Developing an Assessment of School-Wide Responsiveness to the Needs of Military-Connected Students

• In Event: Meeting the Needs of Military-Connected Students: Calls From the Field and Interdisciplinary Responses From Higher Education

Abstract

Purpose
There are over one million school-aged children with a parent actively serving in the United States military. Eighty percent of these children are enrolled in public schools (DoD, 2011). Frequent changes in station and mobility due to parental absence during deployments mean that military children attend an average of six to nine schools by the time they complete twelfth grade (MIC3, 2011). This makes them a mobile and potentially vulnerable population served by at least 700 school districts nationwide (MISA, 2011). Research on the needs of military children has focused on transition and deployment in relation to clinically significant psychological and emotional consequences (Chandra, et al. 2010), although an understanding of the effect of military lifestyles on children’s educational experiences and outcomes is emerging (Richardson et al., 2011). Importantly, the institutional needs of the schools and the needs of the educators that serve these children have gone largely unexplored.

The purposes of this study were to (1) investigate the existence of consistent categories of institutional structure, policy and practice that impact educators’ ability to meet the needs of military children, and (2) capture variations in these categories to inform the development of assessment tools to evaluate school-wide needs and responses. Theoretical grounding draws from principles of school-wide reform and support for other under-served populations, including comprehensive school reform and models of effective schooling for mobile populations (e.g. Berends, Bodilly, & Kirby, 2002).

Methods
A mixed methods study was conducted after purposefully sampling from eight public schools serving high proportions of military-connected students. Semi-structured interviews with principals and school counselors gathered information about areas of school functioning that relate to military-connected student education. Multiple focus groups with teachers from each school presented prompts about student, teacher and institutional strengths and needs. Teachers also provided questionnaire responses on military-connected student academic placement, social-emotional support, parental involvement, available resources, and teacher professional development. Field notes and transcribed audio-recordings were coded by three raters through an iterative process congruent with the constant comparison method (Patton, 1990). Summary statistics were generated using SPSS 18.0.

Results
Five categories of institutional agency were identified. These included (1) academic support for military-connected students, (2) social-emotional support for military-connected students, (3) school leadership and record keeping, (4) responsiveness to military culture and (5) school-military-community partnerships. These were tentatively identified as categories along which schools’ overall ability to meet the needs of military children could be assessed, should a standardized instrument protocol be used. Within each category, variability was found among schools. Examples included processes by which transitioning students are assessed for existing academic and social-emotional difficulties, the range of support programs offered to students and parents, and staff perceptions of preparedness to support military-connected students.

Implications
In response, a thematically focused collection of comprehensive needs assessment, program implementation and program evaluation tools is under development. Empirical research using the tools in authentic school settings will further validate the categories and assessment rubric dimensions of programmatic consistency, customization, comprehensiveness, research-derived, impact, and sustainability.

Authors

• Joanna K. Garner, Old Dominion University

• John A. Nunnery, Old Dominion University

• Leigh Sayre, Old Dominion University

• Jennifer A. Sughrue, Florida Atlantic University