University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The factors present in an outperforming charter middle school: a case study focusing on promising practices, school leadership, and cultural norms

(USC Thesis Other)

The factors present in an outperforming charter middle school: a case study focusing on promising practices, school leadership, and cultural norms

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

THE FACTORS PRESENT IN AN OUTPERFORMING
CHARTER MIDDLE SCHOOL:
A CASE STUDY FOCUSING ON PROMISING PRACTICES,
SCHOOL LEADERSHIP, AND CULTURAL NORMS

by
Brenna Harren McCarthy

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirement for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2018
ii
ABSTRACT
Many of today’s low-income neighborhoods are plagued by failing public schools. The
present public school system is fundamentally flawed due to the inequalities that exist with
regards to funding, resources, and equitable learning opportunities. Given these complexities, the
country introduced charters and other nontraditional schools to combat the bureaucratic systems
limiting the progress of the traditional public schools. Charter schools are publicly funded, held
to the same accountability measures as public schools, but are independently run. This freedom
allows them to implement innovative curriculums, use research based practices, and increase
learning opportunities for all students through unique school structures and classes. After 1992,
charters quickly grew in popularity, and while some could uphold their promise of academic
excellence, others began to mimic the problems of traditional schools.
This case study has highlighted an outperforming charter school. The researcher
identified Lunar Learning Academy, a nontraditional urban charter school that has defied the
troubling realities facing low-income communities and schools. This study used interviews,
observations, document analysis, and surveys to distinguish promising factors that are present at
the school. This case study looked through the lenses of promising programs and practices,
leadership practices, and cultural norms to detect factors that play a role in the school’s
outperforming success. Through data triangulation, the researcher identified four emergent
themes from the findings – each of which played an integral part in the school’s outperforming
academic success: (1) High expectations for all stakeholders (2) Decision-Making Freedom (3)
Intentionality with decision making (4) Mindset Consistencies.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This has been a once in a lifetime academic journey. I entered this Ed.D program in
search of something, but I was not sure what that something was. I went through my first several
classes still wondering what I was looking for, and it wasn’t until my interactions with Dr. Sylvia
Rousseau that I realized why I was here. During her first class, she asked us where we stood on
the map of human geography. I sunk in my chair, wondering if I had missed a reading
assignment because I didn’t have the answer. Throughout the semester, I took note of her passion
for equity, acknowledgement of diversity, and urban education. Her conversations and lectures
were immediately infectious, inspiring, and intimidating all at the same time. Not only were they
intimidating because of how committed she was to ensuring that we were citing the text when we
spoke, but intimidating because of the realities she uncovered for us. Dr. Rousseau opened my
eyes to social injustices, implicit racism, and imbalances in our society, that ultimately made
their way to our nation’s public schools. She taught me that no actions are too small, especially
when our nation’s children are at stake. And she taught me that there is no better time to commit
ourselves to celebrating diversity, and lifting our nation’s schools, than now. Thank you Dr.
Rousseau.
My parents have always been my biggest supporters. Thank you to my mom, Kathy
Harren, for motivating me to enter this Ed.D program. Thank you for editing my course papers,
watching Jaws during my late Wednesday night classes, and picking up my phone calls, even
when you knew all I might do was complain about how much work I had to do. Thank you for
supporting me financially during this program. It allowed me to fully immerse myself in this
work, and give it the attention it deserved. Also, thank you to my dad, Pat McCarthy. Thank you
for always being a USC fan, just because I went there. Thank you for wearing the USC shirt I got
iv
you, and being proud because your daughter is a Trojan. I love you both, and would not have
been able to do this without you.
This acknowledgement would not be complete without a few more people.
Evan: Thank you for being the best husband out there. You have supported me through
every step in this journey. I appreciate your independence during the weekends, when
you knew I had to go work at Starbucks for 10 hours. I appreciate you taking care of Jaws
on late Wednesday nights when I had class, and I appreciate you supporting me during
my stressful meltdowns (albeit, there were only a few J)
Dr. Ott and Dr. Gothold: Thank you for passion surrounding nontraditional schools. I
have always been proud to say that my two chairs truly believe in equitable,
nontraditional education, and that has made this process so much more meaningful.
Thank you for talking to us about your personal achievements, work, and opinions. Your
passion for nontraditional schools is incredibly inspiring. You both have made this work
about so much more than a dissertation, you have made this about learning, applying, and
being change agents in education.
ICEF Vista Academy - Staff & Students: Without you, this journey would not have
had the same meaning. Thank you for allowing me to take time away to conduct research
for this study. Thank you for allowing me to come back with new ideas, and for having
the willingness to implement them the very next day. Your enthusiasm to try new things,
just because I wanted to has made my journey so much more meaningful. Thank you for
your open minds, and your open hearts.

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem 2
Importance of the Study 3
Research Questions 4
Definition of Terms 5
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 8
Background of the Study 11
Historical Waves of Education 16
Poverty 16
Policies and Initiatives 18
The Rise of Nontraditional Schools 25
The Current Status of Nontraditional Schools 31
What is Going Wrong? 32
Promising Systems and Practices 37
Critique of Literature 49
Parental Involvement 51
Extracurricular Activities 53
Conceptual Framework 55
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 57
Overall Procedures 58
Sample Selection 61
Role of the Researcher 62
Data Collection and Instrumentation 62
Document Analysis 63
Surveys 64
Observations 64
Interviews 66
Data Analysis 67
Validity 69
Reliability 71
Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions 72
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 75
Methodology 77
Background of School Site 78
Findings by Research Question 81
Findings for Research Question 1 80
Clear and High Expectations 81
Decision-Making Freedom 89
Intentionality in Decision-Making 94
vi
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1 97
Findings for Research Question 2 98
Leading by Example 99
High Expectations and Accountability Set by Leadership 101
Decision-Making Freedom 104
Restorative Approaches of Discipline 108
Intentionality in Decision-Making 111
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2 114
Findings for Research Question 3 115
Mindset Consistencies Among Staff 115
Intentional Decision-Making 120
Relationships 122
Summary of Findings for Research Question 3 129
Emergent Themes 130
Discussion 131
Summary 138
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY 140
Purpose of the Study 141
Methodology and Research Questions 141
Summary of Findings and Themes 142
High Expectations 144
Decision-Making Freedom 145
Intentional Decision-Making 146
Mindset Consistencies 147
Implications and Suggestions for Future Studies 148
Recommendations for Future Studies 149
Conclusion 150
REFERENCES 151
APPENDIX A: DOCUMENT ANALYSIS PROTOCOL 162
APPENDIX B: SURVEY INSTRUMENT 163
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 168
APPENDIX D: OBSERVATIONPROTOCOL 172
APPENDIX E: INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN STUDY 178

vii
List of Tables
Table 1. Site Background Information 62
Table 2: Data Analysis Coding 68
Table 3: Summary of Findings by Research Question 143

viii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Staff members efforts to ensure student success 82
Figure 2: Expectations for students 85
Figure 3: Staff member contact with families 87
Figure 4: Freedom to carry out culturally relevant curriculum 92
Figure 5: Freedom to carry out different activities 92
Figure 6: Use of different instructional strategies in the classroom 95
Figure 7: Instruction adjusted to meet individual needs 96
Figure 8: Teachers receive regular feedback 103
Figure 9: Leadership holds staff accountable for student learning 103
Figure 10: Staff members work across grade level to increase achievement 117
Figure 11: Staff works beyond their roles to support student achievement 118
Figure 12: Teachers provided with regular feedback 119
Figure 13: Teachers care about their students 125
Figure 14: Discipline is considered fair 126
Figure 15: Student interactions are polite and supportive 127
Figure 16: Student attitudes are better than at previous schools 128

1
Chapter 1: Introduction

Most the nation’s urban public schools are a modern-day manmade disaster. Impacted by
controversial policies, extreme poverty, and an increasing teacher shortage, America’s low-
income and minority students are shortchanged on this fundamental human right. Despite the
widespread awareness that schools in low-income urban communities struggle to educate their
high-need students, savage inequalities persist, causing a widening academic gap between
schools serving low-income urban students and those in more affluent communities. Researchers
and educators have struggled to develop a successful plan to close the widening achievement gap
that has been plaguing the nation for decades. In an attempt to identify the most pervasive
causes, policy makers and educators have worked to create systemic changes through plans and
measures that would ideally minimize the achievement gap.
Despite a large number of changes and interventions, schools in low-income communities
continue to underperform all others. Urban low-income schools staff the highest numbers of
under qualified teachers, despite the recognition that teachers are the strongest determinant of
student achievement (Barry, 2004). Black male students are overrepresented in cases of extreme
discipline such as expulsions and suspensions (Skiba & Williams, 2014). Additionally, in most
low-income urban American high schools, fifty-percent of Latino and African American students
drop out of high school (Noguera, 2012). In many of these cases, poorly performing schools are
separated from successful schools by only a few miles, yet the inequities that exist within them
are alarming. Even more disturbing is that the traditional public education system in the United
States has made it essentially impossible for students in poor communities to gain access to
affluent schools even if they are only a few blocks away due to school zones and housing prices
(Holme, 2002).
2
In an attempt to level the opportunities available to minority children, nontraditional
schools were developed as an alternative prospect for students. These schools of choice provide
the opportunity students of any neighborhood to choose where to attend school. Unfortunately,
decades into this movement, research has shown that many of these nontraditional schools, such
as charters, magnets, private, and independent schools, are not performing at levels that are
higher than traditional neighborhood schools.
Statement of the Problem
Historically, students in high-poverty urban schools have not performed well
academically, in comparison to students in more affluent communities. However, there are
nontraditional urban schools with similar low socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
that are outperforming traditional public schools. More needs to be known about how these
nontraditional outperforming urban schools operate in order to achieve excellence.
The purpose of this study is to identify a nontraditional urban school that has defied the
troubling realities facing low-income communities and schools. This school demonstrated its
ability to outpace its traditional and nontraditional peers by providing a high-quality education to
its students despite the many barriers that exist. This study utilized a qualitative case study to
gather rich and descriptive data about the schools promising systems and structures, leadership
practices, and cultural norms. The findings from the study have been developed into an
illustrative narrative about what works within this nontraditional urban school. While this study
does not provide opportunities to generalize the data, it does afford a detailed account of
successful factors within one school setting, that could be used by leaders in similar schools in
parallel contexts.

3
Importance of the Study
Given that California has struggled to provide poor and minority students with a high-
quality education, this study is important for many reasons. To begin, it is imperative that this
research focused on an outperforming nontraditional school that served a high-need population to
learn about the promising practices and systems that existed within the school. By learning about
one school, other schools with similar demographics may be able to gather data about successful
characteristics and implement components of those within their schools. Additionally, as of
2015, over ten percent of the public-school student population attended charter and magnet
schools (NCES, 2015). However, only a small percentage of those schools were making marked
gains in improving student performance. Thus, it is essential that those schools were studied to
learn about the characteristics that could be contributing to their success.
Overview of the Study
This case study was conducted at a middle school in an urban city serving low-income
students in grades five through eight. For the purposes of this report, the pseudonym Lunar
Learning Academy was used when speaking of the research site. This research examined
teachers, administrators, and other stakeholders to learn about the promising systems and
programs, leadership practices, and cultural norms that existed within the school. The research
design consisted of four data gathering methods that began with a document analysis. Next, the
researcher administered surveys to the staff at Lunar Learning Academy (LLA). The surveys
were followed by interviews, and finally observations. Surveys and interviews were conducted
with teachers and school administrators, and observations took place in the classrooms and at
various locations around the school. The use of these four methods allowed the researcher to
triangulate findings to answer the three research questions:
4
(1) What practices and programs are implemented this urban outperforming nontraditional
school?
(2) What are the leadership practices in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12
school?
(3) What are the cultural norms in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12 school?
By answering these three questions, this study helps address the problem of failing urban schools
as it identified an institution that demonstrated success despite the enormous inequities that
existed in the public-school system in the United States.
This qualitative case study took place throughout the duration of one year and consisted of
between eight and fourteen full days at the school site. This study was part of a larger group
dissertation with eleven other members from the University of Southern California, each who
studied a different outperforming nontraditional urban school. The research design and data
collection instruments were developed cooperatively by the thematic dissertation team; however,
each researcher conducted his/her research, analyzed the findings, and wrote their report
independently. Together, the twelve case studies helped to identify trends amongst the data that
could assist leaders of other nontraditional urban schools in understanding some of the essential
components in these types of institutions. This paper discusses the case study research conducted
by a single researcher on an outperforming nontraditional urban charter school in a large urban
school district. It answers the questions about the promising practices and systems, leadership
practices, and cultural norms that existed within the school by triangulating the rich data and
developing meaningful conclusions about the factors that exist within the school.

5
Definition of Key Terms Specific to the Study
There are several terms that are unique to the educational setting which may be
unfamiliar to those interested in learning from this study. These words and phrases are identified
and defined according to various sources and institutions.
Achievement Gap: Refers to the differences in scores on state or national achievement
tests between various student demographic groups (Anderson, Medrich, & Fowler, 2007).
Charter School: Public schools that operate with freedom from many of the local and
state regulations that apply to traditional public schools…Charter schools are sponsored by local,
state, or other organizations that monitor their quality while holding them accountable for
academic results and responsible fiscal practices (U.S. Department of Education, 2009).
Magnet School: Magnet schools are designed to attract students from diverse social,
economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. They focus on a specific subject, such as science or
the arts; follow specific themes… or operate according to certain models… Some magnet
schools require students to take an exam or demonstrate knowledge or skill in the specialty to
qualify to go to the school, while others are open to students who express an interest in that area
(U.S. Department of Education, 2009).
Nontraditional Schools: An umbrella term including any school not considered a
traditional public school. The mission of the nontraditional school is to be a democratically
governed learning community of broadly educated, creative, and independent critical thinkers
who work collaboratively and demonstrate a high degree of individual and social responsibility
(Johnson, 2004).
Outperforming: Outperforming schools are those with predominantly met or exceeding
scores on their Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortia (SBAC). Schools that have received
6
outstanding school awards such as blue or gold ribbon awards, and have low dropout rates (if
they are a high school).
Private School: Most private, or nonpublic schools in the U.S. are religious, and are
affiliated with a religious faith, denomination, or local church. Many nonpublic schools without a
religious identity or affiliation are private schools designed to prepare students for college. Other
independent schools are based on an education philosophy or approach to learning (U.S.
Department of Education, 2009).
Promising Practices: A collection of ideas, values, procedures, that form a coherent,
integrated whole. Practices that apply, work, and generate higher performance levels
everywhere, and in any context (Leseure, Bauer, Birdi, Neely, & Denyer, 2004).
Traditional Schools: A school that is maintained at public expenses for the education of
the children of a community or district and that constitutes a part of a system of free public
education commonly including primary and secondary schools (Dictionary.com, 2017).
Urban Schools: Urban schools are those that predominantly enroll students with low-
socioeconomic status, have high ethnic diversity, and generally under resourced.
The subsequent chapter provides a thorough review of the relevant literature on the historical
educational initiatives that led up to today. It then discusses the current challenges of public
education, provides a detailed description of the most common characteristics of successful
urban schools – both traditional and nontraditional, and finally, it concludes with a critique of the
existing literature. Chapter three provides a detailed description of the methodology used in this
case study, as well as an explanation of the limitations, delimitations, and assumptions of the
research. Chapter four explains the data and results gathered by the researcher regarding the
research questions, as well as highlights four emergent themes generated from the findings.
7
Finally, chapter five is a discussion of the results as they relate to current educational issues and
describes implications for future research on similar topics.

8
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature
The term achievement gap has been a critical topic of debate for many parents, educators,
and researchers alike. It was once generally defined as the numerical difference in academic
achievement scores between Black and White students. Unfortunately, the definition’s simplicity
did not adequately indicate the various complexities and multiple gaps that exist. Attempting to
explain the gap, identify the causes, and measure its growth or decline has been a long-standing
battle for all parties involved. As a result, researchers have begun to take an alternative approach
by looking not only at the educational gaps, but also the income gaps between Black and other
minority groups in comparison to their White peers, and how those disparities have played a role
in the achievement gap (Anderson et al., 2007). Moreover, researchers and educators have also
begun to look at the different causes of this achievement gap as well as the best ways to measure
it.
After years of investigation on the many possible causes of the achievement gap, many
educators and researchers have narrowed their scope to investigate the responsibility of poor-
quality schools in this educational crisis. Low-income neighborhoods and communities are
plagued with failing schools that often face pervasive shortcomings in several critical areas.
Weak school leadership, often caused by strong teachers unions, is a dominant factor in failing
schools because of an inability to create positive change and a powerful school culture (Pak,
2015). In high-poverty schools in the United States, the average child is more likely to be
surrounded by classmates who lack big dreams and are less academically engaged (Kahlenberg,
2009). Teachers in these schools are less likely to be highly qualified and have fewer years of
teaching experience (Kahlenberg, 2004). Additionally, urban schools often have scarcer
resources as well as out-of-date classrooms, materials, and buildings (Darling-Hammond &
9
Luczak, 2005). Given the difficult obstacles, attempting to close this gap has been an
overwhelming process for all those invested in the nation’s public education system.
Much like an innovative chef adds or removes ingredients to a recipe in order to achieve
perfection, policy makers and educational experts are regularly doing the same, but with a much
greater outcome at stake; their popular ingredients are the school choice movement and the
introduction of nontraditional schools. At the most basic level, the school choice effort indicates
that parents and guardians may choose the schools that their children will attend. A major
component of the school choice movement has been the introduction of nontraditional schools.
Advocates of this change often lean on market accountability. They assert their optimism that
school choice will improve the quality of education in the United States because of the inevitable
competition that will arise from the parents’ freedom to send children to any school available.
Under this structure, school leaders function like corporations, and treat parents and students as
customers, adopting different management strategies to generate a greater profit from their
monetary input (Firestone & Shipps, 2013). Conversely, opponents believe that nontraditional
schools are the demise of traditional public schools. These schools are often accused of drawing
funds and resources from neighborhood public schools. From the same lens, critics blame the
nontraditional school choice movement for the increase in racial segregation in schools caused
by “White flight” to rural neighborhoods (Bangser et al., 2007; Davis, 2014; Holme, 2002).
Although both sides continue to present their concerns, it is imperative to recognize that the
nation is decades into the school choice and nontraditional school’s movement, and the academic
achievement gap between wealthy and poor, and between minority and White, continues to
grow.
10
Historically, students in high-poverty urban schools have not performed well
academically, in comparison to students in more affluent communities; however, there are
several nontraditional urban schools with similar socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
that have defied these odds. These rare nontraditional schools are not only outperforming other
nontraditional schools, but also traditional public schools. The review of the literature in this
section has identified the following six factors as the most promising practices in low-income
urban nontraditional schools: (a) a clear vision of success, (b) collaborative environment, (c)
high expectations, (d) emphasis on the student voice, (e) high-quality teachers, and (f) strong
leadership. It is vital to learn more about these nontraditional outperforming schools and how
they implement these six characteristics. By studying these rare and notable schools, it is
possible to learn about strategies, systems, and promising practices that could be utilized in other
nontraditional schools in order to achieve similar excellence.
The purpose of this study is to identify the factors present in a nontraditional
outperforming urban K–12 school. This literature review will indicate the progression of the
nontraditional school movement. It will begin with a review of the relevant historical initiatives
that have played in a role in education reform. Next, this report will include the empirical
findings on the most prominent obstacles that low-income, urban schools face, as well as a
synthesis of the findings on six of the most promising practices that take place within high-
performing nontraditional schools. Finally, this review will include a critique of the findings
from the body of literature that has been conducted on outperforming nontraditional urban K-12
schools serving California’s highest need students.

