1. 1 Student Health Risk, Resilience, and Academic Performance Thomas Hanson, Greg Austin, and June Lee-Bayha WestEd

2. 2 CDE (via Stuart Foundation) commissioned examination of two questions: Are California students in low performing schools exposed to more health risks and fewer development supports (assets) than students in other schools? How are student health risks and resilience assets related to the progress of California schools in raising test scores?

3. 3 Data California Healthy Kids Survey (800,000 students, grades 7, 9 & 11) –Core Module (1,700 schools) –Resilience Module (600 schools) API Research Files (1999-2001) STAR Research Files (1998-2002) –Standardized Testing and Reporting school-level test results.

4. 4 Analyses School-level analyses (combined grades) Adjusted for racial/ethnic composition, parental education, ELL students, free/reduced meals, and baseline test scores (when appropriate)

5. 5 Physical Activity and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 77 81 85 89 93 API Score Percent who engaged in any physical activity 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

6. 6 Physical Activity and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.4 0.1 0.6 1.2 1.7 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.1 0.7 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent who engaged in any physical activity -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 768288941007682889410076828894100 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

7. 7 Nutritious Intake and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 72 74 76 78 80 API Score Percent reporting any nutritious intake 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

8. 8 Nutritious Intake and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.4 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.9 2.2 1.5 1.6 1.7 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent who report any nutritious intake -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 717476798171747679817174767981 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

9. 9 Breakfast Consumption and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 52 57 62 67 72 API Score Percent who ate breakfast 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

10. 10 Breakfast and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.2 0.6 1.4 2.2 0.7 1.1 1.5 1.9 2.4 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent who ate breakfast -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 485562697648556269764855626976 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

11. 11 Safety at School and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 73 79 85 91 97 API Score Percent reporting feeling "safe" or "very safe" at school 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

12. 12 Safety at School and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.1 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.5 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.3 0.9 1.3 1.6 2.0 2.3 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent reporting feeling safe or very safe at school -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 737985919773798591977379859197 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

13. 13 Lifetime Intoxication and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 3 13 23 33 43 API Score Percent ever intoxicated 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

14. 14 Lifetime Intoxication and Annual Changes in Test Scores 2.2 1.6 0.6 -0.3 -1.2 3.0 2.4 1.6 0.7 -0.1 2.9 2.4 1.6 0.8 0.1 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent ever intoxicated -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 010254055010254055010254055 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

15. 15 0 2 4 6 8 API Score Percent reporting any 30-day substance use on school property 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile 30-day Substance Use at School and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship)

16. 16 30-Day Substance Use at School and Annual Changes in Test Scores 1.5 1.1 0.6 0.3 -0.1 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.6 2.1 1.6 1.2 0.7 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent in school reporting any 30-day substance use on school property -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 0368110368 0368 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey

17. 17 Offered Illegal Drugs at School and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 6 15 24 33 42 API Score Percent offered illegal drugs 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

18. 18 Offered Drugs at School and Annual Changes in Test Scores 2.0 1.4 0.7 -0.0 -0.7 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.7 2.9 2.3 1.6 1.0 0.3 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent offered illegal drugs on school property -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 113263851113263851113263851 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

19. 19 Sadness/Hopelessness and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 23 26 29 32 35 API Score Percent reporting sadness/hopelessness 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

20. 20 Sadness/Hopelessness and Annual Changes in Test Scores 1.5 1.0 0.7 0.3 -0.2 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.7 2.6 2.1 1.7 1.1 0.6 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent reporting sadness/hopelessness (12 month) -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 202529343920252934392025293439 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

21. 21 Resilience Assets Caring Relationships – supportive connections with others who serve as prosocial models and support healthy development. High Expectations – direct and indirect messages that students can and will succeed. Opportunities for Meaningful Involvement – relevant, engaging, and interesting activities. including opportunities for responsibility and contribution. Resilience assets enhance school connectedness.

22. 22 School Caring Relationships and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 53 59 65 71 77 API Score Caring relationships at school 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

23. 23 School Caring Relationships and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.3 0.1 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.8 1.1 1.5 1.9 2.2 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.1 2.7 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent reporting caring relations with adults at school -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 525864717752586471775258647177 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

24. 24 School High Expectations and API Scores (Concurrent Relationship) 60 67 74 81 88 API Score High expectations at school 1st (Lowest) 2nd 3rd 4th 5th (Highest) API Quintile

25. 25 School High Expectations and Annual Changes in Test Scores -0.5 -0.1 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.9 0.8 1.1 1.5 1.9 2.3 ReadingLanguageMathematics Percent reporting high expectations at school -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in SAT-9 (NPR) 586572808758657280875865728087 Source: California Healthy Kids Survey & STAR data files.

26. 26 Cross-sectional Analyses: Main Findings Are California students in low performing schools exposed to more health risks and fewer development supports than students in other schools? –Yes – low performing schools generally have more students exposed to health risk than other schools, even after accounting for socioeconomic characteristics. API scores were related to: –Physical Exercise –Nutrition –Substance Use –Violence and School Safety –School Developmental Supports 75% of health risk/resilience measures examined were concurrently related to API scores in expected ways

27. 27 Longitudinal Analyses: Main Findings How is student health risk related to the progress of California schools in raising test scores? Test score gains were larger in schools with: –high levels of physical activity healthy eating school safety caring relationships at school, high expectations at school, and participation in meaningful activities in the community –and low levels of substance use, particularly substance use at school drug availability at school theft and vandalism, insecurity, and weapon possession sadness and depression –Results held for 40% of the health risk/resilience outcomes examined.

28. 28 Methodological Limitations Limited to secondary schools that conducted CHKS –Especially applies to resilience data Non-experimental data. –Other unmeasured factors could account for relationship of health indicators to changes in test scores School-level analysis. –Results need to be confirmed using student-level data.

29. 29 Implications Addressing health and developmental needs of youth is a critical component of a comprehensive strategy for improving academic performance and turning around low-performing schools.

30. 30 Program Implications Physical Activity and Nutrition: Increase student access to moderate-to- vigorous physical activity. Monitor nutritional content of food offered at school. Promote greater awareness among students about their physical health and nutrition.

31. 31 Program Implications Crime, violence, and substance use. Comprehensive early programs to prevent onset of risk behaviors –Identify (CHKS) and target high-risk populations –Promote positive youth development Targeted intervention programs to address needs of students already demonstrating problems –Provide help-oriented Student Assistance with referrals to services.

32. 32 Program Implications Youth Development: Provide students with supportive, caring connections to adults at school who model and support healthy development. Provide clear and consistent messages that students can and will succeed. Involve students in meaningful activities. Ask students what they think! Hold a Listening to Students Workshop.

33. 33 For more information, see: Hanson, T.L., Austin, G.A. & Lee-Bayha, J. (2004). Ensuring that no child is left behind: How are student health risks & resilience related to the academic progress of schools. San Francisco, CA: WestEd. Hanson, T. L., & Austin, G. A. (2003). Student health risks, resilience, and academic performance in California: Year 2 report, longitudinal analyses. Los Alamitos, CA: WestEd. Hanson, T.L. & Austin, G.A. (2003). Are Student Health Risks and Low Resilience Assets an Impediment to the Academic Progress of Schools? (California Healthy Kids Survey Factsheet 3). Los Alamitos, CA: WestEd. Available from the CHKS Website: www.WestEd.org/hks