The purpose of this study was to identify high performing school districts in Texas and to determine if there are different characteristics leading to the provision of an adequate education in high performing districts as compared to low performing districts. It specifically sought to determine which characteristics contributed most to an adequate education and used data from the Texas Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) which chronicled scores on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). The population for this study consisted of all 2001-2002 Texas public school districts with the exception of charter schools, special-purpose statutory districts, and state-administered districts, which resulted in using data from 1027 Texas school districts. Descriptive discriminant analysis was chosen as the method for statistical analysis. Data were obtained from the Texas Education Agency (TEA). Adequate and inadequate districts were analyzed according to eight variables. They were (1) taxable value per pupil, (2) the percentage of special education students, (3) the percentage of students coded as bilingual and ESL, (4) pupil-teacher ratio, (5) the size of the district, (6) the percentage of economically disadvantaged students in the district, (7) the district community type, such as rural or suburban, and (8) the total operating expenditures per pupil. Two analyses were conducted. The first analysis sought to determine the different characteristics between adequate districts (districts that scored 80% or above on the TAAS test) and inadequate districts (districts that scored 79% or below on the TAAS test). In order to determine these differences with a higher standard for adequacy, a second analysis was performed. The second analysis focused on districts deemed adequate by scoring 90% or above on the TAAS test compared to those districts deemed inadequate by scoring 69% and below. The eight variables accounted for 21% and 37% of the variance between groups respectively. For both analyses performed, the three variables that clearly contributed most to predicting membership in the two groups were the percentage of economically disadvantaged students( .935, .652), the percent of students in bilingual or ESL programs (.332, .371), and the taxable values per pupil (.178, .058). The percentage of economically disadvantaged students indicated that this variable explained 94% and 65% of the overall effect sizes. The percentage of bilingual and ESL students explained 33% and 37% of the effect size. Taxable Value per pupil explained 17% and 6% of the effect size. The percentage of special education students, total operating expenditures per pupil, the student-teacher ratio, community type, and the size of the district each, revealed only slight contribution to group differences. These results clearly suggested that the inadequate districts had higher percentages of economically disadvantaged students and ESL students while the adequate districts had higher taxable value per pupil, or wealth.

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) annually rates campuses and districts on how well they meet standards of student performance. Since the high standard is so difficult for campuses and districts to reach, educators continually seek ways to improve student performance. The effective schools process is research-based and has stood the test of time. Descriptive statistics were used in this study to identify practices within the effective schools correlates that exemplary campuses implement. Campuses with long-term exemplary ratings were identified using the TEA data base. Campus site-based teams were surveyed using the More Effective Schools Staff Survey. Data was collected on elementary and secondary campuses with homogenous, diverse, economically advantaged, and economically disadvantaged student populations. District instructional leaders for those campuses completed a District Instructional Leader Survey to determine what practices districts implement to support their exemplary campuses. Findings from this quantitative study revealed what effective schools practices were highly evident on these exemplary campuses, regardless of diversity, economic status, district size, community type, property wealth, or location within the state. Findings also revealed that district leaders provide direction and support in the areas of (a) professional development; (b) beliefs, mission, and goals; (c) curriculum; (d) instruction; (e) assessment; and (f) site-based decision making. The research data imply that campus or district administrators can improve the performance of their students if the identified practices are implemented.