11
Background of the Study
Given traditional public schools’ inability to meaningfully educate their minority, low-
income, and high-need students, there is an overwhelming urgency to study nontraditional urban
schools that are producing promising results. These nontraditional outperforming schools are
unique because they have techniques to provide their students with a high-quality education
despite the many barriers that exist. These devastating inequities, such as underqualified
teachers, limited classroom resources, poor school leadership, and inequitable funding, have
caused significant achievement gaps between low- and high-income students.
It is becoming increasingly evident, now more than ever, that money matters. School
districts that receive more capital have higher salaries for their employees, smaller class sizes,
better resources, and, ultimately, higher academic achievement. Between 1993 and 2007, in 40
states across the United States, high-poverty schools received increased funding from their
districts, relative to more affluent communities (Baker, Farrie, & Sciarra, 2016); this added
funding was meant to help boost low-income schools that had been financially neglected for so
long. The additional funding also helped create smaller class sizes, and provide more promising
resources. However, despite the growing evidence showing the necessity for equitable funding
for low-income school districts, in the five years after 2007, 30 states in the United States have
decreased their equitable funding to low-income schools (Baker et al., 2016). The result of this
inequitable funding has been an increasing dropout rate in urban schools and a widening
achievement gap.
Children who live in low-income households in urban communities often struggle in
school for a multitude of reasons. Children in low-income families tend to experience greater
residential mobility, which is linked to poorer academic achievement (Han, 2014). Further, low-
12
income children are more likely to suffer maltreatment, neglect, or traumatizing family events
such as divorce (Coulton, Korbin, Su, & Chow, 1995). As a result, in many urban high-poverty
school districts, standardized test scores are lower than the state-wide average (Bangser et al.,
2007). Further, in low-income communities, less than one of every two students graduates from
high school. In the United States as a whole, approximately one-half of Black students, and 40%
of Hispanic students are enrolled in failing schools, and only one-half of the students graduate
(Bangser et al., 2007). In a popular debate, many individuals often wonder whether failing
schools are a result of failing communities, or if communities suffer because of failing schools.
On one end of the debate, communities that house multiple failing schools face an increase in
crime caused by the large number of dropouts (Barton & Coley, 2010a). Students who drop out
of school struggle to make ends meet and must find alternative means of survival. On the reverse
side, low-quality neighborhoods can negatively impact student attendance because of an increase
in stress caused by community violence, gangs, or a lack of positive role models (Sampson,
Morenoff, & Ganon-Rowley, 2002). Children who frequently miss school show less academic
achievement because they miss valuable instruction and fail to benefit from their teachers and
peers (Morrissey, Hutchison, & Winsler, 2014). The conflicting evidence leads to the assertion
that there is a cyclical impact on failing neighborhoods and failing schools.
Amongst all the adverse statistics there are pockets of hope and promise; these are
nontraditional urban schools in low-income communities where students are not only learning at
an impressive rate, but also achieving at levels higher than any traditional school around them.
By studying an outperforming nontraditional school like this, research can shed light on the
promising practices, and other successful strategies and structures that exist in these unique
13
schools. These findings can help support and inform other nontraditional urban schools serving
California’s disadvantaged youth.
California’s struggle to provide poor and minority students with a high-quality education
has been a historic battle. While academic achievement has been increasing on average for all
groups of students, the gap between White and Black, and high- and low-income students
remains a persistent problem in our education system (Baker et al., 2016). In the 1970s,
considering the reality that urban schools in low-income communities were struggling,
alternative options to public education began to open across the country. These nontraditional
schools promised continuous progress in education. They attracted parents and kids who desired
an alternative school that was academically better, safer and more racially integrated than their
previous school offered. This movement symbolized hope in the face of doubt and stimulated the
faith that these new schools were the answer that so many had sought after for so long.
The nontraditional schools’ movement came in waves. In the late 1970s magnet schools
began to open across the country. These were public schools that operated with public funds that
were open to all students who applied. These schools had a distinct focus in their curricula, such
as arts, dance, or music. The wave of magnet schools increased quickly, and they could not keep
up with the demand. Magnet schools filled up quickly, and many students were still attending
their failing neighborhood school. As they grew in popularity, there was a subsequent increase in
nontraditional schools. In 1992, the first charter school opened in California. Built on the same
premise, these schools did not have a particular thematic focus, yet also grew quickly in
popularity (Edwards & Perry, 2004). Charter schools served as an educational experiment in the
school choice movement. They offered increased autonomy, encouraged instructional
innovation, and were exempt from most accountability measures. As the rise and fall of charter
14
popularity continued, new forms of nontraditional schools began to emerge all over the country.
Small schools, independent study programs, and many other types were born, all of the same
message and hope: to provide all students with a unique and superior education. Despite their
hopeful message and the many changes and trials, this movement has lasted over a decade and a
half, and the achievement gap continues to grow.
The nontraditional school choice options continue to increase across the country,
especially in states with large numbers of low-income urban communities such as California.
Unfortunately, this growth has yet to make any dent in the achievement gap in California. At the
end of the 2016 school year, 72% of Asian American students and 53% of White students met or
exceeded the Common Core State Standards—a measure of academic proficiency—on their
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium exam (Fensterwald, 2016). During that same year,
only 18% of Black students and 24% of Hispanic students scored proficient on the same set of
tests (Fensterwald, 2016). Further, low-income students scored 35% proficient, and English
Language Learners (ELL) tested at 13% proficiency (Fensterwald, 2016). These numbers
dismally demonstrate that the gap in achievement is much more complicated than many initially
believed and that the challenge of urban education extends well beyond schools. Further,
economic status, neighborhood differences, and family structures all play a critical role in the
education of high-need students.
It is important to understand that different students have different needs. The nation’s
urban schools have made it increasingly evident that low-income and minority youth need
something different than what they have been receiving for so long; however, it appears this has
not been as widely acknowledged until the past few decades when families of poor and minority
students began demanding change. As a result, the nontraditional school option continues to
15
grow in popularity amongst families of students in poor urban communities because of the
increased need for them. Per the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES; 2016) there are
currently 546 magnet schools in California, serving over 500,000 students with an 81% minority
enrollment. Moreover, in California, there are 982 active charter schools, serving over 370,000
students, and over 250 alternative schools with over 63,000 students (NCES, 2015; NCES,
2016). These growing numbers of nontraditional schools confirm that this movement is here to
stay not only in California, but also across the nation (Wohlstetter, Smith, & Farrell, 2015).
Nontraditional schools are unique in two primary ways. Firstly, they are filled through
open enrollment. In other words, any student may choose to attend a nontraditional school
regardless of money or geographic borders. However, more recently, many of these schools have
been forced to use lottery systems to admit students because of an increase in demand. Secondly,
they are more autonomous in structure; for example, many nontraditional schools often
emphasize college-readiness, leadership, and lifelong learning. Many also offer extended school
days, hold high expectations for their academics and behavior, and encourage the active
involvement of families and communities. These nontraditional schools frequently operate with a
particular focus that is well integrated into their curriculum such as arts-focused instruction, a
curriculum based on science, technology, engineering, math, communications, or game-based
learning. These two unique characteristics make nontraditional schools an attractive option for
many students and families, especially those living in low-income urban neighborhoods.
Despite their captivating qualities, many nontraditional schools are not providing
California’s high-need urban youth with a better education than traditional public schools.
Theses nontraditional schools may still face the same obstacles as traditional schools such as
low-quality teachers, weak leadership, and classroom overcrowding. Whatever ones view on
16
these schools, it is evident that nontraditional schools are here to stay, and as a result, it is
essential that researchers identify and study the nontraditional schools that are defying this
reality and are providing the low-income minority population with an equitable and high-quality
education. Through innovative curriculum, high expectations, and a shared and clear school
vision, these schools are outperforming all other schools around them. As educators, community
members, parents, and researchers, it is imperative to examine these outperforming
nontraditional schools in order to determine how they overcome the many disparities and barriers
that exist. A critical study and investigation of these schools will provide hope and show promise
that schools and school districts can take large steps towards closing the achievement gap once
and for all.
The Historical Waves of Public Education
Poverty
Low-income and minority students face pervasive shortcomings when it comes to
education, and it is these obstacles that can cause schools and students to fail. At the most
fundamental level, students who live in poverty have fewer options when it comes to school.
Traditional public schools have historically failed to provide low-income and minority youth
with the most basic educational requirements (Steagall, 2012). Moreover, policies, such as No
Child Left Behind (NCLB), that were created to hold schools accountable were often
undermined by loopholes that allowed failing schools to bypass the accountability systems.
Consequently, these ambiguities have allowed failing schools to remain open with minimal
student learning occurring year after year (Davidson, Reback, Rockoff, & Schwartz, 2015).
When considering private schools, this choice is often far out of reach for these students and
families due to financial constraints. Finally, other types of alternative schooling are often
17
impossible due to transportation (Peske & Haycock, 2006). As a result, these failing schools
have been largely concentrated in high-poverty communities, where they employ under-qualified
teachers in overcrowded classrooms with minimal resources (Steagall, 2012).
Low-income and minority students are often taught by underqualified and less effective
teachers than students in predominantly White neighborhoods. Teachers in these disadvantaged
schools are less likely to hold the correct teaching credentials (Darling‐Hammond, 2007). They
are more likely to be teaching out of their field of expertise, and contain fewer years teaching
experience (Kahlenberg, 2009). Students who attend these neighborhood schools are often taught
by predominantly White female teachers who are in their 1st or 2nd year teaching (Darling-
Hammond, 2007). This often causes what some researchers consider a cultural mismatch, in
which White teachers misinterpret Black students’ behavioral styles as defiance; as a result, these
students are confused about why their White teachers are angered by behavior that is accepted in
their homes (Downey & Pribesh, 2004). This disconnect creates an ongoing battle as
expectations and behaviors clash (Downey & Pribesh, 2004). Additionally, these novice teachers
generally consider poor urban schools a stepping stone to a more desirable job in a middle- or
high-class school district (Kahlenberg, 2009). Consequently, these schools face markedly high
turnover rates, and as a result, often employ long-term substitutes for large portions of the
academic year (Peske & Haycock, 2006).
The inequalities in public education are more apparent when one contrasts top-notch
buildings, beautifully designed sports complexes, and beautiful neighborhoods on flawless
streets with crime-filled ghettos, overcrowded schools, and crumbling facilities. When one looks
inside, the disparities are even starker. Schools in these low-income communities often have
fewer resources that are often out-of-date and severely inadequate for learning (Borman,
18
Dowling, & Maritza, 2008). Amongst these resources, the most beneficial for promoting
academic success is a qualified staff and an adequate staff-to-student ratio. Despite the body of
evidence that suggests the correlation between class size and academic achievement, many
schools are not able to reduce their class sizes. In order for schools to reduce their class sizes,
they would be forced to hire more staff, which would require more money to recruit as well as a
higher compensation to retain them—a feat that is unlikely for any high-poverty urban public
school district (Baker et al., 2016). These schools often use out-of-date textbooks, have fewer
physical resources, and older facilities and classrooms. Students in these schools are offered
fewer Advanced Placement courses, making them less competitive candidates for attending
competitive universities (Pak, 2015). The negative school climate in many low-income urban
public schools does not provide students with their basic educational rights or prepare students to
attend 4-year colleges and universities. These poverty-triggered obstacles are not a result of a
few misplaced leaders or mismanaged funds, but rather they are systemic complications that
have been built by decades of educational policies and initiatives that have favored the nations
more affluent populations.
Policies and Initiatives
The quality of education that children in low-income communities receive is often a
result of the neighborhood in which they can afford to live. Thus, low-income and minority
students do not get the same resources and education in their classrooms as children in more
affluent communities. In an effort to provide an equitable education to all children, there have
been several initiatives and efforts—local and national—that have managed to level the playing
field for poor and minority students.
19
Brown versus the Board of Education. In 1954, the court decision of Brown versus the
Board of Education in the United States overturned the running Plessy versus Ferguson doctrine.
In this decision, the court ruled that the segregation of White and Black students in public
schools was unconstitutional. The Brown versus Board ruling intended to integrate schools by
providing students and their families with more flexibility and choice about where families could
send their students to school. Many Black children were placed on buses and sent to more
affluent neighborhoods where they attended newly integrated schools that had once been filled
with only White students. This initial attempt at the integration of public education in the United
States stimulated panic in many White households across the nation. When violence and crime
did not stop the integration of public schools, White families needed another way to remain
segregated. As a result, White families fled the cities and moved to the suburbs in fear of their
children being educated with Black children, who they believed were “inferior” people (Lee &
Orfield, 2006).
Although credited for integrating public education for good, the ruling of Brown versus
Board had many unintended consequences that can still be seen and felt today. First, urban
communities are even more segregated and poverty-filled than before. Due to the mass
movement of White families to the suburbs, the inner cities and urban schools were left with
predominantly Black and Hispanic students (Darling-Hammond, 2007). Despite the multitude of
affordable housing and transportation efforts that followed, high-poverty urban communities
became even more concentrated. Secondly, Black individuals have been trapped in these poor
and deprived areas for several generations, and the schools have plummeted financially and
academically (Barton & Coley, 2010b). The ruling of Brown versus the Board of Education took
place more than half a century ago. A decision meant to make education equal has crippled the
20
upward mobility for Black individuals and those living in poor urban communities. Additionally,
this same decision has left the schools in low-income urban neighborhoods financially drained.
On a larger scale, these consequences were not isolated in one city; the aftershocks of Brown
versus Board were felt across the country, especially in cities with diverse populations.
Serano versus Priest. More than a decade and a half later, public schools in California
continued to experience the same results as the students did immediately post Brown versus
Board. California’s low-income minority students found themselves attending segregated schools
and sitting in crowded classrooms with fewer resources. In 1971, a landmark Supreme Court
case, Serano versus Priest, addressed the inequalities in the funding of public education in the
United States. Prior to this case, housing taxes paid by families in the neighborhood
predominantly funded public schools. The plaintiffs of the case claimed that using local property
taxes as a primary funding source for public schools caused unequal disparities between rural
and urban schools. They also claimed that using property taxes as a means for school funding
limited the quality of education they could receive (Hirji, 1999). In other words, a child in a low-
income school could only receive an education that was comparable to the wealth of their family
and their community. The reality that many students in California’s urban schools were Black or
Hispanic children meant that those were the students who were receiving a markedly inferior
education.
Upon review of the data, the California Supreme Court found that there were significant
inequalities that existed between districts’ funding, which could be attributed to the use of
housing lines and property taxes. They determined that the wealthier school districts and
communities provided a higher level of education for their children than the poorer districts.
Consequently, the court concluded that the school financing system discriminated against low-
21
income children based on wealth, which violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S.
Constitution and the California Constitution. Education is a fundamental interest, investment,
and human right, and thus, the court ruled that all schools should be equally funded per student.
Improving America’s Schools Act. Over a decade after a policy designed to provide
equal funding to schools in the United States was implemented, it became more obvious that
low-income urban school districts needed funding that was equitable to the obstacles they faced.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was administered in 1965 as a program
designed to give support and funding to low-income students. The most popular component of
this policy was the Title I act, which allocated direct funding to schools based on the financial
standing of the students within the districts. Title I was an attempt at an equitable solution for
school funding.
Since 1965, ESEA has been subject to several modifications, one of which is the
Improving America’s Schools Act (IASA), signed under the Clinton administration. This law
increases flexibility for districts and schools to use federal funds that have been allocated by
Title I, and places a heavy emphasis on promoting parental involvement. IASA requires Title I
schools to have a parent advisory role or liaison to promote familial involvement. The act also
provides additional funding to Title I schools to build systems and capacity for promoting and
encouraging parental involvement. This policy was implemented because of research
demonstrating that low-income and minority parents need guidance when it comes to helping
their children succeed (Moles, 1982). Additionally, low-income children need strong family
cooperation in order to do better in school (Henderson, 1996). Finally, parent involvement plays
a large role in the academic achievement of low-income students (Hobson, 1979). The intention
of the IASA was to provide Title I schools with additional funding in order to promote parental
22
involvement. However, recent research has found that the implementation of parent advisory
roles and councils has negated parents willingness to partake in their own children’s education
because of their hesitation to be a part of financial decisions, programs, and policy boards
(Johnson, 1997).
No Child Left Behind Act. Less than a decade later, and at the start of his presidential
career, George W. Bush passed the NCLB, one of the largest educational reforms in the past 50
years. The 2001 reform supported a standards-based agenda, whereby the United States set
criteria and measurable goals for schools to achieve high academic outcomes. To measure these
desired results, NCLB placed a large emphasis on both school and teacher accountability by
measuring academic progress through high-stakes testing, as well as by creating a rigorous
standard for teacher qualifications and evaluation. Upon initial implementation, it was believed
that a demand for educational excellence would help all schools increase their Adequate Yearly
Progress scores and attain 100% proficiency by the year 2014 in both math and reading.
Advocates of NCLB felt optimistic that this was the reform that would close the achievement
gap once and for all through its two most notable areas: testing and accountability, and highly
qualified teachers.
Supports claim that NCLB shed light on the obvious concern that poor and minority
students are consistently taught less and by newer or underqualified teachers (Darling-Hammond
& Berry, 2006). However, although NCLB attempted to parallel the expectations and
accountability for all schools, it failed to provide equitable resources to high poverty schools to
support them in meeting those expectations (Lee & Orfield, 2006). With such high-stakes testing,
and a shame-based system for highlighting schools that do not meet their target Adequate Yearly
Progress scores and proficiency scores, schools replaced their old systems of teaching and testing
23
with rote-oriented, military-style memorization instruction, most popularly known as “teaching
to the test” (Darling-Hammond, 2007). With such extreme accountability, teachers in these
schools felt immense pressure to produce promising result. Thus, those teachers who once taught
in low-income urban schools fled to more affluent schools where they knew the students would
perform better, leaving volumes of vacancies for teaching positions in the highest need schools.
Teacher shortages in low-income urban neighborhoods have been linked to the inability
of schools to meet their student achievement goals. Unfortunately, many attribute this to
consequence to NCLB and other policies and initiatives (Ingersoll & Perda, 2009). Recruiting
teachers to teach in high-poverty schools is a continuous challenge, and retaining them year after
year is an even more difficult task. In the years surrounding NCLB, reports from the U.S.
Department of Education (2011) released documents stating that over 40% of low-income school
districts disproportionately pay their teachers less than teachers employed in more affluent
school districts. Salaries, insufficient resources, and poor working conditions drove teachers out
year after year, leaving the students who need the best teachers, with a revolving door of novice
and ineffective teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2010). The high teacher expectations set by NCLB
and the demand to have all students meet proficiency in math and reading were far out of reach.
Further, politicians were encouraging educational policy makers to be more realistic about what
students and school districts could do.
Race to the Top. Learning from previous reform efforts, Race to the Top (RTT)
incentivized, rather than mandated, excellence. This was done through monetary allocations to
school districts and states that were willing to exercise a certain criterion as they “raced to the
top” of the public school system (Viteritti, 2012). RTT was one of the largest financial
investments for education in the United States. The legislation was set into place by President
24
Obama in 2009, and it dedicated $4.35 billion for a competitive program that would allocate
funds to states that agreed to implement a set of criteria. States interested in the program would
receive funding for their schools in return for adopting uniform benchmark standards, improving
the recruitment and retention efforts for teachers and leadership, improving the collecting and
analyzing of test data, and implementing strategies to turn around schools that were deemed
failing. While many educational experts and policy makers initially believed that this was the
most equitable reform policy to date, opponents quickly identified the set criterion as a
fundamental flaw because the competitive allocation of resources only benefited wealthier states
and districts rather than helping the students in the highest need schools and communities.
Despite this notable flaw in the policy, advocates found that one of the best outcomes
from RTT was its strategy for turning around failing schools: increasing the supply of high-
quality charter schools (Viteritti, 2012). Initiatives such as NCLB and RTT displayed positive
intent through their efforts to provide quality education to all students in our nation’s public
schools. However, competitive strategies to allocate funds have proven once again that federal
dollars are most often rewarded to schools that need them the least.
The Every Student Succeeds Act. In 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was
proposed as the newest version of the ESEA. Under ESSA, states are required to test students in
reading and math in Grades 3, 8, and during 1 year of high school. Schools must use the data
they gather from these tests to evaluate the performance of subgroups of students. Subgroups
consist of students who are ELLs, students in special education, racial minorities, and students
living in poverty. Under this policy, states receive discretion in how they set their achievement
goals, what they should be accountable for, and how they choose to intervene with a school that
is considered to be failing.
25
Advocates believe that ESSA removes the fear in high stakes testing by allowing schools
to choose alternative measures for performance such as school climate, student engagement,
access to advanced coursework, and grit (Klein, 2015). While ESSA does not go into full effect
until the 2017–2018 school year, its intended goal is clear: Schools that serve the nation’s highest
need students, those that are furthest behind, must close the gaps in achievement and graduation
rates. Despite years of initiatives and policies created to provide equitable education to our
nation’s highest need students, there is still one effort that deserves more attention: the
introduction of nontraditional schools into the public education sector. This movement of
nontraditional schools provides a promising glimpse into what could work in the poorest and
highest need communities in the United States.
The Rise of Nontraditional Schools
The previous explanation of past initiatives was provided to paint a dismal picture of the
educational crisis that is happening in our nation’s public schools. It is evident from the research
that there is an overwhelming need for reform in U.S. public schools, especially those schools in
low-income urban neighborhoods. While previous reform efforts have shown that policies are
not simple tools that can repair decades of broken schools, they do attempt to offer opportunities
for a more equitable education in our most at-risk communities. The difficulty is that not all
agree on the best policies to make this happen.
To many Americans, traditional public schools symbolize an entryway to a better life.
Ravitch (2010) considers public schools the cornerstones of our democratic society. Advocates
such as Ravitch believe that traditional public schools represent the most obvious effort to turn
the ideology of the American dream into a reality (Hochschild & Scovronick, 2003). However,
attempts at this reality come with a price. According to the NCES (2016), the United States
26
spends over one half of a billion dollars on public education every year, equating to more than
$12,000 per public school student each year, and those numbers are continuing to rise. In 2012,
the U.S. expenditures on education for elementary and secondary were 31% higher than 34 other
countries (NCES, 2016). However, popular media indicates that spending more money on
education is acceptable if the public schools are producing promising results.
In a 2012 report of 34 participating countries the United States ranked just 24th in
mathematics, 17th in reading, and 20th in science (OECD, 2012). California is one of 18 states in
the United States whose tax payers pay more for prisons than they do for education each year
(Department of Education, 2016); this has led many to ask: “Where has the nation gone wrong?”
It seems as though all sides of the debate believe that improving student test scores is an
imperative goal for all schools and all students (Ravitch, 2010). However, public schools are
continuing to prove that they only work for middle- and high-income students. A majority of the
public schools serving minority or low-income students are failing to educate their students at a
level necessary for entry into a four-year college or University. Research from the National
Center for Education Statistics (2007) shows that there is a significant gap in reading levels and
comprehension performance between students from higher and lower socioeconomic levels.
Even more alarming is the lack of interest in literacy between students from these same groups,
which has been suggested is a result of a constant mismatch between the needs of students from
different groups (Reis, Mccoach, Little, Muller, & Kaniskan, 2011). These same public schools
are not able to provide their students with equitable resources, namely high-quality teachers and
meaningful instruction. Further, the per-pupil spending differs greatly between urban and
suburban school districts, providing or limiting the types of services offered in the schools
(Bangser et al., 2007).
27
Many educational experts have realized that traditional public schools vary tremendously
in quality. In search for a different option, a new wave of schools was brought to the surface. The
introduction of nontraditional schools has served as an educational experiment to repair and
transform the education system in poor and urban communities. Nontraditional schools are free
public schools that have generally been formed by family or community members based on the
dissatisfaction with the local public schools. Any student can attend these schools regardless of
where they live, or their family income. Nontraditional schools vary in type, size, and quality,
but the most popular and well-known are charter schools, magnets, and alternative types such as
small schools.
Small schools are district-run public schools that allow enrollment regardless of housing
zones. These schools are populated by students who self-select into them, and they limit their
enrollment based on size. They often have a strong focus on academic instruction, and usually
offer enhanced opportunities for personal support and family involvement. The leadership in
these small schools exercise their rightful autonomy to make decisions about the well-being of
the school without being bound by unions or larger governing boards. Small schools often exist
in a small subset of a larger public school.
A second type of nontraditional school is a magnet school. Magnets are free public
schools that often have a distinct focus such as arts, science, gifted learning, or leadership. This
thematic and curricular focus is created to attract and draw students across their boundary lines,
like a magnet (Wang, Schweig, & Herman, 2014). Ideally, magnets hope to generate a diverse
and representative student population. As of 2014, magnet schools were the largest sector in the
nontraditional school choice movement, enrolling over 2 million students during the 2012 school
year (Siegel-Hawley, Frankenberg & Wang, 2012). As a result of their growing popularity,
28
magnet schools now select students based on a lottery and points system, but because of their
autonomous structure, several have chosen to select students based on housing zones, merit-
based requirements, or other criteria.
A third form of nontraditional schools are charter schools. By definition, Charter schools
are schools of choice that operate with more of an autonomous structure and fewer regulations.
They are contracted by a public entity for 3 – 5 years (Bulkley & Wohlstetter, 2004). Charters
are often exempt from a variety of regulations, curriculum requirements, and unions. However,
because they operate with public funding most charters are held accountable for student
achievement and financial stability like all other public schools. Charters have recently grown in
popularity because of several successful Charter Management Organization, such as the
Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP), Success Charter Networks, Uncommon Schools, and YES
Prep (California Charter School Association, 2016).
Nontraditional schools represent the more modern-choice model of education reform.
The idea behind this is that these schools of choice can develop a range of programs both
academic and nonacademic that can appeal to the diverse needs of their students and parents
(Bulkley & Wohlstetter, 2004). The impetus for this movement was the evident crisis that poor
and minority children are getting a low-quality public education every day in public schools
because of a lack of equitable resources, low-quality teachers, and inequitable funding. While the
idea of autonomous nontraditional schools initially sounds promising, many Americans are
divided in their support of these nontraditional schools. Advocates for school choice and
nontraditional schools believe that public schooling does not work for poor children. They
believe that using effective market strategies will illicit competition between schools and
encourage schools to explore and implement new and innovative strategies to effectively educate
29
the students in their schools (Stetz, 2009). Others believe that more choice and flexibility will
allow schools to meet student needs because of the increased autonomy and ability to implement
innovative teaching methods (Toma & Zimmer, 2012).
Support for nontraditional schools spans all ages and interest levels. Three out of five
children who attend charter schools believe that their teachers are better than the teachers they
had at their old school (Hochschild & Scovronick, 2003). The U.S. Department of Education has
promoted magnet schools, stating that the high-quality education they provide can induce
neighborhood schools to better serve the general student population. They believe that magnets
have stimulated competition through basic accountability as schools essentially must compete for
student enrollment (Bangser et al., 2007). However, much like any great debate, it is nearly
impossible to read about this reform movement without hearing the alternative side of the coin.
Opponents of school choice and nontraditional schools believe that nontraditional schools
limit the classroom diversity for their students. They believe that these schools are financially
unstable, and draw funds from local public schools by taking away some of the most involved
families and highest performing students (Bangser et al., 2007). Other public education activists
believe that although magnet schools can be successful at integrating students based on race and
socioeconomic status, they separate students by ability levels (Bangser et al., 2007). Said
differently, they draw the best students away from their traditional public schools and into the
magnet schools, leaving the remaining students at a substantial disadvantage because they are not
benefiting from a learning environment with high-achieving peers.
Critics of charter schools claim that the autonomous structure of charter schools does
more harm than good, and that there are many charter schools that run similar to poor performing
traditional public schools (Wohlstetter et al., 2015). Further, nontraditional schools opponents
30
have shed light on the reality that charter schools lead to increased racial and ethnic segregation
at a much greater rate than other types of nontraditional and traditional schools (Wohlstetter et
al., 2015). A well-known opponent of nontraditional schools, Ravitch (2010), believes that
charter schools take away the most motivated students, leaving the public schools to manage the
problem students that have been left behind. She wrote that running public education like a
market business has undermined the moral values and communal ties of education, putting the
education of all children at risk (Ravitch, 2010).
Despite conflicting opinions, nontraditional schools have shown mixed results when it
comes to the academic achievement and school experience of disadvantaged youth. Twenty-six
charter school sectors in the United States have shown positive results in mathematics
achievement in relation to their local public schools (The Center for Research on Education
Outcomes, 2015). In reading, 23 regions of charter schools have shown positive impacts
compared to their local public schools (CREDO, 2015). In a 2015 study of 17 traditional
elementary schools that had converted to magnet schools, a majority of students in 11 of the
schools performed better on their math and English language arts state assessments than
predicted they would have in their district school (Betts, Kitmitto, Levin, Bos, & Eaton, 2015).
When it comes to diversity and school environment, magnet schools are often more racially
integrated at the classroom level than traditional public schools in urban communities (Davis,
2014).
Alternatively, the overall closure rate for charter schools has increased from just over 2%
in 2011 to almost 4% in 2014 and 2015 (CalEd., 2016). Moreover, at the end of the 2015 school
year, 47 charter schools in California were forced to close their doors because of academic or
financial downfalls; 19 of which were in Los Angeles alone (CalEd., 2016). When looking at
31
magnet schools, a 2014 study found that magnet schools that educate a predominantly Black
population can have negative effects on student learning if all the teachers do not collaborate
regularly to provide the students with quality program implementation (Wang et al., 2014). This
conflicting research funnels down to the following conclusion: As of 2015, over 500,000
children in California alone were enrolled in nontraditional schools (CREDO, 2015; NCES,
2016). The problem the state and the nation face is that the number of children that are educated
in these schools is growing and there is not yet a clear sense of the factors that are playing a role
in the success of some of California’s highest performing nontraditional schools.
The Current Status of Nontraditional Schools
What is Going Wrong?
Nontraditional schools in low-income urban school districts are continuing to grow in
popularity. Despite their growing enrollment, many of these schools have not successfully
demonstrated their ability to educate their students at a higher level than the surrounding
traditional public schools. Three common themes have emerged from the research as primary
factors that have played a role in the current status of nontraditional public schools: inequitable
funding, poor quality teachers, and increased segregation.
Inequitable funding. Consistent with research, the richest school districts house the best
schools, while the worst schools survive in the poorest districts in the nation (Sauter, Allen,
Nelson, & Hess, 2012). In an attempt to provide equitable funding to California’s highest need
schools and students, the state implemented the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Under
LCFF, school districts and schools have increased flexibility in their school spending. Through a
weighted funding system, schools can acknowledge the needs of specific subgroups of students
such as low-income students, ELLs, and homeless or foster youth (CDE, 2016). LCFF provides a
32
base grant per student for each local education agency (LEA), and provides a supplemental grant
that is equal to 20% of the base grant for the “targeted disadvantaged students” such as ELLs,
foster youth, and students who are eligible for free or reduced-price meals, a nationally
recognized measure of poverty (Delahaye, 2016). LCFF requires every school to complete a
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) that identifies goals that the LEA will complete
annually in eight different categories. The LCAP plan should be devised collaboratively with
multiple stakeholder groups, including those from target populations if achievable. While LCFF
and its various components were created and implemented as a method to increase equitable
funding n California’s poorest schools, it requires considerable trust that LEAs have the
knowledge of how to use funds best and will not abuse its discretion (Delahaye, 2016).
A major concern with LCFF is the amount of control and responsibility given to each
school. Advocates argue that schools know the needs of their students best, and thus should have
the responsibility of spending the money at the local level based on the knowledge of their
students (Mace, 2008.) However critics of LCFF worry that most school leaders are not qualified
to manage hundreds of millions of dollars that are allocated to them each year (Delahaye, 2016).
Further, schools are unclear about the purpose of LCAP and unsure what to include in the plan
(Koppich, Humphrey, & Marsh, 2015). Additionally, schools must calculate their funds with a
complex formula; an incorrect calculation can inadequately allocate funds to certain groups,
potentially at the expense of other students (Delahaye, 2016). Finally, many large districts and
schools can often find loopholes in the funding provisions, and utilize the money incorrectly, or
inequitably.
Nationally, nearly one half of all property taxes goes to public school funding, and LCFF
is an ambitious effort to change the way instructional and financial decisions are made in schools
33
with that money. Although its intentions are encouraging, the policy may require many iterations
of revisions before it is able to make the grand transformation it was intended to create (Koppich
et al., 2015). Although funding is a widespread problem in many high-poverty schools, both
traditional and nontraditional, there is another severe epidemic in urban nontraditional schools:
the heavy volume of low-quality teachers.
Low-quality teachers. One of the most pervasive problems in low-income urban school
districts is the high volume of poor-quality teachers. Over a decade ago, teacher quality was
measured by years of experience, degree, certification, and postsecondary college attendance
(Lankford, Loeb, & Wykoff, 2002). While studies that utilized the criteria referenced above
found that teacher quality was unequally distributed across subgroups, more recent research has
found that credentials and years of experience may only be weakly correlated with student
success and achievement (Aaronson, Barrow, & Sander, 2007). As a result, researchers and
schools have begun to use value-added models that are designed to assess the impact or value of
individual teachers on student achievement (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern, & Keeling, 2009).
Using this more contemporary measure of teacher effectiveness, there is an overwhelming body
of research that shows the immense disparities between teacher quality in high-poverty schools
and teacher quality in more affluent schools.
When assessing quality by value-added measures, a majority of teachers in low-income
schools have lower value-added scores than those in other schools (Goldhaber, Lavery, &
Theobald, 2015). When considering years of experience, students in low-income schools and
urban communities are often taught by teachers who are less qualified, with fewer than 5 years of
experience (Stuit & Smith, 2010). Clotfelter, Ladd, and Vigdor (2005) used a sample of students
in North Carolina to study the distribution of quality teachers across subgroups, and found that
34
Black students are 54% more likely to have a novice teacher in math and 38% more likely to
have a novice teacher in English than White students. Additional data shows, over one third of
charter school teachers in California are under the age of 30 and have less than 3 years of
teaching experience compared to teachers in traditional public schools (Stuit & Smith, 2010).
This presents a problem because students who are taught by teachers with less than 3 years of
teaching experience perform consistently worse than those who are taught by more experienced
teachers (Rockoff, 2003).
When comparing nontraditional and traditional teachers, research has found that only
about 38% of charter school math teachers majored or minored in math, compared to about 51%
of public school math teachers (Bulkley & Wohlstetter, 2004). Additionally, charter schools have
twice as many inexperienced teachers than public school teachers despite their ability to exercise
more autonomous hiring strategies. Although evidence indicates that years of experience does
not always indicate a teachers effectiveness, a large amount of data shows that there is some
benefit to having a teacher with more experience (Bulkley & Wohlstetter, 2004). Despite the
overwhelming evidence, the incredible disparities highlighted above between low- and high-
income students and teacher quality is not a new tragedy.
The existence of poor-quality teachers is not an isolated problem, the turnover rates for
teachers in poor and urban schools has been an increasing problem for decades (Ingersoll,
Merrill, & Stuckey, 2014). The problem of teacher turnover is markedly higher in poor and
underserved communities (Clotfelter et al., 2005). Many of America’s low-income urban schools
serving America’s highest need youth lose over one half of their teaching staff every 5 years
(Allensworth, Ponisciak, & Mazzeo, 2009). There are many factors that contribute to the high
turnover rates in urban schools ranging from working conditions, poor leadership, and low
35
salaries (Loeb, Darling-Hammond, & Luczak, 2005). Regardless of the motive, frequent turnover
makes it difficult for schools and school leadership to invest in supporting and developing
effective teachers. As a result, students in these high-poverty schools in urban communities are
often taught by new and inexperienced teachers year after year, who are less effective than their
colleagues with more years of experience.
A third drawback afflicting America’s urban nontraditional schools is the unintended
racial segregation. Despite the initial promise of nontraditional schools to provide more racial
and socioeconomic integration for students living in urban communities because of open
enrollment, many of these schools are more segregated than their neighborhood traditional
schools.
Increased segregation, decreased opportunities. Upon its creation, the nontraditional
school movement was a symbol of change, promise, and hope. Many optimists believed that if
children were not bound by their geographic borders and racial and financial barriers, that
charters, magnets, and other nontraditional schools would promote integration. The hope was
that integration in schools would have an impact in closing the achievement gap. Now, decades
later, it is evident that the exact opposite has occurred: School choice policies have allowed
parents to move away from schools that would otherwise be more racially integrated. This has
caused an increase in segregation for not only Black and Hispanic students, but also students in
special education and ELLs. Consequently, as our society is continuing to become more diverse,
our schools are becoming more segregated (Rotberg, Iris, 2014).
Nontraditional schools lead to an increase in segregation by race, ethnicity, and
socioeconomic status (Wohlstetter et al., 2015). In a 10-year study of North Carolina charter
schools, researchers found that the charter schools became increasingly racially imbalanced
36
overtime (Ladd, Clotfelter, & Holbein, 2015). Additionally, an executive study conducted by the
Civil Rights Project in 2012 found that the nontraditional schools in 40 states were more racially
isolated than the traditional public schools (Frankenberg, Siegel-Hawley, & Wang, 2012).
Further, 70% of Black charter schools in the states that were studied attended an intensely
segregated school—a school that enrolls 90 to 100% of students in underrepresented minority
groups (Frankenberg et al., 2012). Moreover, 50% of the Latino charter school students in the
study attended a racially isolated school (Frankenberg et al., 2012). In the Los Angeles Unified
School District (charter schools are more isolated by race and income than magnet schools and
other traditional schools (Ayscue, 2016). Magnet schools are not exempt from the extreme
segregation either. Districts with a higher percentage of magnet schools experience less
interracial exposure than districts with a smaller percentage of magnet schools (Davis, 2014).
Many charter schools educate a majority of Black students. This is because the parents of
these children often seek out better educational options for their children compared to parents of
other races (Glenn, 2011). Other educational researchers believe that the growing segregation in
nontraditional schools can be attributed to the design and commitment of these schools to serve
students in high-need populations (Eckes, Fox, & Buchanan, 2011). In a qualitative study of
eight charter schools, researchers found that although the school leaders found racial integration
to be an important factor, their specific aim was to recruit and reach students that were
specifically low-income and minority (Eckes et al., 2011). Despite the previous review of the
research on unfavorable side of nontraditional schools, there is a large body of evidence that
shows the promising practices taking place in some of the nation’s best nontraditional schools.
The subsequent section will review the notable systems and promising practices that exist in
some nontraditional low-income urban schools.
37
Promising Systems and Practices
Over the past 2 decades, nontraditional schools in California have been struggling to
validate their ability to provide low-income and minority students with a superior education.
Despite decades of futile efforts, some of America’s nontraditional schools are beginning to find
success at last, and are boosting the academic achievement of so many of the nation’s highest
need youth. As of 2009, 25% of Black students, and 29% of Latino students that were enrolled in
charter schools outperformed traditional public school students in reading and math (CREDO,
2013). Literature on public schools has concluded that small schools have lower dropout rates,
better attendance, higher grades, and a stronger performance on standardized exams (Bangser et
al., 2007). Additionally, some studies have found that a few urban magnet schools have positive
effects on academic proficiency in science, reading, and social studies (Bangser et al., 2007).
Many empirical findings have highlighted six promising practices used in these outperforming
low-income urban schools. It is imperative to review the literature on these practices to
emphasize the practices that are making strides towards closing the historic achievement gap.
A vision of success. One of the most promising practices in some of the nation’s
outperforming nontraditional schools is the existence of a clear and explicit school vision for
success. In a 2012 study of three outperforming urban schools, researchers utilized surveys of
administrators and teachers to learn about their understanding and perception of the school
vision. In these three schools, 100% of their principals, and over 90% of the teaching staff
believed that their school had a shared understanding of their vision and had a common
understanding of what it meant to be a successful school (Steagall, 2012). In another study,
researchers utilized the KIPP theory and practice to turn around a failing high school by
transforming it into a nontraditional independent school. This single case study found that having
38
a clear vision that was understood and commonly held by all members of the school as one of the
largest determining factors in their success. The positive results achieved by the first graduating
class of this school once it was taken over by KIPP demonstrated the power of school-wide
vision that all students could succeed (Kobes, 2013).
Some of the most successful charter schools not only demonstrate a clear vision amongst
teachers and leadership, but also amongst students and parents. In a study of urban and nonurban
charter schools, the researchers found that the most successful charter schools sent home a
contract that described a no-excuses vision, as well as disciplinary procedures and behavior
expectations. Moreover, within those schools, 72% of the parents signed and returned the
contract, demonstrating their awareness of the vision for success (Angrist, Pathak, & Walters,
2011). Nontraditional schools were founded and developed on basis of a shared common vision.
Specifically, U.S. charter schools were developed to run autonomously, serve a special
population, and to attain an educational vision (Editorial Projects in Education Research Center,
2011). Unfortunately, it appears many nontraditional schools have forgotten about this very
foundation upon which they were built. Sadly, research has found that when nontraditional
leaders say that they want to achieve excellence but did not succeed, their vision was not clear or
widely accepted (Dancy, 2016). It is increasingly imperative, that in order to achieve academic
excellence, nontraditional schools should fall back on what they once so strongly believed: an
independent and optimistic vision of success for all students.
A collaborative environment. A second promising practice is the art of collaboration.
The most successful nontraditional urban schools foster a collaborative environment amongst
their teachers and staff. In a quantitative study on successful charter schools, Morrow (2014)
studied the factors that contributed to the success of several charter schools. He studied the
39
impact of collaboration, empowerment, flexibility, high expectations, professional development
training, shared vision, and use of budgeting on the charter schools in his study. Using focus
groups, surveys and document analysis, he found that the most successful schools, as depicted by
an Academic Performance Index of 600 or more, had a collaboration score of more than 7.8. The
research showed that staff collaboration was the largest variable attributed to the success of the
schools in this study (Morrow, 2014).
In a previous study conducted in 2008, researchers found that collaborative decision
making between teachers and staff was a key factor in producing high academic performance in
their high poverty, urban intermediate school. Specifically, the study found that collaboration
between the eighth grade and ninth grade teachers was part of a strategic system to ensure that
students were provided with quality standards-based instruction between the grades (Ventura,
2008). In another study at Bay View Charter School, a successful nontraditional school,
researchers found that a working environment built on collaboration and common understanding
was one of the most pervasive factors that contributed to their success as a school (Aguirre,
2015). When looking at magnet school success, many of the best magnet schools focus on
teacher professional development and collaboration amongst staff members. This often leads to
an improvement in the learning environment, and ultimately boosts student achievement (Betts et
al., 2015). A recent study found that magnet schools that have encouraged their teachers to
collaborate widely with staff at all levels have had the most positive effects on student
achievement (Wang et al., 2014). In additional to a clear vision and a collaborative staff,
literature has also demonstrated that some of the most successful low-income urban schools have
and hold their students to high expectations both behaviorally and academically.
40
High expectations for students. A third promising practice in many urban nontraditional
schools is the existence of high expectations for the success of their students. In a study of
outperforming nontraditional charter schools in California, Weekes (2016) found that a culture of
high expectations was one of the primary characteristics that supported student achievement. The
teachers in the school utilized their autonomy by creating and implementing a meaningful
culturally relevant and responsive curriculum that was consistently aligned to content standards.
The content in their instruction was rigorous and challenging, and offered support for all students
at their various levels. The highly demanding curriculum, coupled with their instructional
scaffolds, and driven by the high expectations they held of their students’ abilities facilitated the
extraordinary achievement of the students in their school (Weekes, 2016).
Many nontraditional schools have adopted a more systematic approach for holding their
students to high expectations using the no-excuses policy. “No Excuses” schools include a newer
approach to education as part of the nontraditional schools’ movement. These schools offer
extended instructional time, emphasize traditional math and reading skills, and develop the most
productive working environment so that students have no excuses not to be successful (Angrist et
al., 2011). Students who attend no-excuses nontraditional schools have been found to perform
better in mathematics than students who attend traditional public schools. Additionally, reading
achievement for students in these types of nontraditional schools has proven to be statistically
significant at 0.15 standard deviations higher than those who attend traditional public schools
(Cheng, Hitt, & Kisida, 2015). Finally, in a 2011 study, no-excuses strategies were used in nine
low-performing traditional public schools in Houston, Texas. Strategies implemented in the
schools included an emphasis on frequent testing, parental pledges of involvement, a dramatic
increase in instructional time, a relentless focus on reading and mathematics, and tremendous
41
human capital investment (Fryer, 2012). The extreme intervention proved to have substantial
gains in academic achievement (Fryer, 2012). This suggests that the no-excuses model may be
prosperous beyond the nontraditional school context (Angrist et al., 2011). The most successful
urban schools often apply a school-wide philosophy that all children can succeed, and hold all
students to the highest expectations. In a study of effective classroom instruction in a high-
performing urban school, researchers found that holding high expectations for students was a
notable factor contributing to the success of this school. Teachers at the school demonstrated a
willingness to work hard for their students and provide the instructional scaffolds and supports
necessary for their students to meet those academic expectations (Ventura, 2008).
KIPP is a rapidly growing network of charter schools that serve predominantly low-
performing, high-need, minority students. Many KIPP schools are outperforming their
surrounding traditional public schools. One of the prominent elements of KIPP schools is their
high expectations for student academic achievement. In a study on KIPP student achievement,
researchers found that KIPP schools are providing their students with 90% extra learning time
per year in math and about 66% more learning time per year in reading (Gleason, Tuttle, Gill,
Nichols-Barrer, & Teh, 2014) These schools often achieve this through extended school days,
weekend classes, as well as highly effective teachers that can teach more content in a given class
period (Gleason et al., 2014). The study attributed these outstanding gains to three variables, one
of which was their emphasis on high expectations for academics (Gleason et al., 2014).
A subsequent study on the KIPP organization found that their focus on high expectations
extended beyond academics and applied to student behavior. Many students at the most
successful KIPP schools attended cultural events with staff members, college visits, and trips on
the weekends. Additionally, many students engaged in behavioral support systems such as
42
etiquette training and alternative experiences that focused on developing the whole child. These
experiences supported the school and families in holding the students to high behavioral
expectations. As a result, less time spent on managing behavior ultimately resulted in more time
for academics (Kobes, 2013). The substantial emphasis on high academic and behavioral
expectations is a notable promising practice in some of the nation’s highest performing
nontraditional schools. However, it is important to recognize the role of the students in these
outperforming schools.
Can you hear them? Emphasis on student voice. A fourth promising practice that has
played a role in the success of many low-income urban nontraditional schools is their emphasis
on student voice and the ability to develop a sense of belonging. As children get older, they often
become disconnected from school; as a result, they can feel uneasy and out of place as they sit in
their classrooms every day. If students do not feel a sense of belonging while at school, they are
often less motivated to engage in activities (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). This reality
demonstrates the extreme necessity for schools to create a sense of belonging and a welcoming
community for all youth.
In a study of Starlight Academy, a successful nontraditional school, researchers aimed to
identify the promising factors that played a role in the high academic outcomes of the students.
Students at Starlight Academy met or exceeded the standards in all content areas, and in some
years exceeded the nation-wide average. Through interviews of students in the school,
researchers were able to conclude that Starlight Academy offered their students a sense of
welcoming and belonging that they could attribute to their academic success. Twelve of the 15
students interviewed by the researchers stated that they felt a sense of belonging at their school
that they did not feel at their previous school (L. S. Johnson, 2009). Additionally, interviewed
43
students felt that, on average, two out of every three of their teachers showed genuine interest in
them, cared for them, and motivated them. Starlight academy operated under a unique system in
which students were only required to attend 25 hours of “in school” classes per week. The
students were not required to attend certain classes, and were not punished for skipping classes.
Data collected from student interviews demonstrated that by giving students the freedom to
choose whether or not to attend classes motivated them to make the right decision about
attending school, rather than being forced to go (L. S. Johnson, 2009).
Providing students with a sense of belonging has been shown to have a positive effect on
student attitudes, and ultimately academic success. In a longitudinal case study on a magnet
school with a focus on belonging and student achievement, Villarreal (2010) found that a sense
of belonging and generosity displayed by students and school staff was strongly associated with
high math scores for students on their California State Tests (Villarreal, 2010). Further, offering
students support and guidance to make their own decisions has also been demonstrated to be a
successful method to empower students to take control of their own learning. Pak (2015) studied
students at a charter high school that ran as an independent study program. He researched the
potential factors that played a role in the schools 90% passage rate of the California High School
Exit Exam. The research concluded that the school placed a heavy weight on student voice and
encouraged independence. Teachers and staff at the school allowed and stimulated students to
advocate for themselves and hold themselves accountable for their own learning (Pak, 2015).
The previous review of the literature has made it evident that a clear vision, staff collaboration,
and student voice are all important factors in achieving academic success in many low-income
nontraditional schools. The literature has made it increasingly evident that one of the most
44
influential factors in achieving success at any school, and in any community, is the availability of
high-quality teachers.
High quality teachers. Teachers are often the greatest indicator of student success or
failure in low-income, urban communities. The most effective teachers can raise the achievement
of their students from the 50th percentile to the 96th percentile in just 2 years (Marzano, 2003).
Not surprisingly, successful nontraditional schools often attribute most of their academic
achievement to their high-quality teachers. In a 2016 study of an outperforming charter school,
researchers aimed to identify the most successful strategies that played a role in the elevated
achievement of their highest need students. The researchers found that the quality of the teachers
in the school, coupled with their ability to have creative freedom in their instruction, allowed
them to meet the diverse needs of their students and ultimately increase their academic
achievement (Dancy, 2016). The positive implications of a high-quality teachers are not seen in
isolation. A surplus of research has continued to conclude their studies with the same results:
High-quality teachers are one of the most important factors in student achievement.
In another study that attempted to compare the practices of three high-performing charter
schools and three low-performing charter schools, the researchers found that the teaching staff
was the determining factor of success across all three schools. The teachers in the highest
performing charter schools utilized student data daily to create engaging lessons at the proper
instructional level for their students. Additionally, these same teachers cultivated an environment
based on high achievement and behavioral expectations, which assisted in fostering the ideal
environment for optimal learning. The study concluded that having a combination of elevated
school-wide expectations coupled with high-quality teachers was a powerful recipe for
successfully helping students persevere and work harder. It was also determined that students
45
without high-quality teachers who exercised the same strategies would likely not excel at the
same rate academically (Stephens, 2008). These low-income nontraditional schools previously
mentioned have transcended above issues of class, race, and poverty, and demonstrated that a
high-quality teacher can help students accomplish what was once deemed impossible.
The characteristics of what makes a teacher a high-quality educator are always advancing
and changing. Despite the many definitions and measures it is evident that high-quality teachers
are those that are able to make the greatest impact in the academic achievement of children.
These teachers utilize strategies and systems to ensure that the children in their classrooms will
not slip through the cracks. Strategies such as using data to drive instruction, collaborating with
colleagues, and having a willingness to improve on their craft have been some of the most
mentioned strategies used by high-quality teachers. In a 2012 study, Steagall (2012) studied three
high-performing high-poverty schools to explore the different characteristics in each school.
Amongst quality leadership, she concluded that the teachers in the school made the biggest
impact on the success of the students. These teachers utilized culturally relevant material and
pedagogy, focused on creating and maintaining high standards for their students, and
implemented strong instructional practices that fostered change in their classrooms (Steagall,
2012). This study, and so many others like it, exhibit the importance of high-quality teachers in
high-poverty schools. Further, a majority of the outperforming high-poverty schools in the
research are particularly impressive because they have managed to achieve at high levels
academically by developing a collective group of high-quality teachers who collaborate, utilize
student data to drive instruction, and exhibit a willingness to grow professionally.
Amongst the overwhelming evidence, which continues to grow, on the impact of high-
quality teachers it is important to acknowledge that none of the studies noted that teachers were
46
the only single characteristic in turning around a high-poverty school. As a matter of fact, most
studies identify anywhere between five to 10 factors or characteristics that can play a role in the
improvement of a low-income, urban school in the United States. Much like this review has
offered research on the positive implications of a shared vision, teacher collaboration, high
expectations, student voice, and quality teachers, there is still one more notable factor that has
contributed to the success of some of the nation’s highest achieving, low-income, urban schools:
leaders as change agents.
Nontraditional leadership in nontraditional schools. Leadership in low-income urban
nontraditional schools is often a major determinant of student and school success. There is not an
individual involved in education that could rightfully deny that a good leader is one of the most
important qualities in any successful business, including a school. Many of the earliest studies on
school success have specified that strong leadership is one of the most defining factors in making
schools successful. For example, Nelson Mandela has long been studied by aspiring leaders for
his historic ability to liberate a deeply prejudiced country, and unite groups of both the oppressed
and oppressors (Stengel, 2008). Students in leadership classes at various universities study
Mandela’s eight lessons of leadership and strive to carry out his suggestions in their own places
of work.
While notable and historic, Mandela is not alone in his legacy of influential leadership.
Collin (2007) explained how an influential leader can transform any organization from
mediocrity to excellence, and Greenleaf (1977) introduced the nation to servant leadership, a
nontraditional approach where leaders are seen as servants first, and leaders second. More
recently, school leadership has shifted from a managerial approach to an instructional approach.
The best instructional leaders concentrate and focus on academic instruction and how they can
47
best support or serve their teachers in the classrooms. These successful leaders in high-poverty
urban schools empower all stakeholders in the school through their collaboration and shared
leadership approaches (Steagall, 2012).
Regardless of the specific approach or style that a leader in a school takes, a good leader
can be the impetus for creating an outperforming urban school. For example, in a 2016 study on
high-performing charter schools of economically disadvantaged children, the researcher found
that effective leadership style was at the very foundation of opening and developing this
outperforming charter school (Dancy, 2016). The principal in the study believed and verbalized a
powerful school vision, set high expectations for both her staff and the students, and effectively
managed stressful situations in the school (Dancy, 2016). The teachers in the school of study also
acted as leaders from their various positions, demonstrating the power of leadership at all levels.
The teachers at Knowledge Academy collectively agreed that they did not prejudge or stereotype
their students, but rather understood that their students were influenced by their cultures;
therefore, they incorporated their students’ cultures into their lessons (Dancy, 2016). Despite
research that shows that teachers can often develop negative stereotypes of students who are of
low socioeconomic status, and thus create low expectations and poor instruction, the teachers in
this study defied the odds, and, as a team, created meaningful lessons and instruction that both
acknowledged the students’ cultures, and maintained high expectations. Reflecting on Mandela’s
lessons, it is evident that although a strong leader at the top is important for academic success,
leading from the back and empowering all to become their own leaders are both essential in
many low-income urban schools.
The example above displayed layered leadership, or leadership at all levels; however, the
influence of an exceptional leader is even more indispensable when there is a school of novice
48
teachers. In a 2016 study of an early college high school, a type of nontraditional school where
students attend a high school on a college campus in order to receive early college credits,
researchers studied the perceptions of the large volume of novice teachers at the school on their
school leadership (Glennie, Mason, & Edmunds, 2016). The researchers found that the early
college novice teachers received more support from their leaders that they felt was personalized
for their specific needs. They believed that the support they received from their leadership team
was of higher quantity and quality than what their peers who worked at traditional high schools
received (Glennie et al., 2016). Personalized support is often given through professional
development, tailored to instructional needs, classroom observations with feedback, or the
assignment of a mentor teacher. The teachers in the study felt that it was this personalized
support and guidance that played a key role in the retention and tenure of the teachers in the
school (Glennie et al., 2016).
In the United States, about 20% of new teachers—those with less than 5 years of teaching
experience—left the teaching profession all together (Ingersoll, 2012). Many novice teachers
leave the profession before they have crafted their skills (Glennie et al., 2016). When leaders
work with large amounts of novice teachers, their roles are even more vital to the achievement of
the students and the school. As a leader, providing the best support to teachers can mean the
difference between a teacher staying or leaving. For example, novice teachers who were assigned
a mentor teacher by their leader remained in teaching for 5 years longer compared to teachers
who were never assigned a mentor teacher (Gray & Taie, 2015). Moreover, during times of
chaos, reform, or change, schools that promote better leadership shared decision-making, and
emphasize teacher support have a higher likelihood of retaining their teachers (Glennie et al.,
2016).
49
The research has made it apparent that urban education in high-poverty communities is
increasingly more complicated. There are many tribulations in the nontraditional public school
system today such as poor-quality teachers, inequitable funding, and increased racial segregation.
However, despite these large obstacles, there are many schools in the nation that are confronting
the odds, and outperforming the surrounding traditional schools and other nontraditional schools
as well. Research has shown that some of the best schools promote a shared vision of success,
emphasize student voice, set high expectations for academics and behavior, promote staff
collaboration, invest in their high-quality teaching force, and have effective leadership. The
biggest challenge, it seems, is finding the right balance of each of these components in order to
maximize the academic success of students in the school, and even when all components are in
place, there is no guarantee that a school will be successful. Fortunately, there are strategies and
systems in place at schools that have been prosperous, but have not been heavily researched.
Overall, it is increasingly obvious that there is not one recipe for achieving academic success in
all low-income urban schools in the nation. However, it is imperative to continue research on the
topic, in order to increase the odds of closing the achievement gap for the nation’s high-poverty
urban youth.
Critique of the Literature
The previously reviewed literature demonstrated the complexities of public school, and
the historical struggle of the nation’s education system. It is unmistakable that the disparities in
public schools are much deeper and compounded than poor pedagogy and out-of-date textbooks.
Ladson-Billings (2006) stated in her work on the achievement gap that focusing only on an
academic gap would be a misplaced battle. Instead, she argued that there are historical,
economic, sociopolitical, and moral inequities that have led us to this point. Without addressing
50
and acknowledging all of these injustices, we cannot begin to attack the achievement gap. While
her argument begins to tug at the root of a much larger systemic problem, the research reviewed
above has shown that there are many urban nontraditional schools in low-income communities
that are overcoming these large obstacles. In consideration of this, it is a researcher’s obligation
to identify these outperforming nontraditional urban schools and shine light on the practices
taking place.
Failing schools litter low-income urban communities across the nation. Whether
traditional or nontraditional, poor-performing schools all look the same, and the causes tend to be
very similar. The literature reviewed in this chapter presented three of the most common
problems in these failing nontraditional schools today: inequitable funding, low-quality teachers,
and an increase in racial segregation. While the overwhelming body of evidence supporting these
three factors is undeniable, the final factor deserves further attention.
Nontraditional urban schools are more racially segregated, with larger class sizes than
traditional schools. Evidence indicated that larger class sizes can negatively impact student
achievement in early grades, and especially for low-income students (Leachman, Albares,
Masterson, & Wallace, 2016). Additionally, highly segregated schools and classrooms are often
correlated with increases in disruption or behavioral disorders (Skiba & Williams, 2014). These
two characteristics, coupled with other ill-fated realities paint a very bleak picture for low-
income and minority youth in the United States. As a result of these highly segregated and
overcrowded classrooms, children’s work habits and behavioral problems become increasingly
present and create larger challenges for teachers (Barton & Coley, 2010b). However, the
promising truth is that when schools are able to set high expectations for student behavior and
constantly enforce and reinforce the rules, they have better outcomes for academic achievement
51
(Furgeson et al., 2012). These two facts are important because Black and Hispanic students that
attend nontraditional urban schools in high-poverty communities are often concentrated in
schools that are less integrated than their traditional public schools. Many of these schools face
overcrowding and fewer qualified teachers. Together, these factors can generate sizable behavior
problems that novice and under qualified teachers are not trained to handle. In conducting the
review of the literature, the lack of research available on the behavioral challenges in low-
income urban nontraditional schools was surprising. Thus, future research is imperative to
investigate the student behavior in these schools, as well as the effects that positive behavioral
incentive and support systems can have on a low-income urban nontraditional school in
California.
Outperforming nontraditional schools in low-income urban communities are not as
common; however, the literature was very conclusive on the promising factors that played a role
in the success of these schools. While conducting a review of the literature, it should be noted
that there were additional factors found that have played a role in the success of some
outperforming nontraditional urban schools. Although found in lighter volume, it is important to
note and discuss these factors because of the potential success they could have for youth in other
similar schools. A body of research during the literature investigation noted that parental
involvement was a key factor in outperforming urban nontraditional schools.
Parental Involvement
While justifiably sensitive, the number of Black children growing up in households
without a father has been explosively increasing (Barton & Coley, 2010b). This has tremendous
implications for children. Youth that grow up in a single parent household face higher rates of
poverty because they are relying on a single income and often have lower academic achievement
52
because they do not receive as much support at home (Barton & Coley, 2010b). Moreover,
children from mother-only households are more likely to drop out of high school, and earn a
lower wages during early adulthood (Barton & Coley, 2010b). When looking at girls specifically,
African American girls that grow-up in a mother-only household are more likely to form single-
parent households themselves (Barton & Coley, 2010b). This is not to say that a single parent of
a family living in a high-poverty urban neighborhood cannot help their children succeed; but the
reality is that single parents face more obstacles than a family with two parents, and research
shows that educational involvement should be a high priority for parents.
In a 2006 study by Prince, of two successful charter schools in California, the school had
developed systems and structures to support the involvement of parents and guardians in the
academics of their students. Further, they incentivized parents to play a larger role in the
education of their children. The researcher found that when systems were in place to encourage
parental involvement, it was deemed one of the largest factors in the success of the school.
Because of this involvement, the two schools increased their enrollment and achieved high
academic scores on their standardized tests (Prince, 2006). The current structure of charter
schools supports autonomy and innovation. The school in this study utilized this freedom to
create a promising strategy and system to increase parental involvement, and the results were
favorable.
In a subsequent study that compared two promising nontraditional charter schools with
two traditional public schools, Zimmer (2007) found that parental involvement was higher in the
charter schools than it was in the traditional schools. Using similar systems for encouragement
and incentives, the charter school could promote and support the involvement of parents and
guardians in various ways. The researcher concluded that it was this involvement that had a
53
substantially positive effect on the academic achievement of the students in the school (Zimmer
& Buddin, 2007). While research has shown for decades that parental involvement can be a
critical determinant of academic performance in a child’s education, more recent research shows
that low-income minority parents participate less frequently in their child’s education than
parents of more affluent students (Epstein, 1984; Lareau, 1987; Prince, 2006). This makes it
increasingly imperative that further research on the ways schools and communities can
encourage parents of low-income and minority youth to become involved in the education of
their children in whatever ways possible.
Extracurricular Activities
In addition to parental involvement, schools that offer extracurricular activities to their
students often show more commitment towards academics, and produce higher achievement
results. Extracurricular activities provide additional experiences for youth and have received an
increasing amount of attention because of their ability to promote school connectedness
(Martinez, Coker, McMahon, Cohen, & Thapa, 2016). Moreover, different types of
extracurricular activities can have different implications in terms of promoting school climate
and culture. In 2012, 44% of high school seniors in the United States played sports as their
extracurricular involvement, 21% were involved in some sort of musical activity, and 21% were
involved in academic clubs (NCES, 2012). Regardless of the type of activity, the availability of
extracurricular activities in schools has been shown to positively impact school climate in the
areas of safety, interpersonal relations, teaching and learning, and the school environment
(Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, & Higgins-D ’alessandro, 2013).
In a longitudinal case study of a magnet middle school, students claimed that their ability
to be involved in many different extracurricular activities was a critical component of their
54
academic success (Villarreal, 2010). Additionally, Pak (2015) studied high-performing at-risk
high school students who were enrolled at an alternative high school with an independent study
program. He found that these students attributed their academic success to having access to
extracurricular activities as well. The students in the study claimed that having the option to play
sports as their extracurricular activity helped stay involved in school and engaged in their
academics. Taking part in these activities helped improve their social and school behavior (Pak,
2015). Despite the minimal studies on the use of extracurricular activities to increase academic
achievement at low-income urban nontraditional schools, the research on the positive effects is
promising. Ultimately, the involvement in clubs, sports, or any extracurricular activities can
spark a student’s interest and investment in school resulting in positive sentiments towards
oneself and their academic achievement. Thus, it would be in the best interest of any individual
involved in urban education to seek or conduct further research on the implementation of extra-
curricular activities in high-poverty urban nontraditional schools.

