the School Effectiveness Questionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Teachers and parents are aware of the homework policy in this school.
2. A variety of teaching strategies (e.g., lecture, discussion, cooperative/team learning) are used in classrooms.
3. Vandalism or destruction of school property is not a problem.
4. Teachers review and analyze test results to plan instructional program modification.
5. There are few interruptions during class time.
6. The Chapter 1/Article III program curriculum is congruent with the regular school curriculum.
7. Most students are eager and enthusiastic about learning.
8. Students are acknowledged and rewarded for academic improvements and achievements in this school.
9. Teachers believe that they make a difference in improving student achievement.
10. The principal encourages and facilitates staff working together to improve instruction.
11. This school has a strong feeling of, “Let’s get things done.”
12. Students treat each other with respect.
13. There is an active parent group in this school.
14. Students are offered multiple opportunities to practice new skills in group and individual settings.
15. Daily lessons in classrooms typically follow this sequence: student focus on the intended learning, teacher presentation, guided practice, specific feedback, independent work, and evaluation of achievement.
16. Parent-teacher conferences result in specific plans for home-school cooperation aimed at improving student achievement.
17. Staff spend more time communicating with parents about the good things students do than about the bad.
18. Multiple assessment methods are used to assess student progress (e.g., criterion-referenced tests, work samples, and mastery checklists).
19. Students not achieving identified standards are given additional help until standards are achieved.
20. This school’s School Improvement Plan focuses on student learning and achievement as the school’s major responsibility.
21. Students receive more praise than criticism.
22. Parents make sure that students complete assigned homework.
23. Special attention is focused on building good continuity across grade levels and programs.
24. Students who achieve identified standards do so regardless of home background.
25. Students receive immediate and specific feedback on homework assignments.
26. Students abide by school rules.
27. The principal uses test results to recommend modifications in classroom instruction.
28. Teachers in this school believe they are responsible for all students mastering basic skills at each grade level.
29. The principal (or other school administrators) makes several formal classroom observations each year.
30. Most homework assigned to students is related to what has already been learned in class.
31. Chapter 1/Article III programs are effective in helping low-achieving students attain reading and mathematics skills.
32. Formal observations by the principal (or other school administrators) are regularly followed by a post-observation conference.
33. The effective teachers in this building receive both praise and recognition from their colleagues.
34. Administrators support teachers in dealing with student discipline matters.
35. This school is a safe and secure place to work.
36. The mission of this school is clearly communicated to staff and parents and serves as a framework for making decisions.
37. Most parents would rate this school as an effective school.
38. The counseling program is effective in modifying student behavior.
39. The principal puts much emphasis on the meaning and use of standardized test results.
40. Students generally believe that school rules are reasonable and appropriate.
41. There are provisions for coordination between teachers in Chapter 1/Article III programs and teachers in regular classrooms.
42. The students in this school are told what objectives they are expected to learn.
43. Generally, discipline is not a problem in this school.
44. Low-achieving students usually answer classroom questions as often as other students.
45. The principal is highly visible throughout the school.
46. During parent teacher conferences, there is a focus on student achievement and basic skills mastery.
47. Students and staff take pride in the school and help keep the building and grounds clean and attractive.
48. Teachers believe that a student’s home background is not the primary factor that determines individual student achievement.
49. As a regular practice, teachers talk with each other about the academic work of students for whom they share responsibility.
50. Parents actively support the learning objectives of this school.
51. The principal frequently communicates to teachers their responsibilities in relation to student achievement.
52. Parents know and reinforce school rules.
53. The principal actively promotes inservice training for staff.
54. The principal is an important instructional resource person.
55. Many parents are involved in home-school support activities.
56. Low-achieving students receive frequent rewards, praise, and/or recognition.
57. There is systematic, regular assessment of students’ basic skills in most classrooms.
58. A positive feeling permeates the school.
59. Students are praised for specific behavior immediately after the behavior occurs.
60. Teachers are encouraged to visit other classrooms to observe the other instructional activities of their colleagues.
61. Teachers provide activities that develop student thinking skills.
62. Students’ academic work is publicly displayed or featured.
63. All staff in this school clearly understood their responsibility for basic skills achievement.
64. Collaborative school planning and decision making are typical at this school.
65. Students receive immediate and specific feedback on classroom work.
66. Discussions with the principal (or other school administrators) often result in improved instructional practices.
67. During instructional time, students are actively engaged in learning tasks most of the time.
68. The principal emphasizes staff development training and teacher skill building.
69. The principal conducts frequent meetings concerning instruction and student achievement.
70. There is an identified set of objectives or skills that all students are expected to master at each grade level.
71. Students are often given the grades A, B, C, D, or E to describe the quality of their work. Suppose your school was “graded” in the same way. What grade would you give your school?
72. Students are often given the grades A, B, C, D, or E to describe the quality of their work. Suppose the Detroit Public Schools were “graded” in the same way. What grade would you give the Detroit Public School system?