Page 25 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 25 of 194 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
19
standards; accountability, where each school and school district is meeting their AYP
(annual yearly progress); implementing high-quality, yearly academic assessments;
instruction is provided by highly qualified teachers; parents are involved in the school
community (No Child Left Behind, 2001).
Since NCLB demands “highly qualified instruction” the increased professional
development accountability for schools and school districts has made external reform
strategies such as the New American Schools, which are whole-school models like
Success for All, and Roots and Wings (Datnow, Borman, Stringfield, Overman, &
Castellano, 2003; Desimone, 2002); Focus on Results and America’s Choice very
popular interventions in many school districts across the nation (Desimone, 2002).
External reform strategies allow administrators and teachers to implement a complete,
pre-designed program of reform instantaneously. To meet the more stringent
accountability requirements, school districts tend to adopt multiple school reform
strategies that focus on different skills and areas for improvement of instruction, which
Hochberg and Desimone (2010) argue leaves “teachers feeling pushed and pulled in
different directions.” With the increased accountability also came the reintroduction of
an old concept: The three R’s; although instead of reading, writing, and arithmetic, we
now have rigor, relevance, and research. If professional development is to be effective,
teachers must feel that there is relevance not only in the intervention strategy, but also
that the professional development is essential to their own content and teaching practices.
Teachers must continually be learning; they must be current in educational research,
which discusses strategies, methods, and interventions. Hochberg and Desimone (2010)
Object Description
| Title | Improving college participation success in Glendale Unified School District: An application of the gap analysis model |
| Author | Cassady, Dawn Marie |
| Author email | Kedwyn@aol.com; cassady@usc.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-01-22 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-29 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Marsh, David D. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Rueda, Robert S. Arias, Robert J. |
| Abstract | From the time of Brown v. Board of Education, the role of education has been on the forefront of our social, political and economic landscape. Legislation such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and No Child Left Behind as well as publications like A Nation at Risk have all illustrated the lack of access, equity and achievement in American schools for the last fifty years. Currently, the United States has a 69% average high school graduation rate, which varies between subgroups and of those students only 57% continue their education in college.; Glendale Unified School District (GUSD) is a high-performing, large, urban school district that serves an economically and culturally diverse population. This project examined the root causes of the gaps in college going rates for all students as well as those of the underrepresented subgroups by applying the Clark and Estes (2005) gap analysis model. Gaps between goal achievement (college participation) and actual student performance were examined and then research-based solutions for closing the achievement gap and recommendations based on those solutions were recommended to the school district administrative team. |
| Keyword | secondary education; school reform; college access |
| Geographic subject | school districts: Glendale Unified School District |
| Geographic subject (county) | Los Angeles |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 1954/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3806 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Cassady, Dawn Marie |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Cassady-4360 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume14/etd-Cassady-4360.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 25 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 19 standards; accountability, where each school and school district is meeting their AYP (annual yearly progress); implementing high-quality, yearly academic assessments; instruction is provided by highly qualified teachers; parents are involved in the school community (No Child Left Behind, 2001). Since NCLB demands “highly qualified instruction” the increased professional development accountability for schools and school districts has made external reform strategies such as the New American Schools, which are whole-school models like Success for All, and Roots and Wings (Datnow, Borman, Stringfield, Overman, & Castellano, 2003; Desimone, 2002); Focus on Results and America’s Choice very popular interventions in many school districts across the nation (Desimone, 2002). External reform strategies allow administrators and teachers to implement a complete, pre-designed program of reform instantaneously. To meet the more stringent accountability requirements, school districts tend to adopt multiple school reform strategies that focus on different skills and areas for improvement of instruction, which Hochberg and Desimone (2010) argue leaves “teachers feeling pushed and pulled in different directions.” With the increased accountability also came the reintroduction of an old concept: The three R’s; although instead of reading, writing, and arithmetic, we now have rigor, relevance, and research. If professional development is to be effective, teachers must feel that there is relevance not only in the intervention strategy, but also that the professional development is essential to their own content and teaching practices. Teachers must continually be learning; they must be current in educational research, which discusses strategies, methods, and interventions. Hochberg and Desimone (2010) |