55
Conceptual Framework
Using the relevant literature written on the characteristics and factors that exist at
successful urban schools, both traditional and nontraditional, three research questions were
generated. The three research questions helped the researcher focus their lens as they collected
data at and around the nontraditional outperforming school. In an attempt to conceptualize how
the three variables work together within a school environment, a conceptual framework was
generated and is shown below. At the top of the framework is the title of a nontraditional urban
school. The title is enclosed and alone to symbolize the reality that any school can be considered
nontraditional and urban simply by how and where it was developed. Below the title are three
spinning gears that are interlocked together. These three gears represent the three variables in
this study: programs and practices, leadership practices, and cultural norms. The gears represent
the three factors working together in unison within the school. If the gears spin enough and work
together correctly, this increases the chances of the school academically outperforming others.
The conceptual framework can be seen below.

56
Those who work in the field of education are constantly reminded of both the systemic
and ground-level problems that plague the nation’s poor urban youth. Despite funding, the lack
of resources, underqualified teachers, and the various inequities that exist, it is imperative to
applaud and acknowledge those low-income nontraditional urban schools that have risen above
the rest and found a way to thrive. This paper is an attempt to do just that: to identify an
outperforming nontraditional urban school in a low-income community and to discover the
promising factors that take place within the school. The following chapter will discuss the
sample and data collection methods used in the research.

57
Chapter 3: Methodology
The achievement gap is one of the leading challenges that the nation is facing. The
inability for urban low-income schools to provide their students with a free and equitable public
education is turning the American dream into a troubling nightmare. Whether traditional or
nontraditional, most failing urban low-income schools possess the same qualities: (1) low-quality
teachers (2) inequitable funding (3) increased segregation. In an attempt to resolve these barriers,
policymakers and educational experts introduced nontraditional schools to the public education
sector. Nontraditional schools are an attempt to provide equitable education through alternative
means of content delivery. The most common types of nontraditional schools are magnet
schools, charter schools, independent study programs, and small schools, but they are not limited
to only those categories. As nontraditional schools continue to rise in popularity, so do their
complications.
Decades into the nontraditional school’s movement, it is evident that many of these
schools are failing to provide poor urban youth with a quality public education despite their
initial claims of a better option for urban youth. After of research, the nation’s educational
experts still know little about the overall conditions of what it takes to be an effective urban
school, traditional or nontraditional. The crisis the United States faces is that every year hundreds
of new nontraditional schools are opening across the nation educating hundreds of thousands of
children, and researchers have yet to determine whether these schools are the best options for
high-need youth. This study identified an urban low-income nontraditional school that is
academically outperforming not only other nontraditional schools but its traditional
neighborhood schools as well. The researcher conducted a rich and descriptive case study to
systematically analyze and determine the promising systems and programs, leadership practices,
58
and cultural norms that exist in the school. This study adds to the small but powerful body of
literature on outperforming nontraditional schools to paint a picture of urban education that
works.
Overall Procedures
This study used a qualitative case study design (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) with a
purposeful sampling of an outperforming nontraditional urban school in a large urban school
district in Southern California. This study is one of twelve studies from a thematic dissertation
group at the University of Southern California. The thematic group consisted of twelve case
studies all focusing on nontraditional schools in urban settings that are academically outpacing
both traditional and nontraditional schools serving students of similar demographics.
Individually each member of the thematic group conducted their own review of the relevant
literature. Once each member was done, the group came together and synthesized the results in
order to develop the three research questions that each would use in their study. Next, the
members of the thematic group developed the data collection instruments together to ensure that
they would be suitable in gathering the data necessary to answer the research questions. While
the methods, instruments and questions are all the same amongst the group, each member
conducted their own research at different schools to write their own report on the findings they
generated.
The following three themes emerged from literature review conducted by the researcher and
the dissertation group as some of the most influential factors in successful urban nontraditional
schools: promising programs and systems, leadership practices, and cultural norms at an urban
outperforming nontraditional school. Using these three themes, three research questions were
generated.
59

The three questions that guided this case study were:
(1) What practices and programs are implemented this urban outperforming nontraditional
school?
(2) What are the leadership practices in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12
school?
(3) What are the cultural norms in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12 school?

While case studies present a thick and rich description of a phenomenon, they are often not
generalizable to broader populations. However, because this study was part of a collection of
twelve additional studies using the same research design and the same research questions the
final collection of all twelve reports will increase the possibility to generalize similar findings to
more populations like those studied.
The school that was researched for this study was selected because it was outperforming on
several indicators. First, Lunar Learning Academy (LLA) significantly outperformed their urban
school peers academically both in traditional and nontraditional schools. Additionally, Lunar
Learning exceeded the statewide average in math, English, and science on their statewide exams.
By using a case study, this research could provide an in-depth description of a contemporary
phenomenon, a school, within its real-life context. This is particularly unique to case studies
because they provide a link between phenomenon and context that is often not evident (Yin,
2013).
The data collected for this study included document analysis, classroom observations,
administration, stakeholder, and teacher interviews and surveys. The study began with an in-
depth look at school documents to gain an initial understanding of the systems, practices, and
60
structures of the school before to speaking with any stakeholders. Then, the researcher
administered closed-ended surveys to teachers and administrators. Next, classroom and school
observations were conducted. Finally, semi-structured interviews with teachers and
administrators were carried out. The interviews were conducted to inquire about data that was
not collected from surveys or observations, as well as to follow up on information that needed
more clarification from previous data collection methods. Using these four types of data
collection instruments, findings could be triangulated to generate results and draw meaningful
conclusions.
Sample Selection
The population for this study was Lunar Learning Academy (LLA), an outperforming
nontraditional urban school. LLA met the following criteria: (1) The school was in a large urban
school district and served a population that was 99% Hispanic or Latino and over 90%
socioeconomically disadvantaged students, (2) LLA was a charter school, a type of
nontraditional school of choice where school attendance is based on a random lottery drawing.
(3) The school was considered outperforming because it significantly outpaced other schools in
the county, as well as their neighborhood schools in both English and mathematics. This
demonstrated a type of unique sampling because the school exhibited a rare phenomenon of
interest – a nontraditional urban school that outperformed other surrounding schools
academically despite the many obstacles and inequalities that exist (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The selection process began with document analysis via the school website and
educational ranking websites to identify nontraditional schools that met the criteria listed above.
Five schools were recognized, and personal emails were sent to the leaders of each school. From
this group, positive responses were received from two of the schools, both who asked for follow-
61
up information about the study to be conducted. One school was a charter high school that is part
of a charter network of five charter schools across Los Angeles County, serving a predominantly
African American population of students. The school identified itself as a “college preparatory
high school” that focused on individualized learning, leaving behind a one-size-fits-all approach.
The school provides a one-to-one ratio of students to computers and built their curriculum
around personalization, purpose, and mindset. The second school was a charter middle school
that is part of a larger national charter network. The school includes grades five through eight,
serving a predominantly Latino population. Its instructional focus centers on teaching intellectual
habits, cultivating character strength, and encouraging students to explore and advance their
education. Both schools serve a low-income and high-need populations of students.
The research group determined what the necessary elements were for each school chosen
for the study regarding its location, its status as a nontraditional educational institution, as well as
the criteria that qualified it is an outperforming school. The researcher for this particular study
chose LLA using the criteria identified for an urban, nontraditional outperforming school. The
group defined urban as an under-resourced school serving a majority of students who were of
low socioeconomic status, with ethnic diversity. LLA is located in a large, urban, densely-
populated county composed of approximately 7,000 people per square mile. It is a Title I school
that serves a predominantly socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort of students, depicted by its
90.8% population of students who receive free or reduced-price lunches. The research group
identified many types schools that are considered nontraditional including, but not limited to,
charter schools. LLA is an independent charter school located in a large urban county, thus it
easily met the criteria of a nontraditional school. The criteria adopted by the group as to what
constitutes an outperforming school was as follows: low dropout rates, Academic Achievement
62
Awards such as Gold ribbon schools, schools with a high majority of students who met or
exceeded the standard on the Standards Based Assessment Consortium (SBAC). LLA
significantly outperformed both their peers in the large urban district, as well as the surrounding
neighborhood schools on their math and English SBAC test. Moreover, LLA did not officially
receive an academic award for their SBAC scores. However, had they applied, they would be
eligible to receive a Gold Ribbon Award for outperforming the statewide average on both math
and English tests. The demographics of the school that was chosen for this study are displayed
below in Table 1 below.
Table 1.
School Name Location Ranking 2015 -2016
CAASPP scores
Enrollment by
Ethnicity
Low-Income

Lunar Learning
Academy

Large Urban
County

9/10
Math | 40%
Meeting/Exceeding
the standard
English | 64%
Meeting/Exceeding
the standard

99%
Latino/African
American

90.8% Low SES
Title I -
Schoolwide

Role of the Researcher
In qualitative inquiry, the researcher is the primary instrument of data collection.
Therefore, in this study, the researcher conducted all the document analyses, survey
administration, classroom and school observations, as well as the interviews. The researcher used
approved tape recorders for interviews, a secured laptop for observation notes, as well as a
reflective journal to track emerging themes, and capture reflections immediately after the data
collection process.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Four types of collection methods were utilized in the study: document analysis, surveys,
observations, and interviews. By collecting this data, the researcher was able to gather and
63
provide a rich description of the thoughts and perceptions of different stakeholders at the school,
and triangulate this data with observations of school, and document analysis. To gather this data,
the researcher conducted fieldwork for several days. The goal of this fieldwork was to not only
collect information for the study, but to increase the subjects’ level of comfort, and encourage
them to speak and behave as they normally would (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). It is recommended
that to conduct quality fieldwork, a researcher should make it their goal to establish relations
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Thus, the researcher in this study started their fieldwork at the end of
2017 school year, before conducting more formal data collection during the 2018 school year.
Document Analysis
The term document is broadly used to define any printed or online materials relevant to
the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In qualitative research, this is often the first step of the
process, as documents can provide background information on the sample, and are readily
available to the investigator. In this study, the following documents were used for data collection
purposes: (1) school website (2) achievement test scores (3) school report card (4) recruitment
information (5) student and parent handbooks (6) mission statement (7) organization chart (8)
information from the California Department of Education such as demographics, retention rates,
school programs, and attendance records. The use of these documents as a means for collecting
data allowed the researcher to frame the study around some of the meaningful information that
was gathered from the artifacts. A copy of the document analysis protocol is in the appendix.
Surveys
After mining through documents and artifacts, surveys were administered to the teachers
and administrators of the school. The purpose of the survey was to gather the feelings and
perceptions of various stakeholder groups at the school that would allow the triangulation with
64
future data that would be gathered during observations and interviews. The survey that was used
was adapted from a 2007 research based publication on nine characteristics of high-performing
schools. The survey used in this research contained questions in the following ten categories: (1)
Background information (2) School vision and mission (3) Leadership (4) Learning environment
(5) School environment (6) Standards and Expectations of nontraditional schools (7) Monitoring
of teaching and learning (8) Collaboration and communication (9) Family and community
involvement (10) Professional development. Each category contained between three and seven
questions, making the survey a 56-question survey. The survey provided only closed-ended
questions which included four-point Likert scale questions as well as some multiple-choice
questions. A copy of the survey used is included in the appendix.
They survey was administered to teachers and administrators at the end of a faculty
meeting via an online survey tool called Qualtrics. The researcher chose to deliver the survey to
teachers and administrators via the internet because it was most convenient for teachers to use
their laptops that they already had at the staff meeting. Additionally, it allowed the researcher to
track how many surveys were being submitted and compare with the number of teachers that
attended the meeting. It was also the most cost-effective and environmentally sustainable method
as no paper copies needed to be made. Once all the surveys were administered, completed, and
collected, the third phase of data collection began – observations.
Observations
The observations for this study took place in general school areas such as the lunch area
and play yard, in the classrooms as well as in faculty meetings. A copy of the template is
included in the appendix. The observations lasted between thirty minutes to an hour and a half on
different days of the week. This allowed the researcher to gain a full range of data on the
65
administrator, student, and teacher behavior. The researcher collected observational data using
two methods – descriptive field notes and reflective field notes. Descriptive field notes are
necessary to provide a detailed description of the setting and environment (Bogdan & Biklen,
2007). Descriptive observation notes help paint a qualitative picture of both the learning and
school environment through the lens of the researcher. Alternatively, the reflective set of field
notes captured the thoughts and reflections of the observer as they were watching the subjects
interact with the environment (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
The descriptive and reflective field notes were taken on a secure laptop computer.
Descriptive notes were meant to capture detailed data surrounding characteristics of the subjects,
dialogue amongst students and between teachers and students, a description of the physical
setting, accounts of events, description of both formal and informal activities, as well as the
observer’s behaviors. The reflective field notes were taken in the form of observer comments
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). These were meant to capture the more subjective side of the data that
was being observed. They were used to record thoughts, feelings, and speculations made by the
observer, as well as jot down notes for future observations or interviews. After each observation,
short reflections were written about the method used, the observer’s thoughts about the event that
was observed, ethical dilemmas that might be present, as well as notes for future clarification.
By the end of the observations, the researcher’s field notes were tens of pages long filled
with descriptive and rich accounts of everything that was observed ranging from student
conversations, teacher instruction, disciplinary action, outsider interruption, and as many small
details as possible in between. At the end of each day of observation, field notes were cleaned
and typed up in a quiet place and away from distractions. The observations were reviewed and
cleaned chronologically, and details were added from memory – a benefit of cleaning field notes
66
the same day as observations. Writing up the field notes was a laborious and time-consuming
process for the researcher, but the advantages were definite. It allowed the researcher to live each
experience line by line, internalize what was observed, use the gift of memory to add details and
rich descriptions to the notes and replay images, conversations, and events over and over in their
head.
After the classroom specific observation notes were cleaned, they were compared to a
rubric generated by a small group of researchers in the dissertation group. This rubric was
created to match the classroom setting and teaching strategies to research based methods of
effectiveness. This allowed the data analysis process of classroom observations to be more
objective and research based rather than opinion based. It also allowed for some consistency
between other researchers in the dissertation group when analyzing data on effective classroom
strategies that play a role in school and student academic success. A copy of the classroom
observation rubric is included in the appendix. Once all observations had been conducted and
cleaned, the fourth and final portion of the data collection process commenced.
Interviews
Interviews were conducted with five to seven teachers and administrators involved with
the school of study. Each interview lasted about thirty minutes to an hour depending on the
participant. The researcher utilized a semi-structured protocol when interviewing the
respondents. A copy of the interview protocol is attached in the appendix. This allowed the
researcher to do several things that aided in the success of the research study. First, the structure
gave the researcher a general roadmap of where to go during the interview, and what questions to
ask. Second, the loose structure allowed the researcher to ask follow-up questions when the
respondent offered an answer that needed more clarification. Third, it allowed the researcher to
67
ask questions about things that they had observed during of the observations that were previously
conducted.
Interviews with teachers were conducted in their classrooms where they felt comfortable.
Interviews with administrators were carried out in their offices with the door closed to minimize
the number of interruptions. The interviews were recorded with a tape recorder and then
transcribed onto a password protected computer. The benefit of tape recording allowed the
researcher to engage in a real conversation with the respondent because they were not
constrained by note-taking. Additionally, using the tape recorder allowed the responses of the
participant to be adequately captured and not paraphrased by the interviewer. After each
interview was conducted, the transcriptions took place. Because of limited time and resources,
the transcriptions process started with a clean listen to the entire interview. Then, the researcher
replayed the conversation, and transcribed only the data that could be useful in the report. Once
all the interviews were conducted, the data analysis process began.
Data Analysis
The purpose of the data analysis process was to make meaning of the data (Schutt, 2011).
The data analysis and interpretation of all the sources focused on themes that had emerged from
the triangulation of the available data sources. Creswell’s (2014) data analysis steps were
followed throughout the examination process, starting with the organization and preparation of
all the data. The transcription and cleaning of all the data were done during the collection
process. Step two required the researcher to look and read over all the available data. Next, the
researcher moved to step three, which was to start coding the data. The process of coding was
used as a way to summarize segments of the data (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). First
cycle coding was used on documents, interview transcripts and observations. This process
68
utilized qualitative coding software to assign labels to data and summarize the meaning in a word
or short phrase. This first cycle coding included descriptive coding and process coding to gather
isolated pieces of data into small categories. Survey results were collected, and large groups were
also coded using first level descriptive and process coding.
After first level coding had been conducted, the researcher moved to step four, which
included the process of second level coding. The purpose of second level coding is to group
those summaries into fewer categories, themes, or constructs (Miles et al., 2014). These second
tier codes are often called pattern codes, as they identify emerging topics and explanations
(Miles et al., 2014). They are used to pull together many of the primary ideas that were
developed from first level coding and create a more harmonious and meaningful unit of analysis.
The large themes that were generated from the second level coding of all types of data collection
instruments are shown in the table below for each of the subsequent research questions.
Table 2.
RQ 1: What practices and programs are implemented this urban outperforming nontraditional
school?
Code Meaning
Expectations High expectations & Accountability for stakeholders
ID Intentional Decision Making
FD Freedom in Decision making

RQ 2: What are the leadership practices in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12
school?
Code Meaning
Lead Ex. Leading by Example
ID Intentional Decision Making
FD Freedom in Decision Making
Expectations High Expectations and accountability for teachers

RQ 3: What are the cultural norms in this urban outperforming nontraditional K-12 school?
Code Meaning
69
MC Mindset consistencies
ID Intentional decision making
Relationships Relationships amongst staff and students

Validity
Validity refers to the credibility and believability of the research conducted. There were
two main types of validity to consider: Internal and external validity. Internal validity, which is
specifically how the research is done, is a definite strength of qualitative research (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Thus, to ensure this study was conducted in a credible and trustworthy manner, it
was imperative that the researcher took steps to increase the validity of this study. First was the
use of the four different types of data collection methods: document analysis, surveys,
observations, and interviews. For this study, all four methods were used to collect data and
generate results. This is known as the process of triangulation, the use of more than one data
source to confirm emergent findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
A second strategy the researcher used to increase the validity of the study was to be
aware and mindful of their bias. As mentioned earlier, a strength of qualitative research is that
the researcher is the primary instrument of data collection, and while this presented several
benefits, it also increased the chance of researcher bias. Thus, to increase the trustworthiness, the
researcher accepted their possible bias and employed several strategies to minimize that bias
throughout the study. The first was a check of representativeness. In other words, the researcher
worked with a team of twelve other research members to be sure that those who were studied
throughout the research could present a varied point of view regarding the data that were
collected. Additionally, the researcher used the strategy that Schutt (2011) refers to as replicating
a finding. This is the process of confirming a finding with more than one data collection
instrument that is measuring the same thing (Schutt, 2011). The researcher employed this
70
strategy to increase validity by using the tactic mentioned above of triangulation to generate
meaning from any results gathered.
A third strategy the researcher used to increase the validity of the study was the use of
purposeful sampling. Purposeful sampling is a method that ensures that the population being
studied will help answer the questions asked by the researcher. Purposeful sampling is often used
in qualitative case studies because it allows the researcher to select a subject or location that is
information rich. In this study, the researcher employed a specific criterion for the selection of
the school site – ensuring that the school was nontraditional, in an urban setting, and was
outperforming other surrounding schools academically. This purposeful sampling increased the
validity of the study because it ensured that the selection of LLA was consistent with the
research questions and variables of the study (Palinkas et al., 2015) .
External validity is most concerned with whether the conclusions of a study have any
larger significance (Schutt, 2011). Generalizability is one of the most unique strengths of
quantitative research. However, the ability to generalize a case study has been an issue of much
contention in the social science research field because of the concern of the ability to construct
theory and generalize findings from a site-specific context with a small and purposeful sample.
Despite this difficulty, the researcher used a few strategies to ensure external validity of the
results in the study.
First, and perhaps the strongest case for external validity, was the use of eleven other
similar case studies that were part of a thematic dissertation group. All twelve members used the
same criteria to identify a sample of study, the same research questions to study, as well as the
same data collection protocols. While this does not allow them to generalize results fully, it does
increase their opportunity to generalize some of the results to other contexts of similar properties.
71
A second method used was the recording of thick descriptions during the data collection process.
This increases external validity as it allows any reader of the research to assess the potential
transferability and relevance for their setting (Schutt, 2011). Finally, the report offers
recommendations for additional settings where the results could be adequately tested and studied
further.
The previous explanations demonstrate the many strategies that were used to increase the
internal and external validity of the study that was conducted. These methods were all developed
to improve the trustworthiness of the study. The methods that the researcher used throughout the
research also consisted of several strategies to increase the reliability of the results that were
gathered.
Reliability
The underlying premise of reliability is whether the process of the study is consistent and
stable overtime. In order to increase the reliability of the study, the researcher utilized precise
research questions that were also used by eleven other graduate students in the thematic
dissertation group. Moreover, the researcher made her presence known from the immediate start
of the study. This was done by presenting the participants with a letter inviting them to
participate in this study. The letter explained what the study was about, what their rights were as
participants, as well as the time obligation if they chose to participate in the study. A copy of the
letter is attached in the appendix of this report.
A third strategy to increase reliability was the collection of data across a full range of
appropriate settings, times, and respondents. The data was collected in many different areas of
the campus, it included observations and interviews of various categories of stakeholders, and
took place during different times throughout the year. A final method that the researcher utilized
72
to confirm reliability was the use of peer and colleague review. Before the collection of the data,
all data collection instruments were presented to and approved by a panel of three dissertation
chairs at the University of Southern California. Later, once results were gathered and analyzed,
the dissertation chair and peers reviewed the data that was collected and the analysis of the
results.
Limitations, Delimitations, and Assumptions
Limitations are matters and occurrences that arise in any study that are out of researcher’s
control. A study in any field is subject to some limitation, regardless of how well constructed and
conducted it is. Delimitations are features that arise from the constraints and decisions based on
those limitations during the development of the study. Because of the inductive and emergent
nature of qualitative research, it was inevitable that barriers arose throughout the course of the
study. As a result, it was the ethical obligation of the researcher to identify and present those
limitations in the study. Moreover, generally case studies show their own levels of limitations.
One limitation of this study was that the researcher was not able to rule out alternative
explanations for the phenomenon that was discovered. This case study involved the behaviors
and perceptions of a small group of people in one organization, and as a result, the data recorded
from this case study may or may not reflect the behavior of those found in other groups of
people. This was a limitation of the study. However, the results from this case study and the
eleven others in the dissertation group may offer promising suggestions of what could be found
in other similar organizations that exist in similar settings.
An additional limitation of this study was in the data collection methods utilized. The
first limitation arose when considering the use of surveys as a method of data collection. Unlike
interviews, where respondents were able to ask clarifying or follow-up questions, when taking
73
surveys, respondents were generally limited to the survey for directions. Further, a limitation of
observations is that it was understandably impossible to observe and record everything that was
happening in the surrounding area. As a result, the researcher was limited to watching and
recording only pieces of information that they perceived as relevant to their study. However,
using a protocol for observations would lessen the impact of this limitation.
One delimitation of this study is concerning the questions and variables that were the
interest of this study. Specifically, the choice to study programs and practices, leadership, and
cultural norms narrowed the researchers focus on only those variables, which dictated what data
the researcher was interested in collecting throughout the study. However, these three categories
were chosen based on research that was gathered on successful low-income urban schools.
Another delimitation of the study was the choice of participants. This study only collected data
from teachers and administrators. The researcher chose not to study other stakeholders and
students because these two categories of respondents were not entirely relevant to answering the
research questions and collecting data from minors created a problematic barrier in terms of
Investigation Review Board approval.
In this qualitative case study, the researcher was the primary instrument of data
collection. In considering the inherent subjectivity that takes place in research, it was important
to acknowledge the assumptions that took place throughout the study. The central assumption
that the researcher made was that all the participants of the study answered all questions
honestly. Despite various data collection methods, there was still no way to guarantee that the
participants answered all questions truthfully. However, using triangulation, and assuming that
they told the truth to the best of their ability, the data can be considered valid and reliable. A
second assumption that the researcher made during this research study was that the researcher
74
and the subjects had a comfortable relationship, and were willing to divulge information about
all topics presented. As stated previously, the researcher is the primary data collection instrument
in qualitative research, and therefore, the subjects needed to work very closely with the
investigator throughout the study. The researcher assumed that the participants felt comfortable
enough being observed and interviewed by the researcher that they acted as they normally
would, and shared all pertinent information during the process.
This chapter has provided an outline of the research study, a description of the sample
selection, a review of the data collection process, an overview of the data analysis process.
Additionally, it has explained the decisions made to increase validity and reliability and exposed
the limitations, delimitations, and assumptions of the researcher for the study. The following
chapter offers a detailed presentation of the data that was gathered during this study as well as a
thick and rich description and analysis of the themes that emerged from the research conducted
at this nontraditional outperforming urban school.

75
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Findings
The success of nontraditional schools, such as charters, is most often a myriad of many
favorable decisions, systems, and practices that exist within a school. The individuals in any
successful school play a unique role in creating the optimal school culture that allows for
students to be successful and feel supported in their academic endeavors. For decades, the roles
of individuals in public schools were very stable—leaders were engaged with their roles as
managers, and tenured teachers taught in isolation. With these roles, public schools served their
purpose: educating most students, preparing many for the workforce, but inevitably leaving the
most vulnerable students behind (Spring, 2017). By the year 1990, parents and families, mostly
in low-income, urban neighborhoods recognized the gaps in the education system and wanted
better options for their children (Miron, 2017).
By the end of 2015, there were just about 7,000 charter schools in over 40 of the nation’s
states, a majority of which served low-income, high-need youth (NCES, 2015). Since 2015,
these schools have continued to grow both in numbers and popularity. Despite their growth and
support from many school choice proponents, skeptics noticed that not all charter schools have
lived up to their promise of academic excellence. As a result, the nation closed over 1,500
charter schools between the years 2000 and 2014. Many of these schools shut down due to
failing test scores or low enrollment, displacing thousands of minority students in low-income
communities across the United States (Singer, 2017). With all the finger pointing, educational
outsiders, or school-choice opponents, have ignored stories of nontraditional schools that are
performing beyond expectations. These are schools that have been outperforming both traditional
and nontraditional schools by proving that “those kids,” the ones who have been traditionally
underserved, can learn.
76
The purpose of this study was to identify promising characteristics and practices that
narrow the achievement gap at an outperforming nontraditional urban charter school. This study
looked at three areas of interest that play a critical role in the school’s successes: (a) practices
and programs, (b) leadership practices, and (c) cultural norms. Through an in-depth case study,
each of the three variables was addressed by answering the following research questions:
1. What practices and programs are implemented this urban outperforming
nontraditional school?
2. What are the leadership practices in this urban outperforming nontraditional K–12
school?
3. What are the cultural norms in this urban outperforming nontraditional K–12 school?
The first three chapters of this study addressed the identified problem of the achievement
gap, some of the current challenges that charter schools face, as well as the significance of the
study. These chapters also offered a review of the existing literature surrounding nontraditional
schools and described the methodology used in this research study. This chapter addresses the
findings from the case study conducted at Lunar Learning Academy (LLA) and will provide an
in-depth analysis of the results for each research question, and finally, it will provide a
discussion of the emergent themes from the study.
Research Questions
Research questions were used to guide the study, and provide detailed information about
the programs and practices, leadership practices, and culture of LLA. A thematic dissertation
group met over the course of 2 years to discuss current and relevant literature, generate research
questions, and develop a reliable and sound method of collecting data. Despite the team
77
components, this study, and all research was conducted by an individual researcher. The team
used relevant literature on nontraditional urban schools and generated three research questions:
1. What practices and programs are implemented this urban outperforming
nontraditional school?
2. What are the leadership practices in this urban outperforming nontraditional K–12
school?
3. What are the cultural norms in this urban outperforming nontraditional K–12 school?
Methodology
Data collection took place at LLA over a period of 3 months, which included 7 days at
the school site, surveys, over 20 hours of observation, and 11 interviews. The researcher was the
sole investigator and data analyst for this case study. In addition to the interviews and
observations, the researcher analyzed various school documents such as staff schedules, the
school website, coaching protocols, anti-bullying lesson plans, character building lessons, and
many more materials. Using all four sources, interviews, observations, surveys, and school
documents, the researcher was able to strengthen the results by triangulating the findings in
between several sources of data.
The researcher collected data on different days and times throughout the 3 months. First,
the researcher obtained documents from the school’s Assistant Principal, Sarah, and the school’s
website. The staff survey was administered online through Qualtrics, and 26 surveys were
completed, representing 65% of the school’s staff. Next, the researcher conducted 4 full days of
observations. Finally, 11 interviews were carried out with teachers, leadership, and other staff
during 4 days at the school site.
78
The data analysis process took place using Creswell’s (2017) six steps of data analysis, as
well as Merriem and Tisdell’s (2015) qualitative data analysis protocol as a resource. The
inductive process of first-level coding was used to find general trends throughout the data. Then,
second-level coding was used to identify the most relevant findings and themes for each research
question. The deductive method of second-level coding helped strengthen the validity and
reliability of the results, as it allowed for further triangulation of the trends that were emerging
from the data.
Background at Lunar Learning Academy
Early mornings at LLA are an inspiring sight. Nestled on the corner of an urban
intersection, LLA’s stark white building stands tall above the rest. Students, families, and their
pets can be seen walking from all directions, as they meet at the front gate of the school.
Students are all dressed in tan pants, white shirts, and striped ties, and wear their backpacks
proudly. When the families get to the front gate, many of them kiss their students on the head
and say their goodbyes. You can hear them saying “Compórtate bien,” and “Te amo” as their
children walk up to the entrance of the school. One gate stands between the outside sidewalk and
the school. At the gate there stands a staff member from LLA, who greets each student with a
handshake and a good morning. The students stand patiently in line, waiting to shake their
teacher’s hand, who knows each student by their name. Parents mingle outside of the gate
saying hello and goodbye before they walk back in the direction they came. It took one
observation for the researcher to realize that LLA stood as a symbol of success for all those in
the community who believe in the possibilities that come with a good education.
Once the students are inside, they proceed to the back of the school where they form
small groups with their classmates and wait for their homeroom teacher to come collect them
79
before class. At 7:30 a.m., they are greeted and picked up by their teacher, who walks them to
their homeroom. Once they are in their homerooms, they silently take out their reading books.
These are books that each student has chosen to read at precisely their own literacy level. After
30 minutes of silent reading, the scholar’s day continues—going to back-to-back classes,
walking through hallways chatting with friends, eating lunch, and playing in the yard. From an
outsider looking in, LLA seems like any other urban middle school. But from an insider, a
student, a staff member, a parent, or a researcher, LLA is much more than that.
LLA is a literacy-focused charter school located in a large urban county in Southern
California. Susan, the current principal, founded the school in 2013. She founded the school
with a strong vision and commitment to the equitable education of students. Many of the
teachers, including the Assistant Principal, Sarah, are part of the founding team and have been
together since the school first opened its doors. Despite LLA’s intense focus on literacy,
students are also required to take an elective course. Every course is run by a teacher that is
passionate about the elective subject. The students can choose from classes such as dance, cheer,
music, art, engineering with Legos, and so many more. These examples show LLA’s
commitment to providing their students with many more opportunities for learning.
LLA, a charter school authorized by LAUSD, put itself on the academic map in 2014
when they outscored the LAUSD in both ELA and math on the SBAC—a standard measure of
academic success. In 2014, 64% of its students met or exceed the standard in ELA, while only
33% of LAUSD and 20% of neighborhood students did the same. In 2016 their success
continued when 73% of students met or exceeded the ELA standards, compared to only 39% of
LA Unified students and 24% of neighborhood students. In 2017, over 70% of students met or
exceeded the ELA standards, beating the LA unified students by over 30%. LLA’s data
80
indicates a consistent climb toward closing the academic achievement gap by ensuring academic
excellence for its scholars.
At the time of the study, LLA was educating over 500 students ranging from Grades 4 to
8. They served over 60 English language learners (ELL), and are responsible for a steady incline
in the reclassification numbers of their ELLs. Over 400 of LLA’s scholars qualify for free or
reduced-price meals, a nationally recognized measure of academic poverty. The staff is made up
of 42 adults, ranging from leadership at all levels, to counselors, high school placement
counselors, and afterschool educators. Several of LLAs teachers have received awards of merit
for excellence in education. This study will present findings that demonstrate LLA’s
transformative environment through data that displays their structures, programs, leadership
practices, and cultural norms that have significantly impacted the academic success of the
school.
Findings by Research Question
This section will present the results that the researcher discovered for each research
question. The researcher chose to focus the three research questions on the areas of instructional
programs and practices, leadership practices, and cultural norms that exist within LLA. Each
research question has been answered with several findings that have been triangulated through
the different sources of data collection.
Findings for Research Question 1
The first research question was as follows: What programs and practices exist at an
outperforming nontraditional urban school? To identify the different programs and practices at
LLA, the researcher gathered data from surveys, interviews, observations, and school documents.
The data was coded and triangulated to ensure validity, after which the following practices were
81
found to be influential factors in the academic success of LLA: (a) clear and high expectations,
(b) decision-making freedom, and (c) intentionality with decision making.
Clear and High Expectations. The first finding that emerged was that LLA held all
staff, students, and families to high expectations. Data from all sources demonstrated a strong
correlation between this outcome and the outperforming success of LLA. Since its inception,
LLA has held all parties to extraordinarily clear and high expectations. One example of these
expectations is that staff members were expected to assume many responsibilities beyond the
traditional one of a classroom teacher. The researcher observed this on several occasions. During
one observation in the staff lounge at LLA, a group of English teachers were meeting during
their break to plan a literacy night for the parents. The teachers were creating activities, making
choices about content delivery, and breaking down room assignments for a literacy event.
Leadership at LLA told the researcher that this event was going to be after school and that all
staff members were asked to plan events and activities for students and families. This finding
was supported in an interview as well. In an interview with Ricky, a teacher at LLA, he stated:
Here, there’s a higher bar set for teachers, and a lot more rigorous work for the time and
the load. You’re expected to wear many hats, be here from a minimum of 7:00 am to
4:15, and then all the work we do after that.
This sentiment was also evident through the survey that was administered to the staff
members. When respondents were asked to respond to the statement, “School staff members
work beyond their traditional roles to ensure student success,” over 88% of respondents agreed
or strongly agreed. These survey results are displayed in Figure 1..
82

Figure 1. Staff members’ efforts to ensure student success.
Staff members at LLA were also held to high expectations when it came to the academic
achievement of their students. In a survey taken by staff, when asked to respond to the
statement, “Administrators hold staff accountable for improving student learning,” a majority of
respondents agreed or strongly agreed. Interview data collected from LLA staff supported this
finding, as they believed that teachers are consistently held accountable to high expectations by
their leadership. In one interview, Jenn, a fifth-grade teacher, was asked what practices had been
most significant in sustaining student achievement. She responded with an example of how her
leadership has held her to high expectations through effective coaching. She stated,
The bar is set for you academically, particularly rigor is set for you by your coach, but
then accountability is set for you when they are in your room, and they’re like, “Hey, you
were supposed to be on this lesson. Why were you just doing whole group reading?”
In another interview, a Kyla, a sixth-grade teacher responded to the same question by saying,
I think administration sets the bar very high, especially with student data. . . . They have
ridiculously high goals. A lot of times we meet them, and then it feels good that someone
pushed us, and we can say, “We did it!”
83
Outside of teachers, LLA held other staff members to equally high expectations. As an
example, LLA employed a high school placement counselor, a unique position, who’s main job
was to educate families and students on expectations for high school enrollment. She also helped
match students with high schools that were a good fit for them. During one interview with Mara,
the High School Placement Counselor, she reinforced the high expectations that were set by
leadership. She stated,
I think that this school is an amazing school. I grew up in the area, so I went to the
middle schools in the area, and it is very different because I feel like our teachers here are
always held accountable for what they’re teaching.
She went on to compare LLA’s staff with her middle school teachers when she was
growing up. She stated,
When I was in middle school in some of the surrounding neighboring schools, I felt like,
yes, teachers were held accountable, but because it was already later in their game for
some teachers; they didn’t have that same energy they once did, which is understandable.
But, it’s very different here: The teachers here are great and its obvious how much they
care about their students. I feel like the fact that our admin is always going in to look at
teachers and looking at what they’re teaching or how maybe they should change certain
lessons or those types of things. I think that’s great because they’re doing it on an
everyday basis. And, in other schools, it’s only when they’re being evaluated.
During the researcher’s final interview with the Principal of LLA, Susan, she commented
on the expectations she sets for her teachers by using data as a talking point, and a motivator in
making progress. Susan said, “We have high expectations here, and a lot of checks and balances,
and transparency—data transparency. People are present. There’s really no place to go hide—
84
holding people accountable to that, and not letting it slide.” She took a breath, let out a small
laugh and said, “I do set such a high bar. We have established a foundation of excellence here.”
This finding was consistent with many findings from relevant and current literature on
successful schools. These studies have shown that high expectations for teachers can create a
culture of achievement that leads to higher academic success for students. In a 2017 study of an
outperforming charter school, Green (2017) found that when leadership raised the bar for their
teachers by creating high expectations, the school quickly nurtured a culture of high
achievement. LLA has shown that by holding their stakeholders to high expectations, they too
have created this culture of achievement that has helped them reach their outperforming level of
success. Through surveys, interviews, and observations, the data overwhelmingly supports the
findings that holding teachers and staff to high expectations is a significant factor in the success
of the LLA.
In addition to the high expectations set for staff, data from interviews, observations, and
surveys also denoted a strong correlation between high expectations for students—and the
success of LLA. Every student at LLA is expected to work hard and make academic progress.
Students at the school are expected to become better readers, mathematicians, scientists,
historians, artists, and scholars. Every scholar is expected to read 35 pages at night—track their
data, and then show growth. During additional observations, the researcher observed examples
of students living up to the high expectations set by their teachers. They were seen coming in
during their lunch break for tutoring, rephrasing answers to use academic discourse while in
class, and demonstrating scholarly behavior that contributed to an academic environment.
Additionally, students at LLA attended a longer school day, which displays another example of
LLA’s high expectations that they set for their students. Scholars at LLA attended school from
85
7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., with one break for lunch. The researcher often observed them reading on
their own free time, working with teachers during their lunch breaks, and helping office staff
with school duties. These actions reinforce the finding that all stakeholders, including students,
are held to high expectations.
The survey given to staff illustrates this finding. 100% of respondents agreed or strongly
agreed that students are expected to achieve at high levels. Additionally, 25 out of the 26
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that all students were consistently challenged through a
rigorous curriculum. This data can be seen in Figure 2. During an observation of an English
class, the researcher witnessed students being held to high expectations through demanding
classwork and instruction. During the observation, students were working on story revisions
while the teacher did individual conferences with other students about their writing. The
researcher observed students using Chromebooks to write essays, receive feedback from their
peers and teacher, and use a revision checklist to improve their writing. During an interview
with Ricky, an English teacher at LLA; he discussed the rigorous standards and expectations for
his students. He stated, “There’s a very high bar set for our students, and I think they are very
capable of achieving that bar.”

Figure.2. Expectations for students.
These findings are consistent with many other studies that show that charter schools with
high expectations for their students have higher odds of closing the achievement gap. One type
of charter school—“no-excuses” charter schools—demonstrate the positive power of setting high
86
expectations for students. Studies surrounding these types of schools have found that the
academic effects of no-excuses charter schools are evident and substantial (Cheng, Hitt, Kisida,
& Milla, 2017). This research reveals the power of creating and maintaining elevated
expectations for students in nontraditional schools. LLA’s expectations for their students
displayed a parallel case that supported the implications of creating and holding students to
rigorous expectations for learning and behavior.
A final sub finding was the practice of holding families to high expectations. Data
collected during this case study supported the finding that when LLA created and maintained
high expectations for their families, they were more involved in the academics and behavior of
their students. This, in turn, had a large impact on the success of the school. Families at LLA
were in frequent communication with teachers and staff members. Additionally, family
members of students were expected to be involved in many of the school’s activities. During
almost every observation, the researcher observed parents walking in and out of the office to
meet with counselors, administrators or teachers before, during, and after the school day.
Additionally, survey respondents reinforced this finding by stating that they were in frequent
contact with families. 25 out of the 26 respondents agreed and strongly agreed that staff members
are in constant contact with families. This evidence can be seen in Figure 3. During interviews,
when teachers were asked about the involvement of parents in the school, one teacher stated,
“We have many events that we want parents to come to, back to school night, literacy night,
sports games, etcetera.” She went on to say, “Sometimes we will go to their houses, or have the
parents come in just to talk about their student’s progress."
87

Figure.3. Staff member contact with families.
Part of LLA’s process of holding families accountable was giving them opportunities and
resources for involvement. As a confirmation of this, over 80% of survey respondents believed
that the school provided families with resources on how to best support their students in school.
During an interview with Mara, the High School Placement Counselor, she talked about how she
involved the families through her role at the school. She stated, “I am starting to meet with the
fifth- and sixth-grade families now. I hold information sessions so that the families know how
important their grades are, starting from this year. I’m really trying to inform families earlier
on.” She went on to say, “I think the parents here are really great. I’ve been a counselor for a
long time, and it's nice that I can call a parent and they come right away.” When the researcher
asked Mara how she motivated parents that were hard to reach, she responded by saying, “I put a
lot of pressure on these parents to be involved, consistently calling them and asking them to
come in.” Additionally, over 60% of the survey respondents at LLA felt that the parental
involvement at LLA was higher than the involvement at their previous school. During an
88
interview with Kyla about factors that she believed contributed to the success of her school, she
said,
I think one piece of our success is our parents because our parents are definitely very
involved. There are certain grade levels where parents are not as involved, but I think
when you have parents that are involved—that’s the biggest piece. I feel like, because
we are a charter school, parents are already opting in, so you’re already having a certain
type of parent—because they’ve done maybe their research, and maybe they weren’t
happy with their neighboring school or something.
During an observation at LLA, the researcher observed the teachers communicating with
parents at the end of the school day about student’s behavior, letting the parents know about
expectations that a student failed to meet. Additionally, the researcher observed signs placed
around the school about days and times for parent meetings. This data shows the types of
systems and supports that LLA offered to parents in order to create and maintain involvement.
In addition to the systems previously mentioned, LLA also expects parents to support
them in disciplinary actions at the school. One day while sitting in the office, the researcher
observed a student who had been sent to the office for misbehaving during physical education
(PE). The student sat in the office to reflect on his actions. A short time later, Sarah asked the
student if he was ready to come into her office to talk about the incident. Curious about the
punishment, the researcher asked Sarah, the Assistant Principal, what that consequence would
be. She responded by placing her hand to her ear to signal a phone. She then asked the student
again, “Are you ready to call home?” The student sauntered to her office where they proceeded
to briefly talk about the incident, and call the students father. The conversation was long, about
10 minutes of describing the event and talking about how the parents can support the school by
89
talking with the student about why his behavior was inappropriate. The student sat in the office
looking remorseful, embarrassed, and upset. When the student was finished with the phone call,
he talked to Sarah for a few more minutes, then returned back up to his classroom.
This incident demonstrated the power of the home to school connection, and the
implications that parental involvement can have on students both academically and behaviorally.
The parents at LLA are often held accountable to help their students at home, both academically
and socially. Many times, they are expected to help issue the students their own consequences at
home, in addition to consequences given at the school site. This has allowed LLA to focus more
on educating children while maintaining a safe learning environment
Overwhelming amounts of research demonstrate the critical role that parents and families
play in the academic success of their children. Even more convincing is the recent study that
shows that schools in disadvantaged communities that create an environment that supports the
urgency for parental involvement have a more significant impact on the learning outcomes for
their students (Li & Fischer, 2017). LLA’s expectations for the participation of their parents and
families is an evidently impactful factor that was recognized through observations, interviews,
and the school staff survey.
Decision-Making Freedom. The second finding for this research question was that the
teachers and the staff at LLA have substantial freedom when it comes to making decisions.
Further, those decisions are always in the best interest of the students. Within LLA there is a
culture of shared decision making that has been built by years of hard work and earned trust
among the staff. There was an apparent confidence between leadership and teachers, as well as
amongst teachers to make decisions that “do right by children.” This trust has allowed the
teachers to create and carry out unique lesson plans that might stray from a formulaic curriculum.
90
Teachers at LLA are given the freedom to develop group lesson plans for other teachers, and
administrators have the freedom to make decisions about the systems and schedule of the school.
The researcher found that this trust between teachers and leadership was an essential component
of the school’s success. Additionally, trust most often leads to improved teaching and better
learning outcomes for students (Koster, 2016). The data for this finding was seen through
observations, interviews, surveys, and school documents, as explored below.
When the researcher entered LLA, they walked back and forth through several
classrooms, and observed the educators teaching with intentionality. Each lesson execution was
unique, and entirely personalized for each group of students. In one math class, students were
working collaboratively on whiteboards, sitting in pods of three, discussing how to solve the
problem. The teacher walked around the room, smiled, and said, “Good job, check line 3,” and
“Make sure the whole group is participating!” Down the hall and to the left, an English teacher
was having her students silently read a book and annotate on each page. This was a skill they
had been working hard on. On the side of the class, she was working with a small group of
students, who were each sitting on their own colorful stool with a book in front of them. She
read part of the book, then put her finger to her chin and asked, “Hmmm—what might this
character be thinking?” The students looked at the teacher, and some responded quietly, as to
not disturb the rest of the class.
Upstairs there was a science class; all students were logged onto their Chromebooks,
watching a science video and reading an article that had been posted onto Google Classroom.
Next door, there was another science teacher having students engage in a gallery walk. During
this activity students rotated in small groups and answered questions about the Fossil record by
using scales to investigate how deep the soil and clay was. Back downstairs and out the back
91
doors was a PE teacher who was using his small portable speaker to play up-tempo music during
his “workout of the day” with the students. As he prepared the students for their jumping jacks,
as he said, “I have Josh’s eyes on me, and Natalia’s eyes on me—I’m just waiting for Crystal’s
eyes, and Lugo’s eyes to be up here.” He then counted to three and the students jumped in
unison.
These observations of the differences in each classroom yielded essential qualitative data
that supported the finding that the teachers and staff at LLA have been given substantial freedom
to make decisions that are best for their students. This freedom, built by trust, allowed the
teachers at LLA to carry out lesson plans, and make instructional decisions that best supported
their groups of students in their classrooms. The researcher never observed teachers using
uniform curriculums, or instructional scripts, nor were any classrooms set up in a traditional
format with desks in straight rows. These observations prove that each teacher is able to create
unique lesson plans and systems within their classrooms for their particular students. They have
been given the freedom to develop and implement lessons that are both rigorous, engaging, and
also appropriate for their content area and the demographic they serve.
Data from the Qualtrics survey supported this finding on several instances. First, when
asked to respond to the statement, “Teachers at this school are given the freedom to implement
and carry out culturally relevant curriculum,” about 28% of respondents strongly agreed and
40% agreed. This finding can be found below in Figure 4.
92

Figure 4. Freedom to carry out culturally relevant curriculum.
In a separate question, staff was asked if the school gives them substantial freedom to
carry out different lessons and activities. For this statement, 96% of respondents agreed or
strongly agreed. These findings can be found below in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Freedom to carry out different activities.
Interviews with several staff members reinforced the finding that staff at LLA have the
freedom to make decisions that they feel are in the best interest of the school and their students.
In one interview conducted with Lara, a lead teacher, when asked about what she believes has
put them in the position to outperform other schools, she discussed the instructional flexibility
they have. She stated,
93
I think we innovate academically. We think really hard about the best research that’s out
there, and we have the freedom and flexibility to do what is best rather than use a lesson
plan that is set by the district.
In Kyla’s interview, a sixth-grade English teacher, when asked the same question, she smiled and
said,
In English, I feel like I have a lot of freedom to teach the curriculum that I want. There’s
a certain structure that leadership expects. . . . They want to see lessons with a ratio of
higher student talk to teacher talk, exit tickets, and data from exit tickets. But, they also
want to see engagement so that everyone can do that in their own way. We can break the
structure, and its fine, as long as I show data and show improvement.
Similar sentiments were not hard to find at LLA. The feeling of freedom and trust was
not just observed by the researcher and a few staff members, it was felt by almost all staff, who
recognized their freedom to make innovative decisions in their classroom that would produce
outcomes for kids. As Lara, the fifth-grade teacher said, “We are fortunate enough to have some
of the supports that other neighborhood schools might not have, and therefore have the leeway
and leverage to provide more for our kids.” She sat up, pointed to herself and said, “I get a lot of
autonomy as a teacher, and I appreciate that, because its supported, and has allowed me to do
things instructionally that I would imagine I’m not allowed to do in district school.” She
continued to express how lucky she felt to work at a school that has supported her and
encouraged her to make decisions, instructionally, that are ultimately good for kids.
The trust that LLA had in its staff has allowed them to not only support but also
encourage their teachers to make decisions for kids. With the understanding that a large part of
this freedom stems from the inherent liberties of charter schools, LLA has used their autonomy
94
in decision making in an evidently impactful way that was supported by both qualitative data,
and quantitative survey and SBAC data. Currently, there is minimal research that matches this
finding, leading the researcher to believe that LLA is modeling the powerful implications that
freedom in decision making can have on students when there is trust among teachers and staff to
do what is best for children.
Intentionality in Decision Making. A third finding for the practices at LLA that have
played a role in its outperforming success was that LLA made deliberate decisions that supported
the academic achievement of the school. When decisions needed to be made at LLA, they were
most often made based on data, and in the best interest of their students. This finding was
supported by data from interviews, observations, and surveys.
Upon walking into any room in LLA, the researcher observed decisions were made to put
kids first. During each of the visits, the researcher observed teachers sacrificing so much of
themselves for their students. The researcher noted two teachers that were forgoing their lunch
break so that they could tutor students in reading. The teachers and students were huddled
around a small table, eating their lunch and reading a book together while the rest of the class
was outside playing. The researcher was also able to observe small groups taking place in
almost every classroom, a practice guided by student data from either formative assessments,
summative assessments, or reading levels. Moreover, the researcher was able to observe
teachers in the staff lounge creating a plan for using different strategies and lessons to help their
students read on grade level. During an interview with Liz, the school’s dean, she said, “I think
everything we do looks intentional. I think we are always reevaluating what we do. We are very
data-driven. If the data doesn’t support it—we figure out something else.” She continued to say,
95
“That’s not only concerning numbers, it’s our student work and our practices; we are not okay
with the status quo.”
Surveys also demonstrated that LLA’s intentionality in their decision making played an
impactful role in the success of their students. Much of their data showed that most of LLA’s
decisions are strategically made to help specific students in their classrooms. One hundred
percent of survey respondents felt that teachers at LLA use a variety of different instructional
strategies in the classroom to help various subgroups of students efficiently meet high academic
standards. This can be seen in Figure 6. Further, 100% of respondents agreed that instruction at
LLA is adjusted to meet individual needs. This data point can be seen in Figure 7. These
findings demonstrated a critical link between the intentionality of differentiated instructional
practices and academic success. The teachers at LLA have committed to helping their students
excel academically, and recognize the importance and urgency of adjusting their instruction in
whatever way possible for their students to succeed.

Figure 6. Use of different instructional strategies in the classroom.
96

Figure 7. Instruction adjusted to meet individual needs.
Every classroom at LLA had walls that were lined with data. Whether the data exposed
scores from a standards-based assessment, or reading levels, all scholars knew where they stood.
In one class, the researcher observed a teacher telling her students that she had increased their
reading time at home for homework because it was the last day to “crush their goals” for the
month. Several students in the class whispered, “yes!” as if to show excitement for more time to
read in order to meet their personal goals. During an interview with Mara, LLA’s High School
Placement Counselor, whose main job was to assist families and students with finding a high
school that is a good fit for them, she expressed how critical student data was in all the decisions
she makes. She stated, “A big part of my role has to do with data, and evaluating it to find out
how we can best support students when it comes to choosing a high school for themselves.” She
continued to say,
Everything is driven by data. For instance, last year Susan had me bring in data about
our students, and then compare it to ECC [estimated college completion], which is data
we did a lot of searching for. But, being able to see behind a student, and what type of
school they would be able to go to, allows us to see how to help students. We are trying
to personalize a path for each student, and then we make every teacher aware of this.
97
There was an overwhelming consensus amongst staff at LLA that they are a school with a
hardworking and dedicated teaching staff, who are fueled by innovation and inspired by one
another’s work ethic. As Jeff, an eighth-grade lead teacher stated, “We are innovative. Our
teachers are always working hard to see what else is out there, and what they can bring into the
classroom. They always want to find a new way of learning.” This data demonstrated that LLA
utilizes a specific practice of using data for intentional decision making. This finding was
evident in all aspects of their school. The staff handled data for individualized instruction, to
guide their lesson plans, and help students take hold of their own learning. Finally, data at LLA
is used to help students understand their path to high school and college. LLA’s intentionality in
decision making was an obvious factor that played a significant role in their success as a low-
income, urban, outperforming charter school.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 1
Staff at LLA engaged in several key practices that made an impact on the success of the
school. The impact of these practices was validated via surveys, observations, interviews, and
school documents. LLA held all stakeholders, including parents, teachers, and students, to clear
and high expectations. These expectations ensured the involvement of families, rigorous
instruction and use of data by the teachers, and accountability for student progress. A second
key practice that was noted at LLA was their freedom in decision making. Teachers at LLA had
substantial freedom, built by trust, to teach in whatever way they thought was best for their
students.
Lastly, staff at LLA exercised intentionality when making decisions in their classrooms.
Teachers sacrificed their free time, and carried out many duties beyond their job descriptions so
that they could help their students make progress. Each of these findings was noted on several
98
occasions by teachers and leaders, through surveys, interviews, and observations. Furthermore,
when the researcher asked Susan, the Principal, what she felt someone’s first impression would
be as they walked into the school, she stated, “I think you would notice that people work really
hard. Everything we do is intentional, and no one is just sitting around.” The teachers in their
interviews agreed, several stating that they are given substantial freedom to make decisions for
their classrooms, and that they are held to transparent expectations about student progress.
Charter schools are given substantial freedom in the way they run, but the most successful
charter schools use that freedom to make powerful decisions that craft positive outcomes for
students. LLA has implemented several key practices that have played a vital role in their
outperforming success.
Findings for Research Question 2
The second research question of this study asked about the leadership practices that
existed within the outperforming nontraditional school. The outperforming scores by students at
LLA can be attributed to a collection of systems and methods within the school. However, one
of the most influential factors, as noted by the researcher, were the different leadership practices
at the school. The leadership team at LLA was made up of three formal individuals, and several
informal leaders within the school such as lead teachers, and founding teachers.
The formal leadership team was made up of the Principal, Susan, the Assistant Principal,
Sarah, and School Dean, Liz. Susan is the founding principal, who started the school 5 years
ago. Susan helped design everything one would see when walking into the school: classrooms,
colors, furniture, and offices. Beneath the surface, Susan built LLA based on her firm belief and
passion for equitable education and literacy for all children. She chose the core values of the
school, and then handpicked a staff that shared the same urgency for education as she did. When
99
speaking with the team, and observing the school, it was evident to the researcher that the
leadership at LLA was an invaluable driving factor behind the outperforming success of the
school.
To identify the specific leadership practices at LLA that played an impactful role, the
researcher triangulated the data from observations, surveys, interviews, and documents to
generate essential findings. The triangulation of the data sources both helped create four
findings for this research question, and also ensured the validity of the findings. The findings
from first and second level coding of the data showed that the following leadership practices
were strong factors that contributed to the academic success of LLA: (a) Leading by Example,
(b) High Expectations and Accountability Set by Leadership, (c) Freedom in Decision Making,
(d) Restorative Approaches of Discipline, and (e) Intentionality in Decision Making.
Leading by Example. The first finding for this research question was that the leadership
at LLA lead by example and empowered leadership among its teaching staff. Upon observation
at LLA, the researcher observed the administration leading by example on several occasions. On
the first day at the school site, all three administrators could be seen out in the yard, helping set
up for a big event with the students. The three leaders, along with several teachers, were stuffing
gift bags for students, blowing up giant inflatable pools for a competitive game of tug-of-war,
blowing up water balloons, and setting up signs. Throughout the day, the leadership was seen
outside helping the teachers run the event, engaging with students, and helping monitor the
safety and flow of the day. The administrators at LLA were the first individuals outside in the
morning, and the last people in at the end of the event.
Survey data supported this finding, demonstrating that 100% of the respondents believed
that their leadership leads by example. Moreover, a few respondents stated that the main reason
100
they chose to work at LLA was because of the leadership at the school. During Jeff’s interview,
the researcher asked what specific leadership practices he thinks have played a role in the
success at the school. Crossing his hands in front of him and leaning back, he stated, “I think the
leadership, solidly, has modeled very firm ideas about how they believe we should treat kids, and
they don’t waver from that.” More specifically he stated, “We are warm demanders. We have
boundaries and expectations that we need to meet, but we are never disparaging or sarcastic. We
don’t yell at kids.” This data supported the finding that the leadership at LLA leads their staff by
modeling the way they want all of their employees to act at work.
During another observation, a significant portion of the students were finishing up a
school-wide assessment that helped LLA measure academic progress. The students were broken
up into testing and non-testing rooms, so that those students who were already finished could
continue learning from their teachers, and the rest had a quiet place to focus on their test. The
researcher witnessed a collective spirit among the staff, led by the leadership, who were seen in
several rooms proctoring the tests for students. This allowed the teachers to have time to plan
with their grade level teams and tutor smaller groups of students. Further, when speaking with
teachers at LLA, the researcher learned that the leadership team gave character-building lessons
to the students several times a month. During these experiences, they discussed topics such as
high school readiness, name calling, grit, and advocacy. While the leadership was teaching, the
teachers were given the opportunity to have common planning time with their grade level teams,
a notable practice for educators. During an interview with the Sarah, she stated,
This year I suggested that we do these character-building lessons. I feel like it’s
important for us to still be in the classroom, it allows us to get to know the kids better and
its good for the teachers to be able to see us in there.
101
These examples demonstrated how the leadership lead by example for their staff. Showing up
early, assisting with lessons, proctoring tests, and staying late were all ways that the
administration modeled the work ethic and commitment they wanted to see from their staff.
High Expectations and Accountability Set by Leadership. The second finding for
research question two was that the leadership at LLA set clear and high expectations for their
staff, and held them accountable for making progress towards those expectations and goals.
During observations at LLA, the researcher took part in a professional development meeting on a
Monday after school. The teachers all sat at desks in the room with their grade-level teams as
they ate their lunch and quietly talked to their peers. At the start of the meeting, the leadership
asked for shout-outs from the staff, where members of the team praised other members for
accomplishments throughout the week. From there, the teachers were led through a multi-part
PowerPoint. The first part of the PowerPoint reviewed the previous year’s SBAC data to remind
all the teachers of their scores from last year. Next, the teachers were asked to collaborate with
their grade level teams and analyze their data from the state test. Finally, the teachers were
asked to make an online resource guide that included all their units, lessons, and materials that
they used to teach so that the following year, everything would be easily accessible for both them
and leadership. In support of expectations such as the one described above, Susan stated, “I
think that there is a high level of accountability. We are trying to create a healthy team where
people feel excited and also accountable to their counterparts. We hold everyone responsible;
we don’t just let things slide.”
During another observation, the researcher watched a coaching session between Liz, the
Dean, and a math teacher. The two sat at a table in the office surrounded by piles of student
assessments. Picking up one test at a time, the administrator and the teacher analyzed the student
102
work. The administrator asked the teacher questions like, “How was this content explicitly
taught?” She also asked how the teacher planned to reteach the questions that were the most
commonly missed. This coaching session demonstrated not only high expectations for learning,
but it also confirmed how the leadership at LLA holds their staff accountable for ensuring that
students learn. This idea is supported by an interview, where Kyla talks about the accountability
set by the leadership. She stated,
I feel like our administration is always going in to look at teachers in their classrooms.
They are always looking at what they are teaching, or maybe how they could change
certain lessons. I think it’s great because they are consistent and doing in on an everyday
basis.
In other interviews with teachers, many of them stated that they recognized the
accountability measures that were in place. Additionally, they appreciated the high expectations
set for them by their leadership. In one interview with Jenn, when asked about the leadership
strategies that promoted effective teaching, she responded by saying,
I think effective coaching is the most helpful. I know it’s such a broad idea, but I’m
thinking about the moments when someone is in my room, telling me what I can do better
next time. Then, I am held accountable for making those adjustments.
During another interview with the Liz, the dean, she stated, “At LLA, we hold observations
pretty sacred in our schedules. We are always in the classrooms. We support our teachers, and
differentiate what they need.” Survey data about leadership showed similar results about high
expectations and accountability. When respondents were asked to respond to the statement,
“Teachers receive regular feedback on how they are performing,” 85% of the respondents
agreed. This data can be found in Figure 8.
103

Figure 8. Teachers receive regular feedback.
In an additional question asking the staff if they feel that the leadership holds them
accountable for student learning, 95% of respondents agreed. The data from thee surveys can be
seen in Figure 9. The triangulation of this data supported the finding that when the leadership
held their staff members to high expectations and accountable for results, their chances of
academic success heighten.

Figure 9. Leadership holds staff accountable for student learning.

104
The aforementioned data supported the finding that LLA’s leadership set high
expectations for their teachers and held them accountable for student learning. The observations,
survey responses, and interviews displayed several instances where this took place, including
coaching sessions, observation cycles, and data analysis. Each of these methods display a form
of accountability that played a critical role in LLA’s success. By maintaining high expectations
for teachers to show student progress, they were more willing and motivated to use data to
inform their lessons and teaching practices. Additionally, leaderships use of data transparency
and accountability applied an encouraging amount of pressure onto the teachers that have fueled
their work ethic and guided their instructional practices.
Decision-Making Freedom. A third finding for the most impactful leadership practices
that existed at LLA was that the leadership had autonomy over many significant decisions at the
school. The administration at LLA used their freedom to make decisions that best supported their
staff and their students. The data for this finding showed the independence in decision making
surrounding human capital, the school schedule, school finance, as well as the discipline
approaches at the school. The freedoms for these decisions have factored into the academic
success of the school.
LLA is a nontraditional school. This allowed them to have substantial freedom over their
human capital. Specifically, the leadership at LLA hired staff members who they felt would best
meet the needs of their specific students. While this freedom exists at many schools, numerous
CMOs or traditional schools in large districts have their applicants screened and selected for
them, potentially bypassing the perfect candidate. At LLA, the leadership oversaw hiring of all
staff members and did so in an intentional manner. When asked about hiring practices at LLA,
Susan made a compelling claim. She stated,
105
I look for people who have been through challenges and persevered and show grit. Or, I
look for people who have been through a personal problem, or they’ve been on teams and
know what it means to work with others. And then, obviously, there’s the technical
aspect—do you get results for kids? Can you do your job well? But to me, those are
negotiable. You have to have the right mindset. You’re a professional. We can teach
you how to be a good teacher, but I am not going to teach you how to think about and
feel about kids.
During Jeff’s interview, he confirmed this practice when he spoke to the researcher about
the amount of freedom surrounding the hiring and human resources at the school. He compared
LLA to his old school, where he described a teacher who he felt was not doing right by children.
He stated,
There was a teacher who was known for just sitting around and letting kids do whatever
they wanted. My principal was very active and wanted the teacher to move on because
this teacher wasn't doing right by kids. But, because of union contracts, the best he could
do was move her to a different grade level that wasn’t tested, and that was the way he felt
like he could lessen her impact on kids.
When asked how this related to the human capital freedom’s at LLA, he smirked, nodded his
head, and stated, “Well, we don’t have that here. We aren’t handcuffed. We have the ability
hire the right people and be flexible with our human capital, which is ultimately the best for
kids.”
As a result of this freedom surrounding human capital and hiring practices, LLA
managed to retain a significant portion of their teachers, a feat that is not easily obtained by
charters. The survey given to the staff indicated that over 20% of the teachers at LLA had been
106
at the school for more than 4 years and five of the staff members were part of the founding team.
This data can likely be attributed to the hiring practices at LLA, where the leadership hired
teachers who demonstrated similar mindsets about kids, work ethic, and a willingness to do
whatever was best for the students at their school. The hiring liberty at LLA was a notably
impactful factor at the school because it allowed Susan and her team to employ individuals that
would not only be a good match for the school culture, but also displayed a shared mindset about
student learning and work ethic. In addition to the freedom surrounding human capital, the
leadership at LLA also had substantial freedom when it came to creating the school schedule,
and making decisions regarding school spending.
Schedules and Finances. Data from this case study surrounding the leadership practices
at LLA supported the finding that the leadership had more freedom when it came to their
spending and scheduling. The freedom to make decisions in these two areas was fundamental, as
LLA had demonstrated that making deliberate choices in these two categories could expand the
opportunities for children and ultimately increase their academic performance.
Data from school documents showed that the leadership had created a schedule for the
students at the school that maximized their learning time, but also their opportunities to
participate in other extracurricular activities. Documents laying out the school schedule showed
that the students began school at 7:30 a.m. and attended until 4:00 p.m., giving them 90 minutes
more instructional time than the surrounding schools. During the first 30 minutes of school,
students are expected to read silently. Each student had been taught how to find books at their
reading level, and use this time to improve their literacy.
When the researcher walked into the school at 7:30 a.m., the researcher observed silent
classrooms filled with students reading books at their own independent grade level. Walking
107
down the hall with Susan, she nodded her head, peered into a classroom and whispered, “Our
kids read a lot.” This statement was confirmed more throughout the day when the researcher
observed students reading books in every class, whether it was part of the class or something to
do to pass the free time. At 3:00 o’clock, when most students at other schools were packing up
to go home, students at LLA were transitioning to their final class—an elective course. Teachers
were given the opportunity to teach elective classes based on whatever subjects or topics they
were interested in. Students were given a survey about which class they would like to enroll in,
and they enrolled in a new elective course every quarter. While some students enrolled in the art
class, others did the science club, and another group participated in coding. When Sarah, the
Assistant Principal, was asked about the schedule, she stated, “Susan was very adamant about the
kids having more opportunities to learn, so she added the elective block at the end of the day.
It’s a lot of work, but I think the kids really enjoy it.”
In addition to the freedom surrounding the schedule, Susan and her leadership team also
had flexibility surrounding the spending at LLA. Every student at LLA had their own
Chromebook that they used in all classes to support their learning. Additionally, staff at LLA
felt financially supported by their leadership. One teacher discussed how the administration
would buy whatever supplies were necessary to support student learning. She stated, “Our
principal will never say ‘no’ to buying more books.” When Susan was asked about why she
founded LLA with such a strong literacy focus, she talked about her leadership training . She
stated,
One thing that really stuck to me in my training was the literacy gap, and specifically that
there was no training for that. Even grad school did not address the literacy gap, which
really, at the late stages of high school is what you are facing.
108
She described an organization that allowed her to train with them, and work for them in the
process. She felt that this training changed the course of her trajectory in education. She stated,
For the first time, I felt that I could affect the outcomes for children. I think that’s why I
got into this work because if you think you’re doing the best job, giving your best effort,
but at the end of the day, a kid can’t read—then what have you done?
The data that supported the hiring freedom and financial freedom symbolized the positive impact
that these actions had on the students in the school. In addition to the schedule and spending, the
leadership also had liberty over decisions regarding the disciplinary approaches they used at their
school. Susan and her leadership team created an environment that was far less punitive, and
much more positive.
Restorative Approaches of Discipline. The leadership at LLA possessed strong beliefs
about the treatment of children. Fortunately, they had the freedom to make decisions about how
to structure their discipline system. As a result, they were able to use a significant portion of the
school’s professional development budget on training for their staff on restorative discipline.
The researcher reviewed school documents surrounding restorative discipline, which described
the practice as a school-wide approach to building a school climate and addressing student
behavior. Staff members worked to encourage community, belongingness, social engagement,
and accountability over punishment. It was evident that restorative discipline was practiced by
all staff members at LLA throughout the school day.
During observations, the researcher witnessed instances where students, like in any
public middle school, engaged in off-task behavior. During each example, the staff exercised
restorative practices when addressing the behaviors. Staff members spoke to students with
respect in a calm, and firm tone of voice. The conversations that ensued after the misbehavior
109
were productive conversations surrounding how to make better choices in the future. During one
observation of an English class, students became distracted when other students in the hallway
were looking through the window in the door, waving and mouthing words to them. The
teacher, who was busy with a small group at the time, ignored the behavior and continued with
her small group, perhaps as to not distract the rest of the class who remained on task. Later,
when the students were packing up their materials and preparing to transition to their next class,
the teacher brought the class together to discuss the incident. She stated,
There will always be distractions at school and in life. But when you are in class, you
have two choices: You can be an active learner or a passive learner. Passive learners sit
back and don't take charge of their learning. Active learners know that they are for their
own learning, and don’t let anything get in the way of it. I hope you all choose to be
active learners.
During another observation of a PE class, students were lined up walking back from the
yard to their classrooms. Once the students began walking up the stairs, a young boy in the back
walked over to a set of bars lining a window from a classroom on the bottom floor. He jumped
up, grabbed metal bars, lifted his feet off the ground and hung for a few seconds. The teacher
turned around and saw the student hanging from the bars. He said the student’s name, and the
student dropped from the bars. The teacher then said,
We have to be careful hanging from those. I know the wall looks very strong, but
sometimes the material is not as strong as it looks, and the bars could break off, and it
could be very dangerous. Does that make sense?
The student nodded his head, and the class continued up the stairs and back into the room. Both
observations demonstrate a similar method of interacting with students who are engaging in
110
dangerous or off-task behaviors. Rather than yelling, or offering the students consequences, the
teachers talked to the students about their actions, why they might be hazardous or unproductive,
and how to make better choices in the future.
Interview data also supported the choice of choosing restorative approaches to handle
discipline. During an interview with Jenn, a fifth-grade teacher, she stated,
When kids get in trouble, we like to bring them in, or call their parents to talk. We give
them spare time to settle down, then get the facts. Our ultimate goal is to get them to
realize that they have violated some rule, and have them offer suggestions of how to fix
it—to restore trust in the community.
It was also evident through observations that many teachers engaged in alternatives for
discipline, and would rather not send their students to the office. During one interview with
Quin, a fifth-grade teacher, she stated, “From a fifth-grade perspective, we are really committed
to trying to do everything to keep our students in the classroom. The longer they are in here, the
more opportunities they have to learn.” This sentiment seemed to be shared across the board: the
idea that discipline methods should be respectful, not punitive, informative, and intentional.
Teachers at LLA were supported by their leadership in this restorative movement. They were
offered PDs that helped them identify struggling students, and then were instructed to chart out
ideas on how to improve them behaviorally so that they could maximize instructional time.
Together, the discipline approaches, schedule, and financial freedoms, as well as their approach
with human capital all demonstrated the positive implications that leadership’s autonomy in
decision making was able to have on academic outcomes for students.
Intentionality in Decision Making. The final finding for the second research question
emerged from the data that focused on the leadership practices. The leaders at LLA made large
111
amounts of intentional decisions that were based on research, or data, and were always in the
best interest of the students. Through observations, interviews, and surveys, it was evident that
the leadership had intentionally made decisions to hire staff based on mindset, as well as use
apprentice and lead teachers in the classrooms to support novice teachers and ensure student
learning.
One distinct practice of LLA’s leadership team was the intentional hiring process they
used. Susan and her leadership team were committed to hiring teachers who shared the same
mindset as they did when it came to equity and student learning. During an interview with
Susan, the researcher asked what she looked for when she hired new teachers. Susan stated that
there was always one non-negotiable: mindset. She said,
Do you make excuses for kids? Do you blame kids? Or, do you look at yourself first and
think about what you can do for children? Are you an initiative taker? Or, are you
somebody who waits? Well, we don’t have time for you to wait. Do you solve
problems? Or, do you just point out that problems exist? I think a lot of people think that
part of being a high performing educator is being able to point out what’s gone wrong,
and to me, that’s the opposite of it. You can point out the problem, and you can come up
with a solution—otherwise, you’re the problem.
When asked the same question to Liz, the school’s dean, and the third member of the leadership
team, she stated, “Hiring is crucial here. We hire for mindset, and when it’s not a mindset
match, it’s a problem.” She reflected on her own staff and said, “Fortunately, I would say our
teachers have the same mindset here—they all want what’s best for kids. And they might not
always agree with everything we do or ask of them, but they all understand the reason behind it.”
This finding was also supported by observations at the school. During a leadership team
112
meeting, the administration talked about how they were planning to replace a math specialist
who was preparing to leave at the end of the year. Together, the team discussed the relationships
he had built at the school, and the impact he had made on both teachers and students. They
worked together to form a plan with the teacher on how to best transition him out, well aware of
the relationships he had built with teachers that he coached. The four of them created a transition
plan that was transparent, but also supported and respected the relationships that had been built
with the math specialist, asserting their commitment to hiring someone who would share the
mindset that specialist had.
Survey data collected also matched this finding, validating that over 95% of respondents
agreed that the staff at LLA shared a common understanding of what they wanted to achieve.
The data from the observations, interviews, and surveys demonstrated a strong link between the
intentional leadership practice of hiring for mindset and creating outcomes for kids. In addition
to deliberate hiring, the leadership at LLA was also intentional about the placement and position
of teachers within their school.
Leadership at LLA recognized the impact that an effective classroom teacher makes on
student learning. As a result, LLA took no chances when it came to putting just anyone in their
classrooms. LLA had a strong partnership with Teach for America, a non-profit organization
that helps place motivated educators in the workforce while assisting them with their teaching
credential. Understanding the challenges that come with first-year teachers, LLA placed Teach
for America members, as well as other developing first-year teachers, in classrooms with more
experienced teachers. Together, the apprentice teachers and lead teachers planned, implemented,
and assessed classroom lessons. The intentional decision of using apprentice and lead teachers
was a critical leadership practice that was noted at LLA.
113
During an observation at LLA, the researcher observed a classroom that had an
apprentice teacher and a lead teacher in the room. The lead teacher supported the primary
teacher in their instruction, while the apprentice teacher was also able to observe impromptu
management techniques used by the lead teacher. When the apprentice teacher taught, the lead
teacher monitored the room and inserted himself throughout the lesson as to model strategies that
could be used by the apprentice teacher. It was evident that the students respected both adults in
their roles as shown by the way they responded to instruction and direction by both teachers.
The use of apprentice and lead teachers was an intentional decision made by leadership to both
ensure students were learning from a highly effective teacher, while also preparing a new teacher
in the process.
The researcher was able to interview a former apprentice teacher who talked about the
positive impact being an apprentice teacher had on her current success as a full-time classroom
teacher. Jenn, the former apprentice teacher and current fifth-grade teacher, spoke about the
support she received such as in-room coaching for several months, lesson plan feedback,
overview feedback, building content knowledge, breaking down standards, creating assessments
and then analyzing student data, getting lessons modeled, and then implementing them to the
next cohort of students. She explained why the use of apprentice teachers was an intentional
decision at LLA. She stated,
There are a lot of reasons why it’s good, and why I thought it was good for myself. The
stakes are really high with kids. I personally did not want to be responsible for failing a
cohort of students, and I didn’t want to be in a position where nobody supported me.
She continued,
114
I knew, like most people know, that the first year of teaching is not going to be easy, so I
personally wanted to mitigate that on all levels. I wanted the professional support that I
knew this school would give me.
Her justification of the use of apprentice teachers demonstrated the intentional placement of
human capital at LLA. As Jim Collins (2001) wrote, the best organizations get the right people
in the right seats on the bus. LLA has displayed what Jim Collin’s meant in his famous book, by
getting the right people into the school, and placing them in the best positions to have a positive
impact on the academic achievement of students.
Summary of Findings for Research Question 2
Research Question two asked about the leadership practices that existed at LLA. The
data indicated that four factors played a significant role in the outperforming success of LLA.
The first finding was that the leadership at LLA lead by example, demonstrating a commitment
and work ethic that they wanted the whole school to embody. The second discovery was that
LLA leadership set clear and high expectations for their staff, and held them accountable for
meeting those goals. The third finding was that Susan and her leadership team had the freedom
to make decisions for their school that would increase the opportunities for students to succeed.
Examples of these decisions were the liberties surrounding human capital, the school schedule
spending, and also the way they disciplined their students. The fourth and final finding for this
research question encompassed the intentionality in decision making at LLA. The leadership
team made deliberate decisions based on research and data—such as hiring for mindset matches,
and using apprentice and lead teachers—a practice that played a role in creating outperforming
success at LLA..
115
LLA’s leadership practices are a major factor in their outperforming success. Susan, the
Founding Principal of LLA, built the school based on a strong belief in equity and closing the
literacy gap for underserved students. She had created a school that is literacy focused, with a
staff that was held accountable to student progress. Principal and administrative team leadership
had been regarded as an instrumental characteristic in a school’s success (Ni, Sun, & Rorrer,
2015). LLA’s leadership team demonstrated the power of an effective leadership team, and the
implications that a strong leadership team can have on academic success of a school.
Findings for Research Question 3
The third research question was as follows: What cultural norms exist within an
outperforming nontraditional urban school? The researcher triangulated data to generate three
findings in regards to the cultural norms that have the most significant positive impact on student
learning. The three findings were as follows: (a) Mindset Consistencies Among LLA Staff, (b)
Intentional Decision Making, and (c) Relationships. Each of these three findings will be
addressed through an explanation of the data collected from observations, interviews, and
surveys.
Mindset Consistencies Among LLA Staff. The first finding for Research Question 3
was that LLA’s staff had a shared mindset surrounding student achievement, work ethic,
professionalism, and the mission and vision of the school. Building a culture amongst the staff
that supported student learning is not something that is explicitly taught within a traditional
education program. However, when done correctly, the positive impacts on student learning can
be astronomical. At LLA, the mindset consistencies among the staff were one of the most
impactful and profound findings observed by the researcher. The researcher used data to
triangulate the findings that supported mindset consistencies across three main areas. The
116
subsequent writing will explain each of these findings, and how they relate to the research
question about cultural norms in the school.
Data from the research conducted at the school site supported the finding that there was a
mindset match when it came to student achievement and the abilities of students at LLA. All
staff at LLA believed that their students could achieve at high levels, regardless of whatever
external obstacles or barriers they faced. Every teacher at LLA taught with a high level of rigor
that pushed students towards the mastery of the standards and learning objectives. The
researcher observed small groups, a heavy focus on literacy, data-driven instruction and
supportive language—each which displayed a consistent mindset in the academic achievement of
students.
During one observation, the researcher observed a fifth-grade PE class. During the first
15 minutes, students were asked to go change in the restroom into their PE clothes—blue gym
shorts and a yellow shirt. During this time, small groups were excused to go to the bathroom to
change. These students would quietly close their reading books, place them neatly on the corner
of their desks, grab their drawstring gym bags, push in their chairs, and carefully exit the room.
The remaining students continued to silently read until their group was dismissed to change. At
the end of the 15 minutes, all students were dressed in their athletic clothes and ready for PE.
This observation demonstrated a heavy focus on literacy regardless of the subject. The teacher’s
commitment to using every minute of time to maximize learning showed a commitment to
student achievement and a recognition that all teachers played a role in helping students succeed.
An interview with Erick, a sixth-grade teacher, supports this observation. He stated, “Everybody
in this building is invested in the education of the children in this school. We are all on the same
page. We are all willing to work hard for kids.” When asked in the survey to respond to the
117
statement, “Staff members work across grade levels to increase achievement,” 100% of staff
members agreed. A copy of the data can be seen in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Staff members work across grade level to increase achievement.
Teachers at LLA all believed that it was their responsibility to do whatever it took to help
their kids learn. During an observation, the researcher watched as a group of fifth-grade teachers
was in the staff lounge discussing the different reading levels of their students. Two of the
teachers sat on a black couch with their laptops on their laps, while a third teacher prepared her
lunch across the room. Sharing data points out loud, the teacher named students who were
reading below grade level.
One of the teachers, feeling discouraged, asked what they should do to help these kids
improve their reading. Another teacher, sat up on the couch, and enthusiastically responded,
“We are going to teach them! We are their teachers; it’s our job, we will figure it out!” The
teachers looked at each other, shared small laugh, and continued planning. A large part of
believing in the academic achievement of the students was the freedom and willingness to do
whatever it took to educate kids. This commitment included using innovative teaching styles to
create academic outcomes.
118
During an interview with Quin, with one of the teachers previously mentioned in the
teacher's lounge, she stated, “I think we work really hard to educate and empower our kids.
There is a lot of power in that.” Moreover, when asked during an interview if the staff worked
beyond their official roles to support student achievement, most the respondents agreed or
strongly agreed. A copy of the data chart can be found in Figure 11. In addition to having a
mindset match around student achievement, the data also displayed a consistent mindset
surrounding an adult culture of performance.

Figure 11. Staff works beyond their roles to support student achievement.
Staff at LLA demonstrated an excellent mindset match surrounding work ethic and
professionalism. Kyla, one of the teachers, referred to it is as “an adult culture of achievement.”
There was an obvious culture at LLA where everyone was willing to do whatever it took to get
results for kids. The researcher was certain that anyone who walked into LLA could feel a sense
of hard work and seriousness coming from every corner of the building. Teachers could be
found tutoring small groups of students during their lunch breaks, planning before and well
beyond the school hours, collaborating in hallways, staff lounges, and offices throughout the
school day. During an interview Liz she stated, “Everyone in this school wants what is best for
119
kids. We are about the community and our children. We push each other concerning content
knowledge, content expertise, and in all subjects.” Sarah, the Assistant Principal, added in her
interview, “I wanted to come join a school where everyone was willing to work just as hard as
me, and I found that here.”
Teachers at LLA were also pushed to improve their craft through frequent coaching
sessions that took place throughout the day. During these coaching sessions, teachers were
observed, and then engaged in a debrief about the observation. During the debrief teaching
strategies were often discussed, classroom management tips were offered, and ideas for future
lessons were shared. Over 80% of the teachers agreed that they were consistently provided with
feedback to improve their teaching, a strategy that likely increased the adult culture of learning
within the school. This data can be seen in Figure 12. The culture of work ethic and
professionalism stemmed from a shared mindset amongst staff at the school. The data
demonstrated that there was a willingness amongst all staff at LLA to do whatever it took to
increase the learning for their students.

Figure 12. Teachers provided with regular feedback.
All staff at LLA also shared a distinct belief in the mission and vision of the school. One
hundred percent of survey respondents believed that LLA had a clear mission and vision—a
compelling data point that supported the finding that staff at LLA shared a consistent mindset.
120
When asked why the teachers chose to work at LLA, over 65% of respondents stated that they
decided to work there because of the mission and values of the school. Ricky, a sixth-grade
English teacher reported, “I was looking for a school that I could align with on mission and
values. I am a huge social advocate, which is a big part of our mission here, so it was a great
fit.” These core values were extremely evident when walking into the school building. The
walls were lined with symbols, words and paintings of historical figures that had demonstrated
some of the school values. Additionally, teachers referred to the school values during their
classroom lessons. In one observation of a math class, the teacher stood in front of the class and
explained the rules and expectations for a Halloween event that would take place the following
day. When she was done explaining, she stated, “Okay, we can do 1 minute of questions.
Would anyone like to advocate for themselves?” The hands of several students rose quickly in
the air, and she efficiently went through questions and provided answers.
The data collected in this case study supported the finding that there were mindset
consistencies at LLA in three areas: (a) student achievement, (b) work ethic and professionalism,
and (c) a belief in the vision and values of the school. The staff at LLA were willing to innovate
and experiment with their teaching practices in order to increase student achievement. They
worked hard and supported one another in their work because they recognized that working
together increased the chances for student achievement. Lastly, the staff at LLA had a firm
belief in the values of the school and aligned their instructional decisions with those values. In
addition to mindset consistencies, there was also strong intentionality within LLA, a cultural
norm that played a prominent role in student achievement.
Intentional Decision Making. A second finding and an extremely pervasive part of the
school culture was the intentionality behind all decisions made. It was evident from collected
121
data that decisions made by the school in regards to families, staff, and students were always
aligned with the mission and vision of the school. One hundred percent of survey respondents
agreed that the team at LLA kept the school’s vision and goals in mind when making important
decisions. Moreover, during the interviews the researcher asked the respondents what they felt
put their school in a position to outperform other schools around them. Quin stated,
I feel like everybody is here with the same mission and vision for kids. I think the fact
that we are all on the same page, and that we are all in this—doing the work together—it
allows us to be in a position to have our kids succeed and outperform other schools.
Her statement displayed how the staff at LLA were very intentional in their decision making,
consistently aligning their choices to the mission and values of the school.
As previously stated, LLA held a firm belief in the way they treated kids. As a
restorative school, they believed in teaching students to learn from their mistakes. As Jeff, the
lead teacher stated, “I think most parents would say that this is a place that safe for kids to make
mistakes.” During an observation in the office, Liz was planning her afterschool detention, and
asked Susan if she could help her run it because she had a conflicting coaching session. Susan
asked Liz if there was any evidence that the detention method was working, or if it was a repeat
of the same students each week. Liz said that she would look at the data to answer that. Susan
followed up by stating that they needed to evaluate if it was useful or not and to reflect on
whether the use of detention holistically matched their vision and belief about how they treat
kids. This observation and the earlier data supported the finding that intentional decision making
was a common practice at LLA. Moreover, the case study data showed that their decisions were
linked to the school values, a prominent and impactful cultural norm that existed within LLA.
122
Relationships. At the very heart of LLA’s school culture were the relationships among
and between students, staff, and families. These relationships undoubtedly played an impactful
role in the school culture, which ultimately has helped them become an outperforming school.
The data yielded three categories of relationships that exist at the school—each playing an
integral part in the overall school culture: (a) relationships among staff members, (b)
relationships between staff and students, and (c) relationships among students. The subsequent
writing will discuss each of these types of relationships, display the data that supports these
findings, and also how they relate to the cultural norms at the school.
The relationships among the staff at LLA are relationships that showed both respect and
professional challenge. Many of the bonds had grown organically, stemming from the mindset
consistencies and similarities in beliefs about education. However, many of these relationships
had been cultivated formally through team building activities, retreats, and common planning
time. During one observation of a staff meeting, the leadership team began the meeting by
asking staff to give each other shout-outs—verbal acknowledgments of great things that have
been happening at the school. For 5 minutes, staff members “shouted” each other out for
planning events, helping with lesson plans, or helping kids raise their reading levels. Later, staff
members were seen eating lunch together in the staff lounge, planning together, and exchanging
intermittent jokes with one another. These observations demonstrate the types of formal systems
that encouraged positive relationships among the staff, as well as the more informal experiences
that also built friendships among the staff members.
The relationships among staff members were not something that the teachers were
unaware of. In an interview with Erick, the sixth-grade teacher, he told the researcher,
123
We have a collaborative team spirit here. The teachers are happy. They hang out with
each other both at and outside of school. They are friends with each other. They like to
work hard, and they like to have fun.
During another interview with Jenn, the fifth-grade teacher, she stated, “There’s a great team
spirit here at LLA. I’m very happy with my team.” Further, over 90% of survey respondents felt
as though the staff value one another, and that the school staff felt comfortable sharing ideas with
their colleagues.
This observational data, triangulated with the survey and interview data showed the
culture of respect and professionalism at LLA. It was evident to the researcher that the
relationships at LLA had created a culture where their staff came to work hard, have fun, and
produce results for kids. The data also showed that LLA was a place where staff members
enjoyed coming to work, a place where they respected each other and felt safe to take risks and
learn from one another. In addition to relationships among staff members, the data from the
research also revealed a significant claim towards the impact of the staff and student
relationships on the culture of the school.
Perhaps even more impactful than the relationships that had been built among the staff
are the relationships that existed between teachers and students at LLA. There was a communal
sense of respect that transcended age, gender, ethnicity, and background that is extremely evident
in the school. This was evident during an observation of a science class that was working on
reviewing for an upcoming exam. The teacher in the room was teaching a lesson on different
types of cells, and showing the students how they could differentiate between prokaryotic and
eukaryotic cells. The students sat at their science lab tables and looked at the teacher, who
slowly walked around the room as she proposed questions to the class. For each question, over
124
50% of the class would raise their hand and squirm in their seats, wiggling their fingers in an
attempt to get just a little bit higher than their peers. To the researcher, this displayed an evident
sign of a classroom culture where it was okay to try, guess, and make mistakes. When the
teacher called on a student who was struggling for the answer, she would allow them to “phone a
friend.” And when students would answer correctly, she would respond with a big smile and
say, “I’m so proud of my people!” Her students respected her, and she appreciated them in
return.
During an interview with Jeff, the eighth-grade lead teacher, he stated that he felt like the
school was a safe place for kids to make mistakes. He said,
When I first joined this school, I thought wow, this feels a little loose. But, the scores are
really good, so this might be the dream. We aren’t a place that’s overly strict on kids . . .
we are a place where kids feel safe to make mistakes. In my opinion, that’s a strong case
to make to parents.
Survey results supported this finding, indicating that 100% of respondents felt as though the
teachers at LLA cared about their students. This data can be seen in Figure 13. Beyond creating
a culture where kids felt safe to make mistakes, the relationships at LLA between staff and
students also played a role in the way they disciplined their students.
125

Figure 13. Teachers care about their students.
As previously reported in this study, LLA was proud to be a restorative justice driven
school—and the researcher was able to witness some of the approaches that staff members used
with their kids. It was apparent that staff members never aimed to discipline kids immediately,
but instead get a sense of why the student chose to engage in the behavior first. During one
observation, a student was sent to the office for making inappropriate gestures at a school
security camera. Sarah, LLA’s Assistant Principal, met the student in the office to discuss the
incident. Rather than tell him what she saw and what his consequence would be, she grabbed a
chair and pulled it close to him. Then, in a low and respectful voice, she asked him, “Do you
know why you were sent here?” When the student shook his head, signaling he did not, Sarah
responded, “Today, I saw you do something to the camera that really made some people at the
school uncomfortable, including myself. Now, do you remember what you did?” Eventually the
student was able to recall his actions. From there they discussed why he made this mistake, what
school rules and values he broke, and also what the student could do to restore trust back into the
school. During the conversation, neither Sarah nor the student raised their voices, got upset or
126
angry. This observation demonstrated the culture that has been created by teachers and students
at LLA. When the teachers at the school aimed to learn about the students and the root of their
misbehaviors rather than use punitive consequences or yell at them, students were better able
learn from their mistakes – aiding in creating a more positive school culture.
The researcher’s interview with Jeff supported this notion. He described how the
leadership has held steadfast to their belief in the treatment of children. He stated, “We don’t
yell at kids here. It doesn’t work. I believe that, the leadership believes that. The leaders just
say, ‘We don’t yell at kids.’” He continued on to say, “And, that’s something that honestly, even
at some excellent schools, you don’t see—so many adults in one place, who are all on board with
the same thing.” Survey data on school discipline revealed that 85% of respondents believed that
the discipline at LLA was handled in a fair and efficient manner, as seen in Figure 14.
Furthermore, over 95% of respondents recognized that restorative approaches were used when
kids engaged in misbehavior. The relationships between the staff and the students were a vital
component of LLA’s culture.

Figure 14. Discipline is fair.
127
Data collected from observations, surveys, and interviews supported the claim that these
relationships had helped build a culture where students were respected socially, and challenged
academically, a unique combination that played a role in LLA’s outperforming success.
Arguably one of the most challenging types of relationships to cultivate at any school is
the relationships between students. To build a supportive and positive culture among students, it
takes modeling, and explicit teaching by all adults within a student's life. The relationships at
LLA among the students were an essential component in the success of the school. Data
collected from this research displayed that the students treated one another with respect and
dignity. They honored one another’s ideas and empathized with their weaknesses. Ninety
percent of staff members at LLA believed that student interactions with one another were polite
and supportive, a quantitative data point that supports this finding. This data can be seen in
Figure 15. Additionally, Figure 16 shows that 70% of respondents thought that the attitudes of
the students at LLA were better than the attitudes of students at their previous school—
something that could have resulted from the relationships that had been built among their peers.

Figure.15. Student interactions are polite and supportive.
128

Figure.16. Student attitudes are better than at previous schools.
During an observation of a math class, students worked collaboratively on a problem that
the teacher had displayed on the board for them. Students sat in groups of three to four and were
instructed to help each other solve the problem. One group was made up of two girls and one
boy. This group had two students who knew how to solve the problem, while their third group
member struggled to work through it. Rather than solve the problem for the third member, the
group members helped the student solve the problem by explaining the steps, and asking her
questions. They used the tips of their pencils to point at numbers and expressions on her paper,
providing her with enough hints until she could complete the work. This example shows the
students exercising patience with their peers, while they respected each others learning.
During another observation of a class competition at the end of the year, students were
broken up by homerooms and sat in a large circle around their grass yard. Groups of students
from each homeroom were selected to come into the center of the grass and participate in a
challenge on behalf of their class. Students cheered and chanted for their classmates as they
competed in water balloon tosses, tug-of-war, and other fun activities. When the competition
129
was done, students returned to their homeroom classes. The researcher observed students who
had just been defeated in the game return their homeroom classes who were supportive and
cheering them on. They patted participating members on the back, saying things like “good job,
man” or “nice try.”
These supportive and respectful relationships were recognized by staff members who felt
as though it was most important to model the way they want their students to treat one another.
During one interview with a teacher, he stated, “Our students here are generally kind and
empathetic to one another.” When the researcher asked how the students got to this point, he
responded, “Their relationships are a result of millions of small interactions that they witness
among staff and between teachers and students every day.” The respectful relationships among
students at LLA had been formed over time, through observations of respectful relationships
with adults at their school. When the students supported and respected each other, they were
better able to take risks in their learning, which ultimately helped propel them forward
academically.
Summary of Key Findings for Research Question 3
The culture at LLA was a critical component that played a role in their outperforming
success. Mindset consistencies surrounding a belief in the mission and values of the school,
work ethic and professionalism, and student achievement were profound elements of LLA’s
school culture. Additionally, LLA possessed a culture of intentionality, where all decisions that
were made supported student achievement and aligned with the school’s mission and core
values. Lastly, the relationships among and between staff and students at LLA was a powerful
component that had played a role in the culture at LLA. Each of these three findings had
130
improved the culture at LLA, and created a safe and respectful environment that fostered
meaningful learning.
A school culture can be defined as actions, achievement standards, and attitudes within a
school which assist in developing a community of learners (Curry, 2013). LLA was a school that
depicted these aspects of school culture through their relationships, mindset consistencies, and
awareness of intentionality. The data collected from interviews, surveys, documents, and
observations all showed the positive results of this impactful culture on the academic results of
students.
Emergent Themes
Data triangulation helped identify four emergent themes from the research questions.
These themes had been noted as the most impactful factors that exist at LLA, an outperforming
nontraditional school. The overarching themes are as follows:
1. High Expectations: All stakeholders at LLA were held to high expectations. Teachers
and staff members were given high expectations by their leadership regarding work
ethic, and student achievement. Families were held to high expectations by staff
members at LLA. They were in constant communication with their students’ teachers
and are kept involved in different programs and events. Students at LLA were held to
high expectations set by their teachers. They were held to rigorous standards of
learning and are expected to track their academic data and worked hard to make
progress.
2. Decision-Making Freedom: LLA leadership and staff members were given substantial
freedom when it came to making decisions for their school and their classrooms. The
administration at LLA exercised this liberty when it came to making decisions about
131
human capital, allocating finances, scheduling, and discipline policies. Teachers at
LLA were given substantial freedom when it came to teaching and instruction in their
classroom. They were trusted to use innovative methods that would deliver the best
results for kids.
3. Intentional Decision Making: LLA teachers and administrators demonstrated
intentionality in their decision making by ensuring that all of their decisions were
made in the best interest of their students. They also were committed to the school’s
core values, ensuring that all their decisions reflected these values.
4. Mindset Consistencies: With LLA’s freedom to hire staff that are a good fit for their
school and their students, they were always on the hunt for a mindset match. While
one's pedagogical skills are essential, leadership at LLA insisted that those are skills
that can be taught, while one's mindset about children, equity, and work ethic cannot
be.
Discussion
Although the debate about charter school’s is relatively new, the idea of school choice is
not, dating well back to Brown v. the Board of Education. While many opponents pushed back
against the idea of nontraditional schools of choice, charter schools have risen in popularity
across the United States. Today, over 2.5 million children attend charter schools, most who live
in low-income, urban neighborhoods. The growth of this movement is exciting for proponents of
school choice, but it does not overshadow the reality that many of these schools are not living up
to their promise of academic success, a promise that grew out of decades of public school
failures.
132
Recent research on education in the United States shows that students in low-income
neighborhoods suffer the most when it comes to their learning. Plagued by low-performing
teachers, limited resources, and poor leadership, students in these schools notoriously fall behind
academically, perpetually widening the notorious achievement gap. Nontraditional institutions,
such as charters, offer parents in these neighborhoods an opportunity to provide their students
with equitable education regardless of their zip code, and many families have taken advantage of
this. Unfortunately, as charters grew in popularity, so did their obstacles. Today, charter schools
face large turnover rates for teachers and leaders, limited resources, and cultural segregation—all
of which have negatively impacted their academic results.
Educational researchers have been quick to point out failing charter schools and
organizations, claiming that they do not produce better results than traditional schools. However,
evidence, including this research study, shine a light on the charter schools that are delivering
better outcomes for kids—and outperforming the rest. These outperforming schools are
innovating academically, challenging the status quo, and breaking down stereotypes. Thus, it is
important to highlight these outperforming institutions, to expose some of the most influential
factors that exist in the schools so that other schools with similarities can learn from them and
increase the chances of producing academic results for kids.
This research study at LLA looked at the outperforming success by collecting data in
support of three research questions:
1. What are the programs and practices that exist in an outperforming nontraditional
urban school?
2. What are the leadership practices that exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban
school?
133
3. What are the cultural norms that exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban
school?
The researcher triangulated the data collected from observations, surveys, interviews, and
documents, and found several findings for each research question. From there, the researcher
triangulated the data from those findings to determine which of the conclusions were the
strongest. These four overarching themes that were identified cut across several research
questions, answering many of them from different lenses. This reveals the strength they play in
helping LLA become an outperforming school. Those themes are as follows: (a) High
Expectations, (b) Decision-Making Freedom, (c) Intentional Decision Making, and (d) Mindset
Consistencies. Each of these emergent themes has played a significant role in the success of
LLA.
The first theme was High Expectations. The researcher’s data strongly supported the
reality that all stakeholders at LLA were held to incredibly transparent, and high expectations.
The teachers at LLA were consistently held to high expectations by their leadership. They were
expected to increase student learning and were held accountable for making that happen. The
students at LLA were held to rigorous standards through their lessons and academic goals in the
classroom. Students were expected to set goals and work hard to achieve those goals. Finally,
LLA held families to high expectations. Families were expected to be in communication with
the teachers, participate in school events and activities, and also if necessary, were heavily
involved in the discipline at the school. Interviews, surveys, and observations showed that this
was a crucial practice within the school.
High expectations undoubtedly contributed to LLA’s outperforming success. The high
expectations that the staff was held to created an environment where teachers were consistently
134
using data to assess their students, and were adjusting instruction to meet the needs of their
students. Additionally, the accountability for these expectations created a culture within LLA
where the teachers pushed one another and themselves to look at the research and use innovative
teaching styles in their classrooms. The students at LLA were also able to feel the urgency.
They were aware of their current academic levels through consistent data tracking and pushed
and incentivized with rewards to make progress. Further, families at LLA were kept heavily
involved in activities and parent events and consistently updated on their students’ progress.
This theme of High Expectations is consistent with many research studies on successful
schools. The Center for Research on Educational Outcomes (2013) charter school study noted
that consistently setting and holding high expectations is a key practice in creating a successful
school. Dobbie and Fryer (2013) showed that high expectations for teachers are a significant
predictor of charter school effectiveness. Although already noted as a key feature of successful
schools, finding this theme at LLA only strengthens the current literature and verifies the impact
and correlation that creating and keeping high expectations had on LLA’s outperforming
success.
The second emergent theme from the data was Decision-Making Freedom, which
referred to both teachers and leaders’ ability to make decisions. Teachers at LLA were given
substantial freedom to make decisions in their classrooms. They were not tied to specific
curriculums or lesson plans and are encouraged to take whatever steps necessary to engage their
students and ensure that they are learning. The researcher found that the ability to make
decisions in their classrooms was a practice induced by extreme trust between teachers and
among teachers and leadership. Teachers felt as though the administration trusted them to make
decisions that would yield the best results for their students. Allowing the teachers to have the
135
freedom to make their own choices at LLA helped created positive results for the school.
Teachers felt trusted and respected, which created an encouraging culture among the staff.
Additionally, they were able to tailor instruction to their students learning styles because they
were not tied down to a specific way of implementation. The data collected by the researcher
supported this theme, and the impact of this decision-making freedom for the teachers. This
freedom was a prominent factor in the outperforming success at LLA. In addition to decision
making freedom for teachers, the leadership at LLA had substantial freedom to make their own
decisions on behalf of the school and the students.
The leadership at LLA had a significant amount of freedom when it came to making
decisions for the school. The administration made scheduling decisions that lengthened the
school day—giving students more opportunities for reading and elective courses. Students at
LLA attended school for more minutes daily than did their surrounding schools. They were also
given the opportunity to take elective courses that were not offered in many other schools. Susan
and her leadership team used their decision-making freedoms to hire staff that they felt were the
best fit for their school. Moreover, they used their financial liberties to spend money that would
directly support teacher learning through professional development and student learning through
classroom resources and libraries. Finally, the administration adjusted their disciplinary
approach to a new style that would create a better environment for kids. Each of these decisions
made an obvious impact on student outcomes at LLA because they each directly impacted
student learning, or helped create a climate conducive to learning.
Data collected from observations, interviews, school documents, and surveys heavily
supported this theme. The researcher found decision making freedom to be a promising practice,
leadership practice, and cultural norm within the school. In other words, this theme answered
136
each research question. It is important to note that decision making freedom is often a typical
luxury of many non-traditional schools, including charters. This is because, in simplest terms, a
charter school is a publicly funded entity that is privately operated by a contract between
themselves and their local authorizing agency. As a result, charter schools are given public
funds, in exchange for favorable outcomes. However, while many charters have decision-
making freedom, they are often conflicted because of demands by management organizations or
even in some cases, teachers’ unions. Many failing charter schools display the reality that
having decision making freedom is not enough. To make an impact on student outcomes like
LLA has, leaders must hold firm to their values and their commitments to students, and trust
their teachers to make decisions for their classrooms.
The third emergent theme, Intentional Decision Making, referred to how LLA created a
culture of intentionality. LLA’s teachers and administrators demonstrated intentionality in their
decision making by ensuring that all of their decisions were made in the best interest of their
students. Teachers at LLA made intentional decisions based on data in their classrooms—
ensuring that their teaching styles supported their students’ needs. Leadership at LLA made
deliberate choices surrounding hiring practices— and stated that they were committed to hiring
teachers who had the right mindset about student achievement and work ethic. Additionally,
LLA leadership made intentional decisions about the placement of their human capital. They
intentionally placed new teachers with veteran teachers in classrooms for several months so that
new teachers were able to learn from their experienced teachers before taking over the classroom
on their own. They were given coaching sessions, lesson plan feedback, and emotional
support—with the hope that this would lessen the hardships that first-year teachers experience.
137
The intentionality of making decisions at LLA was a notable factor. Each of the
decisions described above made a positive impact on the culture at the school, and ultimately
student learning. Using data to inform teaching practices ensured that students were consistently
being taught at their instructional level. Additionally, hiring for mindset and using apprentice
and lead teachers increased the chances for teacher retention, an ideal scenario for charter
schools who are often overwhelmed by constant turnover. Intentional decision making was
made possible by the amount of freedom to make decisions at LLA. However, the data collected
at LLA supported the strong correlation between being intentional with making decisions and
creating an environment for academic success.
The fourth overarching theme, Mindset Consistencies, referred to the collective mindset
shared by staff at LLA. Supported by all data points, the team at LLA shared a common belief in
student potential, confident that all students could learn at high levels. They also shared a
collective mindset about work ethic and professionalism that was propelled forward by an adult
culture of achievement. Finally, the teachers at LLA shared a common mindset surrounding the
way they respected and treated their students. This new theme was not found in any reviewed
research, and this was a surprise to the researcher. Nevertheless, the data supporting the mindset
consistencies was robust and heavily noted by study participants.
The similarity in mindsets surrounding student learning and work ethic was a substantial
factor in ensuring academic success. The teachers at LLA honestly believed that all students
could learn, and they were willing to work hard and do whatever it took for their students to get
to that point. The shared mindset about the treatment of students had created a positive school
culture. Staff members worked hard to get to know all of their students and show each one the
respect that they deserved as learners. They recognized that students would inevitably make
138
mistakes and that it was their job as a school to help them learn from their mistakes, so that they
were able to focus more on learning. The mindset match at LLA was a pervasive factor in the
school’s success because of its impact on school culture, and ultimately student learning.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that exist at LLA, an outperforming,
nontraditional, urban, charter school. The researcher conducted this study through the lenses of
school practices and programs, leadership, and culture. This chapter presented the findings from
each of these, through observations, interviews, a staff survey, and school documents using the
three research questions developed from the thematic dissertation group. Data triangulation led
to several findings for each of the research questions. The questions and the findings are as
follows:
1. What practices and programs exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban school?
• Finding 1: Holding all stakeholders to clear and high expectations.
• Finding 2: Having the freedom to make decisions.
• Finding 3: Being intentional with decision making freedom.
2. What leadership practices exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban school?
• Finding 1: Leading by example.
• Finding 2: High expectations for teachers.
• Finding 3: Having the freedom to make decisions surrounding human capital,
scheduling, finances, and discipline.
• Finding 4: Being intentional with decisions about hiring and staff placement.
3. What cultural norms exist in an outperforming urban school.
• Finding 1: Mindset consistencies among staff
139
• Finding 2: Making intentional decisions aligned with school values & data
• Finding 3: Relationships among staff and students
Once all findings were dissected, further data triangulation let to the identification of four
overarching themes: (a) Clear and High Expectations, (b) Decision-Making Freedom, (c)
Intentional Decision Making, and (d) Mindset Consistencies. These findings supported the
conceptual framework displayed in Chapter 2 by confirming that all three areas—school
practices, school leadership, and school culture all play a role in a school’s success. LLA is an
outperforming school because it has built a culture centered around student achievement. All of
the decisions made by teachers and leadership support student growth, and teacher innovation.
There was a general sense of respect, and an expectation of hard work, and student outcomes.
The school's core values were chosen initially by Susan, the school’s founding leader. However,
it was evident to the researcher that there was a shared mindset among all the staff that displayed
a common belief and commitment to those values, and everything their school leader intended
them to mean. The observations, interviews, surveys, and documents validated the success of the
instructional and leadership practices, as well as the cultural norms at LLA.

140
Chapter 5: Summary
School choice has been an ongoing debate for the past several decades. Despite the
multitude of school choice options, one of the most significant choices has been charter schools.
Charter schools first began in 1992 in Minnesota, and they have grown steadily ever since.
Today, charter schools exist in over 42 states across the country, a majority of which are in low-
income, urban neighborhoods like Los Angeles, California. In the year 2015, California was
home to over 1,500 charter schools, with a clear majority located in cities like Los Angeles and
Oakland. Charter schools represent the most robust sector in the school choice movement to
date. Proponents of charter schools believe that they can provide significant opportunities to
children and families with low incomes and low achievement levels. They symbolize equitable
education through the belief that a child’s zip code should not determine their education. Most
charter schools are built with a strong focus surrounding college readiness, literacy, or
technology, which is often a driving factor for parents who are looking outside of their
neighborhood school for their children.
Charter schools are funded by public dollars but are ran autonomously. They fill their
vacancies on a first come first serve basis, and by law, when there are no more spaces available,
the school holds a random and public lottery. Most teachers in charter schools, apart from a few
large CMOs, are not part of teachers’ unions (Torres & Oluwole, 2015). This is a notable
difference between traditional and nontraditional schools that has helped avoid the danger of
having complacent and ineffective teachers remain in the classroom. Charter schools have also
had heavy supporters such as President Obama, who provided billions of dollars to charter
school reform. Perhaps the most substantial promise many charter school supporters make is
141
their belief in the ability of these schools to close the academic achievement gap in the United
States. This research studied how one urban charter school is making that promise a reality.
Purpose of the Study
This research case study investigated a nontraditional urban charter school that is
outperforming its neighborhood schools, both traditional and nontraditional. The purpose of this
study was to identify the factors that are present in this school through the lenses of promising
practices, leadership practices, and cultural norms. The research was completed as a case study
that included document analysis, observations, interviews, and surveys. The researcher found
several conclusions for each research question by triangulating the data that was collected, and
then further analyzed the data to see four emergent themes that aided in the success of the
outperforming nontraditional school.
Methodology and Research Questions
The researcher conducted this case study at LLA, an outperforming middle school in an
urban city that served low-income students in Grades 5 through 8. The research examined
teachers, administrators, and other stakeholders to learn about the promising practices and
system, leadership practices, and cultural norms that existed within the school. The research
design consisted of four data gathering methods that began with a document analysis of essential
school documents. Next, the researcher administered surveys to the staff via Qualtrics, a secure
an online data software. The surveys were followed by observations at the school site, and
lastly, eleven interviews took place. The use of these four data collection methods allowed the
researcher to triangulate the findings to answer the three research questions:
1. What programs and practices exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban school?
2. What leadership practices exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban school?
142
3. What cultural norms exist in an outperforming nontraditional urban school?
In order to answer these three questions, the researcher identified LLA, an institution that had
demonstrated success despite the vast amounts of inequities that exist in America's public
schools. The researcher was also able to address several problems that notoriously have plagued
low-performing schools by noting how LLA manages those complications.
This study was built over one year and consisted of eight days at the research site. This
study was part of a more extensive group dissertation with eleven other members from the
University of Southern California, each who studied a different outperforming nontraditional
urban school. The research questions, design, and data collection instruments were created
collectively by the thematic team; however, the researcher was the sole collector and analyzer of
the data. Additionally, this report was written entirely by the researcher. The researcher
intended to identify an outperforming school and identify the factors present in the school that
played a role in the success of the school. The researcher anticipated this study to be used by
educational leaders in nontraditional, low-income, urban schools similar to LLA. Ideally, this
report will inspire and motivate school leaders by reminding them of the possibilities that hard
work, passion, and commitment to excellence can bring to the education of America’s highest
need students.
Summary of Findings and Themes
LLA was a dynamic school filled with hard-working individuals who all believed in the
core values of the school. They outperformed their neighborhood schools, both traditional and
nontraditional, as well as the district average for both English language arts and mathematics.
While sheer numbers displayed the outperforming status of the school, this research sought to
identify the factors within the school that played a role in their outperforming success. By
143
gathering data for each of the research questions, the researcher triangulated the data and
generated several findings for each of the three research questions. The results are shown in
Table 3.
Table 3.
Summary of Findings by Research Question
Research Question and Main Findings
Research Question 1: What promising programs and practices exist within LLA?
High expectations for all
stakeholders
Decision-making freedom Intentional decision making

Research Question 2: What leadership practices exist within LLA?
Leading by example High expectations
for teachers
Decision-making
freedom around
human capital,
finances,
scheduling, and
discipline
Intentional decision
making surrounding
hiring and staff
placement

Research Question 3: What cultural norms exist within LLA?
Mindset consistencies among
staff
Intentional decision making
surrounding school values
and data
Relationships among faculty
and students

After triangulating the data to generate these findings, the researcher then analyzed the
results to determine overarching ideas within the data. These themes had a strong correlation to
the outperforming success of LLA, as established by heavy existence within the data that had
been collected. The four themes were as follows: (a) High Expectations, (b) Decision-Making
Freedom, (c) Intentional Decision Making, and (d) Mindset Consistencies. Three of the findings,
Decision-Making Freedom, Intentional Decision Making, and Mindset Consistencies were a
surprise to the researcher because they had not been noted in the literature review. The final
theme, High Expectations, was consistent with a large body of literature on successful schools.
144
High Expectations
Consistent with the current literature, this study found that holding all stakeholders to
high expectations was a crucial factor in an outperforming nontraditional school. LLA proudly
held teachers, parents, and students to clear and high expectations. Large amounts of data
collected by the researcher supported this theme, as well as its impact on LLA’s success. During
an interview with Liz, the school’s dean, she stated that she believed that the school’s high
expectations were a significant factor in their success. Additionally, teachers at LLA
acknowledged that they held themselves and their students to high expectations. They expected
their students to work hard to make academic progress, and they worked hard to give them the
best environment for that improvement to happen. Lastly, teachers and administrators held
families to high expectations by expecting them to be involved in their student’s education.
They kept them engaged through parent events, meetings, and parent groups. Data also
confirmed that they were in constant communication with parents through applications like Class
Dojo and Illuminate.
Holding all parties to high expectations created a culture of urgency and excellence
within LLA. The staff understood that to be successful, all stakeholders needed to work hard,
and work together. Apathetic excuses were not evidently accepted, and if students struggled to
make progress, teachers worked exceptionally hard to help students overcome those hurdles. By
setting high expectations for parents, teachers, and students, LLA was able to propel their
students forward, helping them reach high levels of academic excellence despite the barriers
present in their lives. Nelson Mandela once said, “It always seems impossible until its done,” a
sentiment that seemed to be shared by many at LLA. As one teacher stated, “We have these
incredibly high expectations, and then when we meet them, it’s pretty cool!” Both statements
145
illustrate the power of high expectations, and how they have undoubtedly played a vital role in
the outperforming success at LLA.
Decision-Making Freedom
An important theme that rose from the data was the freedom that teachers have in their
classrooms. Built through an evident trust between administrators and teachers, the staff at LLA
had substantial freedom when it came to their classroom. They were encouraged to innovate and
teach in whatever way they thought would yield the best learning results for their students. This
was evident through all data instruments, especially observations, where the researcher was able
to witness different teaching styles in every classroom. While some teachers taught on
technology, others taught in small groups and some through collaborative activities.
Additionally, survey data showed that much of the staff at LLA felt as though they were given
substantial freedom to make decisions about what they thought was best for their classrooms.
This decision-making freedom was also applied by leadership at LLA.
The administration at LLA, Susan, Sarah, and Liz, all exercised their decision-making
freedom within the school when it came to the human capital, scheduling, school spending, and
discipline methods. The leadership at LLA hired employees based on mindset consistencies
surrounding work ethic and professionalism. They trusted that pedagogy was something that
could be taught or improved upon, but truly believed that ones mindset surrounding students and
education was not something that could be taught. Susan also created a schedule at LLA that
provided students with a longer school day—filled with more opportunities for learning and
elective courses. Additionally, the leadership had consistent freedom when it came to spending,
and demonstrated their commitment to students by using their money on teacher trainings, or
classroom resources that would directly impact student learning such as classroom libraries.
146
Lastly, the leadership at LLA had substantial freedom when it came to their discipline policy.
Guided by their firm belief in equity and respect, Susan and her leadership team decided that
they would be a restorative-driven school—committed to using restorative practices rather than
punitive disciplinary actions.
The freedom for teachers and leaders to make decisions in each of these areas played a
vital role in the success of LLA. When teachers were trusted to make instructional decisions in
their classroom, they were often more motivated to try new things. This freedom fueled teacher
efficacy, or the belief by teachers that they can help their most challenging and unmotivated
students excel academically (Kerley, 2004). Additionally, the decisions that LLA’s leadership
made because of their freedom not only increased learning opportunities for students through
extended time and resources, but it also impacted the culture at the school, both which have
assisted in creating an environment suitable for meaningful learning. Regardless of whether this
decision-making ability is isolated to nontraditional schools, LLA has demonstrated the positive
impact that this autonomy can make on a low-income urban school. The decision- making
liberties at LLA were significant factors that played a role in LLA's outperforming success.
Intentional Decision Making
Intentional decision making was a promising practice, a leadership practice, and a
cultural norm at LLA. In fact, intentionality was a keyword used in several interviews conducted
by the researcher. Teachers at LLA practiced intentionality by using data to inform their
teaching practices. Leadership at LLA used intentional decision making when it came to hiring
their staff members. Moreover, they intentionally placed novice teachers in classrooms with
more experienced teachers as an effort to mitigate the stresses that were often experienced by a
147
first-year teacher. Finally, there was a cultural expectancy to make decisions that were supported
by data and also that reflected the school’s core values.
LLA’s practice of making intentional decisions was an unexpected, but impactful theme.
Previous literature read by the researcher did not describe the critical method of intentionality as
a factor within a successful school. However, data collected by the researcher supported this
overarching theme. Teacher’s at LLA believed that a newcomer’s first impression would be
their intentionality behind everything they do. The school’s dean stated that they were able to
outperform other schools because of how intentional they are about every decision they make.
Further, observations within the classrooms showed that teachers referred to their student data
when planning lessons and activities. This theme of intentional decision making was built from
the liberty that staff at LLA have to make choices in the best interest of students. Perhaps the
freedom to make decisions was only impactful because the decisions were made deliberately and
purposefully. Nevertheless, LLA demonstrated that when given freedom, intentional decision
making can play a pivotal role in creating an outperforming school.
Mindset Consistencies
Mindset consistencies among staff members at LLA was a dominant and emergent theme
that grew out of the data. Confirmed over and over by surveys, interviews, and observations, the
researcher was able to conclude that having mindset consistencies among the staff was a critical
component of LLA’s success. Data collected from the study indicated that the team shared a
similar mindset when it came to work ethic, professionalism and student achievement. Staff at
LLA firmly believed that all students could achieve at high levels, and that they, the staff, were
responsible for making them happen. They also demonstrated and welcomed hard work, as it
created a sense of accountability amongst one another. Furthermore, they shared a common
148
belief about the treatment of children. They were committed to making LLA a safe place for
kids, where they felt comfortable taking academic risks and making mistakes.
Jeff, the lead teacher at LLA, shared his sentiment on the mindset at LLA. He said, “I
think the vast majority of our staff feels the same—like this is a place where kids can make
mistakes, and its okay. Kids can be middles schoolers, and also get really good academics.”
Jeff’s description of a consistent mindset across staff members was supported by observations
and additional interviews as well. Relevant data revealed that this consistent mindset was an
intentional effort made by the leadership during their interview process. Having a school filled
with like-minded individuals committed to helping kids and creating the optimal environment
where kids can learn and be successful wqas a crucial factor at LLA. The mindset consistencies
among the staff in regards to work ethic, professionalism, and student achievement played a
pivotal role in their success.
Implications and Suggestions for Future Studies
LLA created an ideal environment for academic success. Their programs and practices,
leadership practices, and cultural norms helped their school make strides towards closing the
educational achievement gap. There are three implications for this case study based on the data
collected and the emergent themes. Each of the implications can assist school leaders of
nontraditional urban schools who hope to make significant academic gains for their students.
The three implications are as follows:
1. Low-income urban schools who serve a high-need population can still demonstrate
academic success when there is a leadership team who holds tight to its mission and
values, and a staff that possesses an unwavering commitment to academic
achievement for all students.
149
2. Charter school leaders that are given substantial freedom to make decisions should
be confident that student data or relevant research supports the choices they make.
Additionally, leaders should be reflective of the school’s mission and values.
3. Making a commitment to closing the achievement gap at a low-income, urban charter
school will require a culture of data transparency, where teachers are held
accountable for their data and expected to show improvement.
These implications require educators and leaders to reevaluate some of their practices.
Additionally, it requires leadership to reflect on their commitment to their school, and be sure
that all of their future decisions align with their belief and their school. These implications also
require leadership to rethink their hiring practices. Necessary adjustments should assist them in
finding candidates who share similar mindsets when it comes to students and equitable
education. While replicating the findings from this case study alone will not ensure success at
any school, implementing components of these results are believed to increase the chances of
academic success at a nontraditional urban charter school.
Recommendations for Future Study
Through conducting the study, several recommendations for future research have
emerged. While many studies have been done on different types of nontraditional schools, few
studies have looked deeply into the specifics of different kinds of charter schools. Possible areas
of research include the following:
1. A comparative study on the successes of independent charter schools and charter
schools that are part of management organizations.
2. A comparative study on the successes of charter schools that are co-located with
another school and those that are on an independent campus.
150
3. The effects of charter schools that are run by founding leaders.
Each of these studies could help expand the body of research surrounding charter schools, and
ideally increase the academic outcomes of these schools.
Conclusion
Educational researchers are in constant search of a solution to the academic achievement
gap. Decades of reform efforts have been implemented and eventually abandoned because of
their inability to make a dent in the widening gap. With each deserted attempt, economically
disadvantaged youth are negatively impacted, left further and further behind their more affluent
peers. Charter schools represent the nation’s most recent and popular reform movement in
education. However, unlike the previous reform movements, charter schools appear to be here to
stay. With that reality, charter school leaders must make a concerted effort to implement
practices and programs that create a positive and outperforming culture at their school.
This study revealed how an urban outperforming charter school created systems for
accountability and high expectations, as well as exercised their decision-making freedom with
intentionality. The study also shed light on the importance of having a staff with shared
mindsets surrounding student ability, work ethic, and professionalism. Educators should
continue to study outperforming nontraditional urban schools like LLA. Further data on their
strong characteristics can provide experts with an arsenal of tools and strategies that can be
implemented at similar schools in urban neighborhoods. Further, a consistent commitment to
successful charter school research will put pressure on current charter school leaders to make
impactful changes to their schools. Together, with a shared pledge to equitable education for all
students, American charter schools can continue to do their part in closing the academic
achievement gap.
151

References
Aaronson, D., Barrow, L., & Sander, W. (2007). Teachers and student achievement in the
chicago public high schools. Journal of Labor Economics, 25(1), 95–135.
http://doi.org/10.1086/508733
Aguirre, M. G. (2015). Teacher accountability at high performing charter schools.
Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The schools teachers leave. Consortium on
Chicago School Research.
Anderson, S., Medrich, E., & Fowler, D. (2007). Which Achievement Gap? The Phi Delta
Kappan, 88(7), 547–550.
Angrist, J. D., Pathak, P. A., & Walters, C. R. (2011). Explaining charter school effectiveness.
American Economic Journal. Retrieved from
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/aea/aejae/2013/00000005/00000004/art00001
Ayscue, J. B. (2016). Trends, policies, and practices related to racial, socioeconomic, and
linguistic segregation in California’s charter schools, 1998-2013.
Baker, B., Farrie, D., & Sciarra, D. (2016). Mind the gap: 20 years of progress and retrenchment
in school funding and achievement gaps. Policy Information Report.
Bangser, G., Burgess, C., Chalhoub, T., Cohen, E., DiSalvo, K., Haugen, D., … Smith, K.
(2007). Urban education that works: Moving past school type debates and embracing
choice. Woodrow Wilson School’s Graduate Policy Workshop.
Barry, B. (2004). Recruiting and retaining “highly qualified teachers” for hard-to-staff schools.
NASSP Bulletin, 88(638), 5.
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2010a). The black-white achievement gap. Policy Information
152
Report.
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2010b). The black-white achievement gap. Policy Information
Report.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.
http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Betts, J., Kitmitto, S., Levin, J., Bos, J., & Eaton, M. (2015). What happens when schools
become magnet schools? A longitudinal study of diversity and achievement. American
Institutes for Research. Retrieved from
http://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/Magnet-Schools-Diversity-and-
Achievement-May-2015.pdf%5Cnfiles/715/Magnet-Schools-Diversity-and-Achievement-
May-2015.html
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Chapter 3: Fieldwork. In Qualitative Research for
Education (pp. 82–102).
Borman, G. D., & Dowling, Martiza, N. (2008). Teacher Attrition and Retention: A Meta-
Analytic and Narrative Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3),
367–409. http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321455
Center for Research on Educational Outcomes. (2013). National Charter School Study:
Executive summary. Retrieved from http://credo.stanford.edu/documents
/NCSS%202013%20Executive%20Summary.pdf
Cheng, A., Hitt, C., Kisida, B., & Mills, J. N. (2017). “No excuses” charter schools: A meta-
analysis of the experimental evidence on student achievement. Journal of School Choice,
11, 209–238. doi:10.1080/15582159.2017.1286210
153
Cheng, A., Hitt, C., & Kisida, B. (2015). No excuses charter schools: A meta-analysis of the
experimental evidence on student achievement. No excuses charter schools (Vol. 2014–11).
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. (2005). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution
of novice teachers. Economics of Education Review, 24(4), 377–392.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.06.008
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap . . . and others don’t. New
York, NY: Harper Business. Kerley, D. M. (2004). Exploring connections among relational
trust, teacher efficacy, and student achievement.
CREDO. (2013). National Charter School Study Executive Summary, 1–28.
CREDO. (2015). Urban charter school study report on 41 regions.
Dancy, T. (2016). High performing charter school addressing the diverse needs of economically
disadvantaged children.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Recruiting and retaining teachers: turning around the race to the
bottom in high-need schools. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 4(1), 16–32.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (2006). Highly qualified teachers for all. Educational
Leadership, 64(3), 14–20. Retrieved from
http://ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true
&db=a9h&AN=23054696&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Darling-hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher turnover in
California schools, 80(3), 44–70.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: The irony of “No
Child Left Behind.” Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(3), 245–260.
Davidson, E., Reback, R., Rockoff, J. E., & Schwartz, H. L. (2015). Fifty ways to leave a child
154
behind: Idiosyncrasies and discrepancies in states’ implementation of NCLB. Educational
Researcher, 44(6), 347–358. http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15601426
Davis, T. (2014). School choice and segregation: “Tracking” racial equity in magnet schools.
Education and Urban Society, 46(4), 1–35. http://doi.org/10.1177/0013124512448672
Delahaye, A. (2016). Local control funding formula : A continuum of discrimination against
minority youth in education.
Downey, D. B., & Pribesh, S. (2004). When race matters: teachers’ evaluations of students’
classroom behavior. Sociology of Education, 77(4), 267–282.
http://doi.org/10.1177/003804070407700401
Edwards, B., & Perry, M. (2004). Charter schools in california: An experiment coming of age.
Retrieved from https://edsource.org/wp-content/publications/CharterSchools04.pdf
Firestone, W. A., & Shipps, D. (2013). How do leaders interpret conflicting accountabilities to
improve student learning? Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1689–
1699. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Frankenberg, E., Siegel-Hawley, G., & Wang, J. (2012). Choice without equity: Charter school
segregation and the need for civil rights standards.
Fryer, R. G. (2012). Injecting successful charter school strategies into traditional public schools:
Early results from an experiment in Houston (No. (No. w17494)).
Furgeson, J., Gill, B., Haimson, J., Killewald, A., McCullough, M., Nichols-Barrer, I., …
Verbitsky-Savitz, N. (2012). Charter-school management organizations: Diverse strategies
adn diverse student impacts. The National Study of Charter Management (CMO)
Effectiveness.
Gleason, P. M., Tuttle, C. C., Gill, B., Nichols-Barrer, I., & Teh, B. (2014). Do KIPP schools
155
boost student achievement? Education Finance and Policy, 9(1), 36–58.
http://doi.org/10.1162/EDFP_a_00119
Glenn, W. J. (2011). A quantitative analysis of the increase in public school segregation in
Delaware: 1989-2006. Urban Education, 20(10), 1–22.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911400321
Glennie, E. J., Mason, M., & Edmunds, J. A. (2016). Retention and satisfaction of novice
teachers: Lessons from a school reform model. Journal of Education and Training Studies,
4(4), 244–258. http://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i4.1458
Goldhaber, D., Lavery, L., & Theobald, R. (2015). Uneven playing field? Assessing the teacher
quality gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Educational Researcher,
20(10), 293–307. http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15592622
Gray, L., & Taie, S. (2015). Public school teacher attrition and mobility in the first five years:
Results from the first through fifth waves of the 2007-08 beginning teacher longitudinal
study. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from files/692/2015196.pdf
Han, S. (2014). School mobility and students’ academic and behavioral outcomes. International
Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 9(6), 1–14. Retrieved from
http://journals.sfu.ca/ijepl/index.php/ijepl/article/view/573
Hirji, H. S. P. (1999). Inequalities in California’s public school system: The undermining of
Serrano vs. Priest and the need for a minimum standards system of education. Loyola of Los
Angeles Law Review, 32(2).
Hochschild, J. L., & Scovronick, N. (2003). The American dream and the public schools.
Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/The-American-Dream-Public-
Schools/dp/0195176030
156
Holme, J. J. (2002). Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social construction of
school quality. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 177–205.
Ingersoll, R. M., Merrill, L., & Stuckey, D. (2014). Seven trends: The transformation of the
teaching force. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 4(April), 31. Retrieved from
http://www.cpre.org/7trends
Ingersoll, R. M., & Perda, D. (2009). The mathematics and science teacher shortage: Fact and
myth.
Johnson, D. (1997). Putting the Cart before the Horse: Parent Involvement in the Improving
America’s Schools Act. California Law Review, 85(6), 1757.
http://doi.org/10.15779/Z384F0B
Johnson, L. S. (2009). School contexts and student belonging: A mixed methods study of an
innovative high school. The School Community Journal, 19(1), 99–118.
http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.795. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
10.1521/scpq.17.2.148.20854. 10.2307/1170412 10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.143
10.1037/0022-0663.91.1.62 10.2307/l 170786.2002-18022-00210.2307/1170786
10.1037/0022/0663.82.4.616 10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202
Kahlenberg, R. D. (2009). Turnaround schools that work: Moving beyond separate but equal.
Klein, A. (2015). ESEA Reauthorization : The Every Student Succeeds Act Explained.
Education Week, 1–7.
Kobes, S. G. (2013). Implementation of the principles of the Knowledge is Power Program
(KIPP) in an inner-city high school-within-a-school.
Koppich, J. E., Humphrey, D. C., & Marsh, J. A. (2015). Two years of California’ s Local
Control Funding Formula: Time to reaffirm the grand vision. Policy Analysis for California
157
Education.
Ladd, H. F., Clotfelter, C. T., & Holbein, J. B. (2015). The growing segmentation of the charter
school sector in North Carolina. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper
Series. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w21078%5CnNATIONAL
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wykoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A
descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37–62.
http://doi.org/10.3102/01623737024001037
Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The importance of
cultural capital. Sociology of EducationSociology of Education, 60(2), 73–85.
Leachman, M., Albares, N., Masterson, K., & Wallace, M. (2016). Most states have cut school
funding, and some continue cutting. Retrieved from http://www.cbpp.org/research/state-
budget-and-tax/most-states-have-cut-school-funding-and-some-continue-cutting
Lee, J., & Orfield, G. (2006). Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB
on the Gaps: An In-Depth Look into National and State Reading and Math Outcome
Trends. The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, (June), 82.
Leseure, M. J., Bauer, J., Birdi, K., Neely, A., & Denyer, D. (2004). Adoption of promising
practices: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 5–6(3–4), 169–190. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00102.x
Li, A., & Fischer, M. J. (2017). Advantaged/disadvantaged school neighborhoods, parental
networks, and parental involvement at elementary school. Sociology of Education,
3804071773233. http://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717732332
Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher
turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44–70.
158
Martinez, A., Coker, C., McMahon, S. D., Cohen, J., & Thapa, A. (2016). Involvement in
extracurricular activities: Identifying differences in perceptions of school climate. The
Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 33(1), 70–84.
http://doi.org/10.1017/edp.2016.7
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Fundamentals of qualitative data analysis.
In Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed., pp. 86–93). Thousand Oaks,
California: SAGE.
Miron, G. (2017). Description and Brief History of Charter Schools. The Wiley Handbook of
School Choice, 224.
Morrissey, T. W., Hutchison, L., & Winsler, A. (2014). Family income, school attendance, and
academic achievement in elementary school. Developmental Psychology, 50(3), 741–753.
http://doi.org/10.1037/a0033848
Morrow, D. (2014). What makes a charter school successful or unsuccessful? A look at variables
and their effect on charter schools.
Ni, Y., Sun, M., & Rorrer, A. (2015). Principal turnover: Upheaval and uncertainty in charter
schools? Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(3), 409–437.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X14539808
Noguera, P. A. (2012). Saving Black and Latino Boys.
Pak, C. H. (2015). A study of high-performing at-risk high school students and their perceptions
on academic success and achievement.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015).
Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method
implementation research. Adm. Policy Ment. Health, 42(5), 533–544.
159
http://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.Purposeful
Peske, B. H. G., & Haycock, K. (2006). Teaching inequality: How poor and minority students
are shortchanged on teacher quality: A report and recommendations by the education trust,
(June).
Prince, A. J. (2006). Uncovering promising practices for increasing parent involvement: An
investigation of high-performing charter schools in California.
Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system. In The death and life
of the great American school system (p. Chapter 11).
Reis, S. M., Mccoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M., & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The effects
of differentiated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five
elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal American Educational
Research Journal, 48(2), 462–501. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27975296%5Cnhttp://about.jstor.org/terms%5Cnhttp://aerj.aera.
net
Rockoff, J. E. (2003). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from
panel data. Harvard University (Vol. 37). Retrieved from
http://rer.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.3102/00346543073001089%5Cnhttp://aer.sagepub.com/c
ontent/37/2/479.full.pdf+html%5Cnhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=E
D535859
Rotberg, Iris, C. (2014). Charter schools and the risk of incrased segregation. The Phi Delta
Kappan, 95(5), 26–30.
Sauter, M. B., Allen, A. C., Nelson, L., & Hess, A. E. M. (2012). America ’ s Richest School
Districts Jtrre. 24/7 Wall St., pp. 1–8.
160
Schutt, R. (2011). Qualitative data analysis. Investigating the Social World: The Process and
Practice of Research. http://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs.2011.100352
Singer, A. (2017, December 2). Charter school failure (the schools, not the kids) [Blog post]. The
Huffington Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/charter-
school-failure-th_b_13347518.html
Skiba, R. J., & Williams, N. T. (2014). Are black kids worse? Myths and facts about racial
differences in behavior.
Spring, J. (2017). American education. Routledge.

Steagall, F. (2012). From children of poverty to children of hope: Exploring the characteristics
of high-poverty high-performing schools, teachers, leadership, and the factors that help
them succeed in increasing student achievement.
Stengel, R. (2008). Mandela: His 8 lessons of leadership.
Stephens, B. J. (2008). Comparisons between high-performing and low-performing charter
schools.
Stetz, M. D. (2009). Parental choice in non-traditional public schools.
Stuit, D. a, & Smith, T. M. (2010). Teacher Turnover in Charter Schools. National Center on
School Choice Conference. Retrieved from
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/schoolchoice/documents/stuit_smith_ncspe.pdf
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D ’alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school
climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357–385.
http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483907
Toma, E., & Zimmer, R. (2012). Two decades of charter schools: Expectations, reality, and the
future. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 209–212.
161
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.10.001
Torres, A. C., & Oluwole, J. (2015). Teacher satisfaction and turnover in charter schools:
Examining the variations and possibilities for collective bargaining. Journal of School
Choice, 9(4), 503–528. http://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2015.1079468
Ventura, Y. M. (2008). School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom
instruction: Lessons from a high-performing, high poverty urban school.
Villarreal, J. M. (2010). A magnet middle school longitudinal case study of student achievement,
attitudes, and parental engagement.
Viteritti, J. P. (2012). The federal role in school reform: Obama’s “race to the top.” The Notre
Dame Law Review, 87(5), 2087.
Wang, J., Schweig, J. D., & Herman, J. L. (2014). Is there a magnet school effect? Using meta-
analysis to explore variation in magnet school success.
Weekes, T. L. (2016). Characteristics of high-performing california charter schools serving low-
income minority students.
Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national
failure to ackowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. The New Teacher
Project.
Wohlstetter, P., Smith, J., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). The choices and challenges of charter schools,
revisited. Journal of School Choice, 9(1), 115–138.
http://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2015.1000775
Zimmer, R., & Buddin, R. (2007). Getting Inside the Black Box: Examining How the Operation
of Charter Schools Affects Performance. Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2), 231–273.
http://doi.org/10.1080/01619560701312954
162
Appendix A: Document Analysis Protocol

1. School website
2. Achievement test scores
3. School report card (SARC)
4. Recruitment information
5. Student/parent handbooks
6. School plan
7. Mission Statement
8. Organization chart
9. California Department of Education
10. Demographics
11. Retention rates
12. School programs available
13. Attendance records

163
Appendix B: Survey Instrument

164

165

166

167

168
Appendix C: Interview Protocol
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
I. Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have set
aside to answer my questions. The interview should take about an hour.
Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study and answer any
questions you might have about participating. I am currently a doctoral student at USC and I
will be conducting interviews, surveys, and observations for my research. I have structured my
line of inquiry around organizational practices that narrow the achievement gap in
outperforming non-traditional urban schools.
Thank you for volunteering to participate in this study. I want to assure you that I am strictly
wearing the hat of researcher. This means is that the nature of my questions and observations
are not evaluative. I will not be making any judgments on how you are performing as an
educator. None of the data I collect will be shared with other teachers, administrators, or the
district.
I am happy to provide you with a copy of the findings if you are interested. Do you have any
questions about the study before we get started? If you don’t have any further questions, I
would like to have your permission to begin the interview.
II. Setting the Stage
1. I am hoping we could start with you telling me a little bit about this year’s students
that you are serving here at the school.
2. Tell me about any specialized training you received to work with the students that you
serve.
3. What are some of the challenges and concerns the students bring to you?
4. How often do you meet with parents/guardians to speak on behalf of students
academic growth?
5. What are some of the instructional challenges that students encounter in the school?

169
III. Heart of the Interview (Interview Questions are directly tied to your Research Questions)
Interview Questions
Questions RQ#1
What programs
and practices are
implemented in an
urban
outperforming
nontraditional
school?
RQ#2
What are the
leadership
practices present
in an urban
outperforming
nontraditional
school?
RQ#3
What are the
cultural norms
in an urban
outperforming
nontraditional
school?
1. Why did you choose to come to this
school, and what are your experiences
here in comparison to where you were
before?

X
2. When others visit your school,
what do you believe their first
impressions are?

X
3. Why do you believe parents
should send their children to this
school as opposed to the
traditional neighborhood school?

X
4. What do you believe puts your
school in a position to outperform
traditional schools?

X
5. How significant of a role do you
feel the
principal/students/teachers play
in the molding of the school
culture/climate?
• What other factors do you
feel have an impact on
school climate?

X
6. How does the school resolve
discipline issues when they arise?
• How are stakeholders
involved?

X
170
7. How empowered is the staff to
make decisions in the best interest
of the students without waiting on
the leadership? Can you give an
example?

X

8. What specific leadership
practices do you believe are most
significant factors that sustain
and improve student
achievement?

X

9. How are decisions made to
implement researched
instructional practices at your
school?

X

10. How are resources and
programs used to increase
student academic achievement?
X

11. What school-wide programs
or rules does your school
implement in order to promote
student success?
• What was the process in
coming up with these
school-wide
implementations?
• How are they
implemented? (Action-
Resolution?)
• How are they measured
for effectiveness?
(Specific benchmarks?
Numbers?)
X

12. How would you describe the
implementation of professional
programs, training, and
professional opportunities to
grow?
X

Closing Question (Anything else to add)
171
I am wondering if there is anything that you would add to our conversation today that I might
not have covered?
V. Closing (thank you and follow-up option):
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your time and
willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I find
myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact you, and if so, if
email is ok? Again, thank you for participating in my study.
172
Appendix D: Observation Protocol
Name of Observer Date Time

Location Study

Brief Summary of Observation

Physical Space
Define the physical
space.
• Geographical
• Temporal
• Physical
• Political

Utility: What is the
purpose of
event/setting?

Participant reactions to
physical setting

Other

173

People/Participants
Who are the
participants taking
place in
observation/event?
How many
participated?

Demographical
information:
• Racial
• Ethnic
• Gender
• Class

What are the roles of
those being observed?
How do you know?

What was each of the
specific participants
doing?
• Group interaction
• Individual actions
• Passive participants
• Active participants

Purpose of Events/Observation
Why is the event taking
place? Are there any
political contexts to be
discussed?

174

Who was invited to event?
Who was not?

Was there any discussion of
educational policy? Why?
How so?

What are the positions of
the various participants
involved?
• Power dynamics
• Roles

What is being discussed?

175
Sequence of Events
Beginning

Middle
End

176

Observer Role
What am I doing? What
is my role throughout
the observation?

Describe some of my
interactions with other
participants throughout
the observation.

177
How did my
interaction/presence
affect the observation
participants?

Other

Pictures

178
Appendix E: Invitation to Participate in Study

Invitation to Participate in a Study

You are invited to participate in a research study. The purpose of this study is to identify and
examine organizational practices that narrow the achievement gap in outperforming non-traditional urban
schools. The study will address the history of the achievement gap as well as the impact of poverty amongst
diverse populations in urban schools. It will then identify promising practices that exist in urban non-
traditional schools. An honest reflection on your own teaching practices and opinions are most appreciated.
The study procedures include a survey, interview, document analysis and observations of your
classroom and/or campus. Your participation is voluntary and you can choose to participate in one, some or
all the procedures. If you choose to participate all the data collected will be confidential and will not be
traceable back to you.
This research will be taking place between May 2017 to April 2018. It is expected that it will take
twenty minutes to complete each questionnaire. Time for activities will vary depending on the activity, if you
choose to participate you will be sent a schedule of activities, as well as descriptions and time commitments
for each. Your responses will be kept confidential. Your name will not appear on the questionnaires. If you
have questions about any aspect of your participation in this study, please feel free to ask your principal or
contact me at Bhmccart@usc.edu
You can withdraw your participation at any time. There will be no consequences if you choose to
skip questions, activities, or not complete the questionnaires or activities. If you are interested in learning the
results of this survey once it is completed, you can contact Bhmccart@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Many of today’s low-income neighborhoods are plagued by failing public schools. The present public school system is fundamentally flawed due to the inequalities that exist with regards to funding, resources, and equitable learning opportunities. Given these complexities, the country introduced charters and other nontraditional schools to combat the bureaucratic systems limiting the progress of the traditional public schools. Charter schools are publicly funded, held to the same accountability measures as public schools, but are independently run. This freedom allows them to implement innovative curriculums, use research-based practices, and increase learning opportunities for all students through unique school structures and classes. After 1992, charters quickly grew in popularity, and while some could uphold their promise of academic excellence, others began to mimic the problems of traditional schools. ❧ This case study has highlighted an outperforming charter school. The researcher identified Lunar Learning Academy, a nontraditional urban charter school that has defied the troubling realities facing low-income communities and schools. This study used interviews, observations, document analysis, and surveys to distinguish promising factors that are present at the school. This case study looked through the lenses of promising programs and practices, leadership practices, and cultural norms to detect factors that play a role in the school’s outperforming success. Through data triangulation, the researcher identified four emergent themes from the findings—each of which played an integral part in the school’s outperforming academic success: (1) High expectations for all stakeholders (2) Decision-Making Freedom (3) Intentionality with decision making (4) Mindset Consistencies.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A case study of an outperforming urban magnet high school

PDF

Against all odds: a case study of an outperforming nontraditional urban charter school

PDF

Outperformance in a nontraditional urban elementary school: a case study

PDF

Look into an outperforming non-traditional urban high school: what's their secret?

PDF

Nontraditional outperforming K-12 urban schools: a case study of the implementation of promising programs and practices, leadership and cultural norms in a project-based curriculum college prepar...

PDF

Success in reflective practice: a case study of an outperforming non-traditional urban high school

PDF

Model of excellence: a qualitative case study of an outperforming magnet middle school

PDF

A case study of factors related to an outperforming urban charter high school

PDF

Factors contributing to outperformance in nontraditional urban schools: a case study of a public elementary school with a dual immersion program

PDF

Overcoming urban challenges: a succesful case study

PDF

Outperforming nontraditional urban school: a high school case study

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of one outperforming urban school making a difference

PDF

Outperforming urban schools that are closing the achievement gap: a case study of Phoenix High School

PDF

Outperforming nontraditional urban school: a success case study

PDF

The plight of African American males in urban schools: a case study

PDF

Rising above expectations: a case study of an outperforming urban nontraditional school

PDF

Creating connections: an implementation study of promising practices for mentoring in California charter schools

PDF

Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs

PDF

Through the eyes of art: uncovering promising practices in arts-themed learning in California charter elementary schools

PDF

Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of one outperforming urban high school

Asset Metadata

Creator McCarthy, Brenna Harren (author)

Core Title The factors present in an outperforming charter middle school: a case study focusing on promising practices, school leadership, and cultural norms

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/23/2018

Defense Date 03/09/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag charter schools,charters,cultural norms,middle school,nontraditional,non-traditional,OAI-PMH Harvest,outperforming,promising practices,school leadership

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ott, Maria (committee chair), Gothold, Stuart (committee member), Hocevar, Dennis (committee member)

Creator Email Bhmccart@usc.edu,Brennamccarthy615@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-493437

Unique identifier UC11267224

Identifier etd-McCarthyBr-6265.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-493437 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-McCarthyBr-6265.pdf

Dmrecord 493437

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights McCarthy, Brenna Harren

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA