University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The role of superintendents as instructional leaders: facilitating student achievement among ESL/EL learners through school-site professional development

(USC Thesis Other)

The role of superintendents as instructional leaders: facilitating student achievement among ESL/EL learners through school-site professional development

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE ROLE OF SUPERINTENDENTS AS INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERS
FACILITATING STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AMONG ESL/EL LEARNERS
THROUGH SCHOOL-SITE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
by
Veta Deann Patrick
_________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2012
Copyright 2012 Veta Deann Patrick
ii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my late Father, Jackie Ray Patrick, an
administrator, teacher, and coach for over 30 years; my Mother, Dorothy Ann
Patrick, a former educator for over 40 years; and my Brother, Jack Walter
Patrick, who like my Mother, has been my lifeline throughout this program and
are the two most important people in my life. Words cannot express how much I
love you two or what you two mean to me.
I dedicate this dissertation to my Grandmothers, MomPat and Nana, who
both loved me dearly and always supported my education.
I dedicate this dissertation to my niece and nephews, who are so
intelligent and talented; as well to all of my aunts, uncles, and cousins, who are
also highly educated and have been very supportive of my endeavors throughout
this program.
I want to recognize my dog Duke, who has been so patient throughout the
hours, months, and years that I have been in class or researched, typed, and edited
my dissertation, as he faithfully lay by my side or waited for my return to our
home from very long days.
I also dedicate this dissertation to all students, educators, and
administrators in K-12 schooling, particularly pupils who face academic and
personal challenges. Hang on. It will get better, even better than expected.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the following people for their relentless
support and encouragement as well for being a major source of inspiration
throughout my journey in my doctoral program and my dissertation writing
process:
Dr. Pedro E. Garcia, my committee chair; and Dr. Rudy Castruita and
Dr. Rudolph F. Crew, my committee members.
Dr. Pedro E. Garcia, professor, mentor, and friend, my dissertation
cohorts, and all of my other peers from core and concentration classes of Cohort
2009. Dr. Harry Bedevian, Dr. Clarence Clarkson, and Dr. Bronte Reynolds
for their reference letters towards my admission into the Ed.D. Program, as they
are USC doctoral graduates and mavens in education.
Mrs. Clarice Evans, my sixth grade teacher, Dr. John Abbott, family
friend, educational expert, and mentor, Kristina Marie Hobill Acosta, Andrea
Statum, and all of my supportive peers at my school site.
To the following friends: Dr. Harvey Abrams; Cary W. Goldstein,
J.D.; Leigh Ann Hunt-Goodson, J.D.; Octavio P. Perez; Tana Lee Quinata;
Daniel Ulibarri, J.D.; Sandra Figueroa; Cybil Solyn; Hans Wolfgang Katte;
Christof Merz; Trey Burnette; Max Smerling; as well Dino and all my coffee
break friends at Stir Crazy—I love you all!
iv
INSPIRATIONAL QUOTES
Sources of inspiration, perseverance, and ethical responsibilities in leadership:
“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and
become more, you are a leader" (John Quincy Adams).
"Pressure makes diamonds” (General George S. Patton).
"I'm not interested in preserving the status quo; I want to overthrow it”
(Niccolo Machiavelli).
"How many cares one loses when one decides not to be something but to
be someone" (Coco Chanel).
"Growth is a painful process" (Wilma Mankiller).
“Good is the enemy of great” (Jim Collins).
In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be teachers
and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing
civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest
honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. (Lee Iacocca)
“What shall it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?”
(Jesus Christ, Bible, Matthew 16:26).
Sources: brainyquote.com, goodreads.com, inspiringteachers.com, thinkexist.com
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION.................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................. iii
INSPIRATIONAL QUOTES ............................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................... viii
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY.................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem................................................................................. 5
Significance of the Problem............................................................................. 8
Purpose of the Study........................................................................................ 9
Research Questions ....................................................................................... 10
Methodology ................................................................................................. 11
Definitions of Terms...................................................................................... 12
Assumptions.................................................................................................. 15
Limitations.................................................................................................... 16
Delimitations................................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE..................................................... 18
The Superintendent as the Instructional Leader.............................................. 18
Instructional Leadership: What is it?......................................................... 19
Understanding Organizational Culture....................................................... 21
Professional Collaboration......................................................................... 25
Professional Development in the 21
st
Century................................................ 32
Inadequate Systems in Urban Schooling .................................................... 32
The District Central Office and its Relation to Professional
Development ............................................................................................. 33
School-Site Professional Development--A Feasible Plan............................ 35
District and State Expectations in the Collaborative Process ...................... 38
Data Analysis and School Wide Expectations ............................................ 39
The Comprehensive Educational Leader—a Closing Reflection .................... 44
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 47
Sample Size and Population........................................................................... 49
Overview of Sunset East High School ........................................................... 50
School Demographics and Organization ........................................................ 51
Data Collection Practices............................................................................... 53
vi
Data Analysis Procedures.............................................................................. 56
Ethical Considerations................................................................................... 58
CHAPTER 4 QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE DATA
ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 60
Research Question # 1................................................................................... 61
Overview of Subjects' Background and Experiences as Instructional
Leaders...................................................................................................... 61
Quantitative Findings................................................................................. 62
School-Site Professional Development— the Superintendents'
Perspective ................................................................................................ 64
Data Summary for Research Question # 1.................................................. 67
Research Question # 2................................................................................... 68
The Magnitude of a Vision from Instructional Leadership and its
Relation to Sustaining Collaboration from the District Office to
Campus Stakeholders................................................................................. 68
Qualitative Reactions from Interviewees Regarding a District's
Purpose or Vision and their Correlations to Successful Collaboration
Throughout the School Year...................................................................... 69
Student-Centered Learning ........................................................................ 71
Quantitative and Qualitative Percentages and Feedback from the
Online Survey............................................................................................ 73
Data Summary for Research Question # 2.................................................. 75
Research Question # 3................................................................................... 77
Creating a Culture of Inquiry Throughout the Professional
Development Process................................................................................. 77
Qualitative Summary of Subjects Regarding Question 3............................ 80
Interviewees’ and Survey Responses Pertaining to Question 3................... 81
Instructional Practices Directed Towards Targeted Learners ...................... 83
Qualitative Summary of Methods or Resources Utilized for Targeted
Groups in ELA .......................................................................................... 84
An Analysis of the Dichotomous and Subjective Measures........................ 86
Quantitative Responses.............................................................................. 88
Bridging the Gaps: Different Approaches Towards the Complex
Realm of Evaluations................................................................................. 89
Qualitative Beliefs Regarding Comprehensive Teacher Evaluations.......... 90
Summary of Evaluation Responses from Subjects...................................... 91
Field Notes of Observed Interviewed Subjects............................................... 93
Comparisons and Conclusions....................................................................... 96
Discussion of Research Question # 1 ......................................................... 96
Discussion of Research Question # 2 ......................................................... 98
vii
Discussion of Research Question # 3 ......................................................... 99
Discussion of Research Question # 4 ....................................................... 100
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... 102
Summary of Findings .................................................................................. 103
Limitations.................................................................................................. 108
Implications for Practice.............................................................................. 109
Future Research........................................................................................... 111
Final Conclusions........................................................................................ 113
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 115
APPENDICES
Appendix A The Three Levels of Culture. .................................................. 120
Appendix B Organizational Leadership and its Relation to Collegial
Professional Development ................................................................... 121
Appendix C Benefits of a Targeted Learning Professional Development .... 122
Appendix D Establishing Group Norms for Collaborative Professional
Development ....................................................................................... 123
Appendix E Sunset East High School ......................................................... 124
Appendix F USC Dissertation Data Collection ........................................... 126
viii
LIST OF TABLES
1. Does Your District Serve Title 1 Students.........................................63
2. Targeted Subgroups..........................................................................63
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Replies from Online Survey .................70
4. Learner-Focused Professional development and Allocated
Resources .........................................................................................74
5. Teacher Evaluations, Districts' Alignment to State Standards, and
Staff Morale......................................................................................88
6. Sunset East High School.................................................................124
ix
ABSTRACT
The following research utilized student performance data regarding the
English Language Arts curriculum from a secondary, very low-performing school
site located within the Los Angeles/Hollywood community, whereby the majority
of the student population was socio-disadvantaged and served a preponderance of
ESL/EL learners. For the purposes of improving student achievement at this
school, as well comparable school sites with similar student populaces and
learning disparities, this study ascertained endorsed collegial training methods by
superintendents, whose instructional leadership had contributed to comprehensive
academic progress among such demographics. Current educational studies have
concluded that there are direct correlations between enhanced student and teacher
efficacy in core curriculum content such as English Language Arts and from
school-site developed strategies created by an empowered and engaged staff
development process. For the purpose of determining the most optimal
professional development plans to increase English Language Development and
to close staggering achievement gaps among English Language Learners,
Southern California district superintendents were interviewed, observed, and
surveyed. The data of this study affirmed that educators, guided by visionary,
collaborative leaders, had advanced opportunities to become mutually
accountable stakeholders, to obtain school-site goals, and to build rapport with
their peers and administrators throughout their professional endeavors.
1
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Recent organizational trends in education to close achievement gaps in
lower-performing, inner-city school-sites such as autonomous Small Learning
Communities and Pilot Programs continue to prosper in large districts. These
schools within a school were developed to subdivide over-crowded and typically
larger urban schools into smaller, thematic-based learning, whereby smaller-
school constituents are allowed more governance over curricular development and
staff training.
School members, throughout a variety of schooling such as teachers and
administrators, continue to seek instructional methods that are relevant to the
particular needs of their school for increased student achievement. Due to time
constraints from a myriad of class schedules that do not coordinate all educator
preparation periods simultaneously, teachers and principals must fully utilize their
intermittent banked staff time, as teacher development meetings remain the only
mandatory instances of faculty assemblage.
While extensive learning discrepancies dwell among their targeted
demographics, these above-mentioned sovereign schools are perhaps lacking in
administrative auspices. Neither to invalidate their unique purpose nor to
diminish their scholastic successes, this study examined how such lower socio-
2
demographic schools can achieve pedagogical successes through school-site
teacher-development, regardless of the organization of schools. The locus of this
inquiry stems from the chief educational leader, the superintendent, and how his
or her vision and guidance would spearhead a productive, interdependent means
of teacher development and support among under-performing school sites.
One of the primary concerns among superintendents is to facilitate
widespread student achievement. The modern educational system has revealed
that its leadership is reflective of standards-based learning and the pressures to
provide measures of academic successes (Lashway, 2002). Additionally, troubled
schools virtually rely on the intervention of a powerful leader. Other factors
related to educational endeavors such as after-school tutoring or intervention
programs may contribute to enhanced learnning, but school leadership is the
catalyst (Leithwood, Seashore, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2005). Through an
extensive meta-analysis or synergy of data, educational research concludes that
there is a direct correlation between school leadership and student achievement.
Substantial research suggests that leadership is directly responsible for the
effective functioning of a school organization (Marzano, Waters, & Mc Nulty,
2005).
While compelling superintendence over school organizations is a
fundamental necessity, the current educational system in America is still greatly
standardized, as a one size fits all approach towards curriculum and instruction
3
remain as a dominant model among schools (Christensen, 2008). In essence,
school-site professionals are restricted by the demands placed upon them from
local, state, and federal mandates, amid their perpetual efforts to obtain a feasible
blueprint for customized learning and instruction, relevant to the particulars of
their students' needs.
As the acquisition of knowledge continues to advance in an informational
age of schooling, certificated members of school-sites and district levels must
persistently revisit instructional methods and embrace new responsibilities both
within and outside of the classroom. The premise of such endeavors begins with
a school's definition of professional development and its intent to meet the
demand of a complex and diverse learning populace (Gusky, 2000). Under-
achieving campuses are no stranger to the daunting task of creating meaningful
staff development. No longer can administration deliver sit and get or one time
only trainings that are lacking in clear expectations and relevance towards the
particular academic needs of each individual campus (Drake & Roe, 2003).
Conjointly, professional development throughout many school-sites is regarded as
mandatory and often irrelevant, yet according to Gusky, 2000, it should be "an
ongoing activity that is woven into the fabric of every educator's professional life
(p. 38).
Without question, schools that share similar educational challenges are in
a dire need of a revamped professional development that is conducive to
4
scheduling and budget limitations of urban schooling while effectively espousing
the individual talents and merits among its stakeholders. From local, state, and
national rankings, site teacher-trainings must cover substantial pedagogical issues,
as more accountability is placed on both educators and administrative offices.
Whilst school data is analyzed to determine its performance indicators such as
AYP or API statuses, student achievement plans for Title 1-eligible schools must
disclose how they allocate resources to provide support for their lower socio
populace, and professional development strategies are a major component of such
school-wide plans. Likewise, the federal mandate, No Child Left Behind (United
States Department of Education, 2002) requires that all states ensure the
availability of high quality professional development for all teachers (Borko,
2004).
One of the most frequently mentioned resources in current educational
research that is essential towards the effective functioning of a school is the
professional development opportunities for teachers (Marzano, Waters, & Mc
Nulty, 2005). Similarly, educational research supports the utilization of
professional development collaboration among school professionals, as school-
banked time facilitates instructional dialogue and strategies among stakeholders.
Yet, school-site autonomy still requires effective and appropriate professional
development, accompanied with collaboration and productivity. These vital
components of staff training may be lacking in some schools, which may directly
5
contribute to unsuccessful learning outcomes, particularly in lower-performing
schools. Accordingly, the creation of a collaborative culture is referenced in
studies as the single most important factor for successful school improvement
initiatives and should become the first order of business to enhance schools’
effectiveness. Collaboration among teacher development is an essential
requirement of improving schools, the critical element in reform efforts, and the
most promising strategy for sustained, substantive school improvement (DuFour,
2001). Consequently, the culture and successes attributed to a school-site's
professional development begin at the locus of its superintendency, as the era of
accountability continues throughout the 21
st
century and descends upon every
campus, with careful attention to at-risk students and targeted, urban campuses.
Statement of the Problem
According to the California Department of Education, roughly 30% of all
students from the 2008-2009 school year, previously enrolled in state public
education, drop out of high school and do no complete their GED requirements.
Of that percentage, approximately, 40% of African-American and 30% of
Hispanic student populaces are simply not graduating from high school and
consequently constitute for the majority of lower-performing populaces, both
statewide and nationwide. Likewise, Hispanic and Latino populations comprise
50% of the enrolled students in the 2009-2010 school year in California, which is
6
the most populated state in the nation. Furthermore, there are about 1.5 million
statewide English Learners (EL) with 85% of those pupils whose first language is
Spanish. Nearly 25% of enrolled students are English Learners, and almost half
of all enrolled students qualify for free or reduced meals, a qualifying factor for
Title 1 funding for low-performing schools, typically comprised of urban or inner
city schooling (EdSource, 2007).
Though this data is very disheartening, what is just as disconcerting are
the data regarding insufficiencies in teacher training and staff development to
meet the needs of categorical low-performing and EL learners, particularly
regarding the standards of English Language Arts. In states of heavily populated
English learners (EL's), such as California, English Learner credentials, such as
the CLAD are required of all content instructors; yet disparities remain as 70% of
all certificated teachers are white (as of the 2008-2009 school year) while only
17% and 4% are Latino/Hispanic and African-American, respectfully (EdSource,
2007).
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, (Jones, 2002)
54% of prepared and qualified teachers of public schools taught EL's and lower-
socio demographic populations, yet 17% of that percentage did not believe to be
prepared to instruct students who lack proficiency in English. Nationally, only
2.5% of all teachers who instruct low-performing EL's hold a degree in English as
a Second Language (ESL) or bilingual education while 70% of teachers with
7
English Learners (EL) in their classrooms have never received professional
development in teaching these students (Spaulding, Carolino, and Amen, 2004).
It is quite common for both veteran and novice mainstream teachers to have not
had substantial experience with multicultural or multilingual students nor have
obtained adequate experiences in a diversified classroom, embodied by academic,
socio, and linguistic challenges (Jones, 2002).
Concomitant with the aforementioned data, educators and other
certificated persons, whose primary student populace is of lower performing, EL
subgroups are not fully prepared to meet the arduous academic demands of their
school-sites. Standardized credentialing programs to instruct such subgroups is
simply not sufficient. School-sites must examine their particular data and
engineer professional site training that is not only relevant to their achievement
gaps but will sustain in the cultural thread of the learning community. School-
sites in challenged urban campuses must welcome visionary change towards
improved and relevant site development. Per the direction of experienced and
reputable superintendents, district instructional leaders (such as superintendents,
whose terms in office have provided academic successes in closing achievement
gaps through their innovative merits of site-based staff development systems),
local schools, and administrations will have the instructional archetypes necessary
to foster student achievement.
8
Significance of the Problem
As schools in urban areas seek out organizational strategies to minimize
over-populated campuses and retain more autonomy, achievement gaps and high-
school drop out rates among targeted populaces such as EL and academically-
challenged continue to increase at state levels and nationally. This educational
epidemic is at the forefront of research and debate, as studies maintain that
American public school systems are not meeting the educational needs of such
percentages of subgroups, and instructors are not fully equipped to meet such
challenges. In California alone, approximately 50% of all students in public
schools met proficiency or above in English Language Arts (ELA), while no
subgroup met its Annual Measurable Goal in ELA for the 2009-2010 school year
(California Department of Education). In summary, the data suggests that the
most populated state in the nation consists of roughly 3,000,000 students who
struggle to read and write at their grade level. More so, these students are at-risk
of dropping out at secondary levels and will likely make up the vast percentage of
pupils who either drop out and/or do not receive a GED.
California is not an isolated study. As referenced in the movie Waiting for
Superman, nationally, public schools in urban areas are becoming drop-out
machines as government mandates push for more accountability and academic
outcomes for targeted students remain largely despairing. The majority of
troubled inner city schools have yet to determine specific solutions among
9
campus stakeholders that will effectively diminish student issues associated with
targeted groups. Coupled with more state and national accountability and
potentially diminishing school funding, this conundrum of statistics in public
education could simply escalate in years to come, as local schools are left to
ponder, "How do we fix this problem at our school?"
Purpose of the Study
The purpose for creating this research is to ascertain professional
development planning guidelines that will enable a culture of collaboration among
certificated professionals that can ultimately be employed by campuses of low-
performing statuses. This study addresses target populations of Title 1, English
Learner students, who are struggling academically in secondary, urban learning
environments, and particularly in crucial core-subject matter such as English
Language Arts. Through the methodologies of surveying, observing, and
interviewing superintendents whose endeavors in education have proven to lend
district-wide academic achievements in related disadvantaged communities, the
data and the findings were focused on site-based professional development and
the necessary strategies to support a school climate of engaged educational
professionals. As school-based data indicates that EL/socio-disadvantaged
students are the largest target group, by having consistent, low-proficiency scores
on standardized tests, it was the intent of this study to explore the means of
10
greatly closing these subgroups’ achievement gaps through an interdependent
staff training process. Challenged, Title-1 eligible urban schools are alarmingly
in need of reformed campus practices such as interactive staff training that is
research-based and is focused directly on the pertinent educational needs of its
student populace. Simply repeating failed actions or relying on antiquated
bureaucratic-based programs will not work. The time is now to create and
facilitate school-site-development that is defined by its community, allows for
autonomy, and perseveres as the cultural thread of its campus. Hence, this inquiry
discovered how professional development can be learner-focused, while
advocated and supported by its top curricular leaders—the superintendents, who
preside over their districts and share in the responsibility among all stakeholders
for student learning.
Research Questions
For the purposes of this study, the following questions served as a basis
and as protocol for ascertaining data through interviews and other inquiry
methods from each participating superintendent.
1. As the instructional leaders of their districts, what roles do superintendents
play in their school-sites' professional developments?
2. Which types of methods or resources do superintendents appropriate
towards their school sites to facilitate collaborative professional
development?
11
3. Which professional development strategies do superintendents endorse
that increase proficiency levels in English Language Arts, particularly
among targeted ESL/EL populaces?
4. How do superintendents evaluate school-site collegial development?
Methodology
For the purposes of this study, a mixed method of qualitative and
quantitative research was utilized to answer the aforementioned research
questions. Three veteran superintendents, whose incumbencies and reputations
are indicative of effectual leadership towards student learning in urban schooling,
were interviewed and observed. An online survey instrument was emailed to 30
superintendents within the southern California area, which included open-ended
and close-ended questions as well multiple choice, and one-answer responses.
The quantitative data, such as multiple choice and open/closed responses, were
analyzed to measure the percentage of participants' responses with regard to
experiences related to serving targeted students, endorsed methods of school-site
professional development, its significance towards increased student achievement
in ELA, as well the assessment or evaluation process to measure overall school
achievements and inefficiencies.
The data results were also examined to determine any correlations
between participants' responses and findings from the literature review. The
12
qualitative data were established by the audio taped and transcribed responses of
both field observations and interview sessions from each distinct superintendent
and were analyzed by means of coding subjects' responses into themes and
categories. The researcher employed suggestions from interviewees regarding the
necessity of site-based staff training and delineated how each observed district
leader has unique and similar means of enforcing interdependent staff
development.
Definitions of Terms
API: The Academic Performance Index (API) Report is required by
California's Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) of 1999. This report
shows how much a school is improving from year-to-year based on its API. A
school’s API is a number that ranges from 200 to 1000 and is calculated from the
results for each school’s students on statewide tests. The state has set 800 as the
API target for all schools to meet. Schools that fall short of 800 are required to
meet annual growth targets until that goal is achieved. API targets vary for each
school.
AYP: The Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report is
a series of annual academic performance goals established for each
school, Local Education Agencies, and the state as a whole. Schools, LEAs, and
13
the state are determined to have met AYP if they meet or exceed each year’s goals
(AYP targets and criteria).
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This report shows
how well schools and school districts are meeting common standards of academic
performance as measured by whether the school or school district makes AYP.
Required AYP targets increase yearly until 2013–14 when all schools must have
100% of their students performing at or above the proficient level on statewide
tests. By law, all California schools and school districts receive annual AYP
results.
CAHSEE: The California High School Exit Exam. All enrolled high
school students must pass this test to earn a high school diploma. The test helps
to ensure that students graduate from high school with grade level skills in
reading, writing, and math.
CELDT Testing: California English Language Development Test:
This annual test is given to all ESL students to determine initial placement or
reclassification in English language development (ELD) programs. Students in
kindergarten through grade 12 whose home language is not English are required
by law to take an English skills test in California and help schools identify
students who need to improve their skills in English. Schools also give the test
each year to students who are still learning English.
14
CLAD: Cross Cultural Language and Academic Development
Certificate authorizes instruction to teach EL/ESL students in California.
CST: The California Standards Tests determines standards proficiency
among core subjects such as ELA, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies for
grades 9-11.
EL: English Learner: A student that been an ESL student and has
transitioned out of an ESL program but still may need or qualify for modified
instruction.
ELA: English Language Arts: English core subject matter and its
curriculum, consisting of reading, writing, listening and speaking skills.
ESL: English as a Second Language: Targeted students whose primary
and/or home language is not English; classifications are based upon the EL
language acquisition level(s) that he or she possess as determined from the
CELDT, The California English Language Development Test.
Professional Development: Prepares, trains, and recruits high-quality
teachers, principals, paraprofessionals, and other staff members.
SDAIE: Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English are
modified teaching strategies for students whose first language is not English.
SLC: Small Learning Community: Schools within schools in larger
campuses with more autonomy to develop their own programs or thematic
curriculum.
15
Superintendent: The Chief School Administrator, an individual who has
the highest administrative and executive rights over an educational organization.
Program Improvement: All Title I funded schools and local educational
agencies (Local Educational Agencies) that do not make Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) are identified for Program Improvement (PI) under the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Determinations are made
using 2 years of data for schools and LEAs that receive Title I funds.
Targeted Students: Populations of students who bear specific academic
needs such as low performance in core subject matter and are often of low socio-
economic status. Targeted populaces can be ESL/EL, Special Needs, or a
combination of both.
Title 1 Programs: Categorical federal money allocated to eligible schools
with a qualifying student population to support or supplement academic
improvement.
Assumptions
1. Sunset East High and schools with similar demographics will benefit from
the professional beliefs and recommendations from interviewed
superintendents concerning improved school-site professional
development.
16
2. The responses from interviewees are candid and are to the best of their
knowledge.
3. The chosen superintendents are reputable and knowledgeable leaders of
instruction throughout their district and as determined by their API and
AYP scores.
4. The superintendents have contributed to the facilitation of school-site staff
development for the purposes of improving student achievement,
particularly among targeted groups.
Limitations
1. The external validity of the findings is limited to the responses of three
distinct superintendents, which may not necessarily warrant student
improvement in similar schools or districts from local, state or national
levels.
2. The internal validity of the findings is dependent upon the dialogue and
responses given for the day of interviewing as well the reliability of the
instruments used to collect and record interviews as research data.
3. The researcher is not a superintendent.
4. The subjects interviewed are within the Southern California sector.
17
5. Not all superintendents who chose to answer the online data collection
instrument completed every portion or answered every question, be it
multiple choice, open-ended, or close-ended responses.
Delimitations
1. The interviewed superintendents were three public K-12 superintendents
who had served or worked with educators of low performing targeted
groups.
2. The interviewees were superintendents chosen by the recommendations
and approval of the researcher's dissertation chairs.
3. The interviewees were known throughout the Southern California area for
their knowledge, experiences, and research in professional development.
4. All three interviewees had obtained their Ed.D.
18
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Superintendent as the Instructional Leader
Since the inception of the established American superintendency from the
mid 1800s, the role of the superintendents has evolved from being a managerial
position, overlooking the running of schools, to a much more expanded and
complex supervisory and political position (Andrews & Grogan, 2002). As the
United States became more cognizant of the academic disparities of American
public schooling from such publications as A Nation at Risk (United States
Department of Education, 1983), taxpayers have turned to districts and their
superintendents to provide the authoritative explanations and educational reforms
that the public continues to demand.
Thus began the era of accountability among superintendents as, they have
and will continue to be, the primary responsibility for the economic, political, and
social conditions of their school-sites. From the 1990s and as of present, public
education has become even more intertwined with federal and state policy
makers, and the office of superintendency is reflective of such legislative
enforcements. Most notably is from the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, whereby
the United States Congress mandated higher learning standards and measurable
educational goals for all students enrolled in public schools (United States
19
Department of Education, 2002). Concurrent with today's community concerns
regarding vast learning gaps, especially among inner city schooling, the
instructional leadership component of superintendency continues to advance, as
challenged districts examine further means to produce optimal learning among all
school-sites.
Instructional Leadership: What is it?
Throughout history, the terminology of leadership has taken many forms
as the role of a leader has evolved to meet the demands of his or her constituents.
In the educational world, the head of a district office is no longer limited to top
bureaucratic management, but rather is signified by his or her ability to enact
change without undermining the administrative duties that are necessary for a
school organization (Bolman &, Deal, 1994).
Traditional models of school leadership are no longer compatible with
evolved methods of school improvement. Increased student performance relies
on the investment of pedagogical knowledge and skills, as well the delegation of
instructional leadership for the purposes of successful professional development
(Elmore, 2002). Consequently, a leader of instruction is signified by a district
culture that emphasizes student achievement as the responsibility of everyone,
from the district office to support staff (Mac Iver & Farley, 2003).
20
The instructional leader of today provides continuous, necessary support
and empowers his or her constituents through a system of transformational
change. It is the sheer capability of instructional leadership to facilitate a
democratically guided learning community, as clarity of purpose and core values
become the foundations of a group's endeavors (Ramaley, 2002). Primary goals
that are essential towards the stability and growth of organizations are the
alignment of individual values with collective expectations and are vital
administrative components in the age of school accountability (Elmore, 2005).
Fundamentally, it is the responsibility of a district leader to facilitate
collegiate leadership, as teamwork and the individual talents of team members
will expedite greater solutions concerning student achievement. The overall
managerial role of a superintendent is too vast to be accomplished by one
individual (Bensimon & Neumann, 1994). The fine balance of juggling a district
culture that welcomes innovation and necessitates managerial skills of the 21
st
century is reflective of quintessence effective leadership itself and its impact
towards learning and instruction among all classrooms. From this premise,
substantial research suggests that truly effective leadership regarding student
learning and academic achievement must begin by understanding the
organizational culture and collaborative abilities among school-site stakeholders
(Murphy & Datnow, 2003).
21
By examining the relationships between culture and collaboration within
the school environment, one may better discern the contextual, symbolic qualities
of school leadership, and how positive community involvement is indicative of an
efficacious leader (Bolman & Deal, 1994). Apropos to cultural and collaborative
initiatives from an instructional leader, school administration can become
conduits for cultivating learning organizations, as innovative thinking is both
encouraged and rewarded among constituents, and professional learning becomes
an integrated and accepted process (Senge, 1990). Decisively, an instructional
leader has the foresight to know when and how to affect positive change, even for
the most troubled school-sites. He or she understands that leadership for learning
is not an isolated duty. The successes or failures throughout a term in office rest
upon the collective buy-in from stakeholders as well the cultural shifts from
schools that promote comprehensive student achievement.
Understanding Organizational Culture
A resolute leader is conscious of the social dynamics among learning
environments such as families, businesses, socio-economic associations, and how
such cultural norms and civil involvement are related to successful outcomes in
professional practices. Further, culture and leadership are synonymous (Schein,
2010). The mere creation of groups and organizations, whose membership is
symbolized by shared assumptions, transpires into an accepted form of culture.
22
Thus, the criterion for leadership is compelled by the culture it serves; cultural
functionality and stability are directly linked towards its leadership and his or her
oversight of any group of individuals.
Culture is not only limited to mutual associations; it defines groups'
identities and influences organizational autonomy (Schein, 2010). Schein furthers
that any group's culture can be best examined by understanding its three levels,
which are its level of artifacts, its level of espoused beliefs and values, and its
level of underlying assumptions (Schein, 2010). It is the objective of every leader
who desires organizational change to grasp the underlying assumptions of a
culture before deciphering cultural artifacts, shared values, and behaviors.
Through leadership, mutual assumptions by group members are acquired
by believing in what works and consequently promote cultural stability and
meaning (Schein, 2010). According to Schein, 2010, the first level of culture is
its artifacts, such as the climate of an organization, or shared assumptions.
Although artifacts are apparent to the observer, they can be quite difficult to
discern, as there may be deeper, underlying beliefs from a variety of group
members which are not observable. Additionally, a person's own beliefs in
relation to his or her observation of group artifacts can be biased, such as the
perceived behavior among group members and how the leader interprets such
behavior or cultural practices as either effective or ineffective.
23
The second level relates to the espoused beliefs and values within a
culture. Typically, group members truest ideas or protocols from the direction of
a leader, which are reflective of the values of a leader, are deemed successful by
the groups' perceptions of task outcomes. The espoused morals and shared beliefs
not only serve as the group's conscious; they provide an embedded ideology that
will guide a group's endeavors, even throughout trying circumstances. Yet, to
truly comprehend the intricate patterns of a culture and to anticipate future group
behavior, one must analyze the culture's basic assumptions or psychological
processes that explain how groups define what is important to them and how they
emotionally react to various types of situations. This level is the definitive
measure of a group's identity and character, as individuals and groups
traditionally seek stability and meaning. Therefore, changing basic assumptions
is not only arduous for a group leader; it can be a highly emotional and timely
process. It is critical that leaders are able to assess a variety of assumptions
among a group culture and are equipped to handle the anxiety that is discharged
when such assumptions are challenged (Appendix A).
Additionally, the educational leader not only values culture, as an
atmosphere that promotes trust among staff; they set the tone for interaction
among students while promoting the willingness to change administrative
practices for the betterment of the learning environment (Mulford, Silins, &
Leithwood, 2003). They further their findings of cultural relevance in a school
24
setting by the interdependence of educators and staff members and their beliefs
regarding collegial norms. In other words, the successes of a learning
environment stem from how people are treated and valued by their peers and
administration.
The school culture emphasizes a professional community, whereby
stakeholders act versus react and are involved in a transparent, supportive
decision-making organizational structure. Mulford, Silins, and Leithwood (2003)
demonstrate how these aforementioned elements of a supportive culture
conceivably contribute to relevant professional development. Risk-taking is
encouraged and staff performance is expected to be innovative and reflective
among all participants (Appendix B). Their research advocates for
transformational leadership in a community-focused learning environment, as
teachers perceive the school culture to have productive working relations and the
administrators are responsive to the school community, while incorporating
community values into the school's culture. Accordingly, school leaders must
have high expectations for students and faculty and are encouraged to continually
reflect intellectually about learning practices within classrooms, all of which are
the makings of a comprehensive and productive collegial development (Mulford,
Silins, & Leithwood, 2003).
Conclusively, the abstract yet powerful components of an organization's
culture lend direct structural stability. When examined and understood by
25
leadership, mutual beliefs and goals among group members will become the
driving forces to affect positive change such as a collaborative and integrated
professional development among school-sites.
Professional Collaboration
According to DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, and Many (2006), a true learning
community is evidenced by the commitment to the learning of each student and is
composed of a collaborative group of people who work interdependently to
achieve common goals, for the purposes of learning for everyone. Collaboration
is a means or a process that will influence instructional practices and provide
improved outcomes for students, staff members, and the entire school. Hence, the
very act of collaboration is the fundamental building block towards the
improvement practices of any learning community. However, the mere act of
collaborating will not contribute to school improvement. DuFour, DuFour, Eaker,
and Many (2006), emphasize the importance of staff teams to collaborate on the
right things. For the purposes of improved learning, a professional and
collaborative school structure presents the following four questions to its
stakeholders to determine the right learning practices for the entire student
population.
1. What is it we want our students to learn?
2. How will we know if each student has learned it?
26
3. How will we respond when some students do not learn it?
4. How can we extend and enrich the learning for students who have
demonstrated proficiency?
Concurrent with the aforementioned, the structuring of a professional
collaborative team is crucial towards the achievement of common goals and will
shift the tendency of staff isolation towards individuals in an organization coming
together to achieve a collective purpose. Interdependence, or joint action, is the
catalyst for an organization's productivity, performance, and innovation (Pfeffer
& Sutton, 2000). Often times, the creation of a collaborative work force is not
limited to the knowledge of how to build successful teams but is related to the
acts or steps leadership must take to facilitate collaboration. Pfeffer and Sutton
(2000), refer to this dilemma as the knowing-doing gap, whereby the people
responsible for the transfer and implementation of knowledge or knowledge
brokers have failed in converting group knowledge into group action.
For the purposes of promoting action or collaborative efforts while
reducing a group's dependency of using organizational jargon or talk as a
substitute for action, the following strategies must be in place to facilitate
organizational interdependence.
x Use action-oriented language and have follow-up procedures to
ensure the implementations of decisions that talk results in action, not just more
talk.
27
x Develop an organizational culture that values simplicity not
complexity. Organizational language should be simple, clear, and direct.
x Reframe the objectives when group members believe something
will not work or cannot be done; do not accept excuses or unwarranted criticisms
without offering reasons to overcome obstacles rather than reasons not to try.
x Employ leaders who know how to do the work of the employees;
knowledge acquisition becomes action, as everyone, including management, is
involved in the core principles and process of an organization (Pfeffer and Sutton,
2000).
Furthermore, collaborative cultures do not simply emerge in any school
organization. It is ultimately the responsibility of leadership to nurture
professional collaboration not only throughout professional development but also
as a cultural norm, a means to higher levels of learning from empowered members
of high-performing teams.
Langer, Colton, and Goff (2003), refer to a collaborative culture as
collegiate interactions, as the focus of collaboration is centered on an ongoing
analysis of student work in a supportive and non-judgmental environment.
Through an accepted set of norms that guide behaviors and communication skills,
educators become less inhibited to share the work of their students, particularly of
lower-performing pupils, and will become more open to professional feedback.
This process of collaborative inquiry requires all participants to be more open to
28
solutions and to rethink previously adopted pedagogical strategies that may not be
contributing towards academic achievement.
For participant willingness to ensue, Langer Colton, and Goff (2003)
suggest that group norms act as the ground rules for collaboration and that
communication skills serve as the tools to further a mutually trusting inquiry
process. With regard to communication, often times participants believe that they
must speak to be understood, yet it is through the engagement of effective
listening that group members construct meaning, enabling individuals to convey
what is interpreted through shared ideas. As communication is an artful skill that
requires practice in a group setting, it is through the commitment of the group to
hone their speaking and listening techniques that will lend the most optimal self -
assessment, discussion, and reflection.
Although Langer, Colton, & Goff (2003), advocate for group facilitation,
the selection of a facilitator who is cognizant of the collaborative inquiry process
and is not an administrator is greatly encouraged. The school leader's role is to be
participatory, to shape a school culture and bolster their faculty's involvement in
the group facilitation movement, which will lend transformation among
professional collaborative development within all school environments and
communities. Meaningful and productive collaboration is time consuming, long-
term, and arduous; therefore, it is necessary that leaders adhere to the following
guidelines:
29
1. Schedule time to collaborate; if necessary, restructure the
school day.
2. Attend to what is happening in the collaborative process and
acknowledge victories.
3. Participate in groups and demonstrate a commitment to
professional growth.
4. Allocate for staff incentives and provide the necessary resources
such as related off-site training and/or compensation for group facilitation.
Likewise, four leadership principles are fundamental to the
accomplishments of the collaborative analysis process:
1. Establish a school vision that will shift schools in a purposeful
direction.
2. Promote an inquiry-based culture; be mindful of the behaviors and
interactions of staff, particularly of educators, while promoting systematic
collaboration.
3. Facilitate communal responsibility. When necessary hold faculty
members accountable and generate cognitive dissonance or empower participants
to question current teacher practices and assumptions.
4. Advocate for change and how newly acquired skills or strategies
will benefit students (DuFour & Berkey, 1995).
30
Undeniably, the collaborative process is an imperative and intricate
component of any school organization that seeks positive outcomes and is
analogous with the facilitation of a positive and proactive culture, embedded
throughout school operations. With regard to challenged inner city schooling,
typically the first order of business among leadership is to become familiar with
the accepted norms or culture, to ascertain which shared beliefs are
counterproductive, and to create cultural shifts that will actualize short-term and
long-term goals. Simultaneously, the administrator must induce a feasible,
collaborative process. They must face such realities of a disengaged faculty or
non-productive professional development and provide a succinct system of
protocols throughout teacher-training development that will bridge departments
and personnel (Hancock & Lamendola, 2005). Ergo, the modern and capable
educational leader acknowledges that teacher isolation and meaningless staff-
training must be eradicated. When empowered group members utilize effectual
teaching strategies, everyone benefits, including and most importantly, the
challenged student subgroups.
Subsequently, the benefits of a school culture that supports professional
collaboration through educator development extend value towards the entire
community. Not only is the school culture regulated to improve the quality of
instructional practices among its targeted populaces, its cultural processes
promote a heuristic approach towards skills development and learner assessments.
31
For example, educators are more willing to engage in different strategies or
become more receptive to social factors that are potentially affecting student
performance, as they must repeatedly analyze and reflect upon all determinants
relating to their students' learning environments.
Significantly, group participants feel more connected to the school culture
from this collegial process; their expertise and originality are valued which, in
return, reduces the potential of an isolated campus climate. From a more rigorous
practice of engaged analysis and reflection of student work and standards,
teachers will acquire the necessary tools to complete additional professional
certifications such as National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and
other reputable programs. They will become more familiar with the reflective
process and will be encouraged to evaluate their instructive performances.
Educators will welcome feedback and incorporate responses from team members
as a means of recognizing their own strengths and weaknesses and not as a
belligerent form of criticism within their work environment. As well, the
collaborative process benefits teachers and community organizations. Teacher
participants will have more clarity about student performance and progress. They
will be able to communicate their expectations and findings from targeted
learning areas to parents from documentation, procured throughout the
collaborative process. The analysis of student work renders a summative
evaluation for both parents and teachers. It inadvertently supplies before and after
32
data concerning student progress and specifies areas of improvement through
actual work samples and instructional methods used to close achievement gaps.
This comprehensive process pinpoints what school organizations and departments
necessitate, in terms of providing additional training needed for specific
instructional concepts and not allocating funds for irrelevant or unnecessary
teacher preparation (Appendix C).
Professional Development in the 21
st
Century
Inadequate Systems in Urban Schooling
The highly political and bureaucratically driven American school system
of today is representative of its national agenda to hold all schools, teachers, and
students accountable to higher standards of academia while employing
organizational systems that are indicative of the 19
th
and 20
th
centuries (Elmore,
2002). There are widespread assumptions among school-sites that educators have
had substantial preparation before entering classrooms and that teaching and
administrating should be carried out separate of each other. Likewise,
supplemental training or courses to enhance teacher performance may not mirror
the true issues associated with an educator's students or their learning gaps. Even
on-site workshops provided by districts that present current trends in teaching
methods may lack the connections that are necessary to combat actual challenges
related to learning and instruction (Sparks &, Hirsh, 2000).
33
In an age of heightened accountability, analyzed standardized testing
outcomes, and highly qualified teaching, school organizations have every
incentive to provide and sustain a well-trained faculty and a professional
development that is relative to the particulars of each learning community. A
school leader of today understands that professional development must be results-
driven, connecting subject matter to pedagogy. No longer will status-quo,
disengaged staff trainings be tolerated. Schools should become functional again
to allow for adapted practices and to support shared knowledge regarding learning
and instruction (Elmore, 2002). Appropriately, the focus of all revamped
professional development must be aimed at the real issues, tailored to address the
learning challenges of real issues among students. It is vital that all certificated
staff, policy makers, and community members invest in the knowledge and skills
required by educators (Sparks & Hirsh, 1997).
The District Central Office and its
Relation to Professional Development
As instructional leaders of their districts, superintendents should have
every incentive to invest in the human capital among their educators (Mac Iver &
Farley, 2003). It is the willingness of administration to allocate the resources
necessary to increase teacher knowledge, which sets the stage for large-scale
improvement (Elmore, 2002). Moreover, the district-enforced professional
34
development is representative of the strategic plans offered to certificated staff .
Its practices and results are essentially reciprocal to the demands placed by local,
state, and national accountability measures. Unfortunately, disparities exist
between what is expected or outcomes from the educational system, and what is
actually offered to certificated members to succeed in their endeavors.
Educational research claims that there are widespread gaps between the
instructional vision of a district office and the coordination of advantageous and
supported site-based development.
Traditionally, the role of superintendents towards teacher training has been
characterized by the generic and irrelevant professional development that is
provided by a district, with few direct interactions or connections between school-
site employees and central office administration. It is estimated that more than
40% of district administration's time is spent on activities unrelated to
instructional improvement (Mac Iver & Farley, 2003).
Corcoran, Fuhrman, and Belcher (2001) found that district-sponsored
professional development focused more on the training process rather than the
disciplines of subject matter and content. Their studies concluded, however, from
the observed district leaders, that central offices do wish to provide development
practices that produce results. Yet, gaps in feedback and data from piloted staff-
training programs (that would provide concrete evidence of successful outcomes)
contributed to the demise of an overhauled system. Other reasons of failed
35
development initiatives were simply the lack of focus and coordination among a
district's hierarchically autonomous structure. School-site professional
development notably had different values or various interpretations of teacher
training, that either was not research-based or was not in alignment with district
expectations (Corcoran, Fuhrman, & Belcher, 2001).
The consensus among these studies is that most school leaders want to
invest in the efforts needed to persuade local schools of district-supported
professional development that will greatly assist student achievement in all
classrooms. The question remains as to how to do so and how to transform such
formidable and complex campuses, especially in the epoch of drastic cutbacks in
American education and all of the aftermath that ensues from ongoing fiscal
deficits.
School-Site Professional Development--A Feasible Plan
Whilst the aforementioned research presents a seemingly dire and
unconceivable undertaking for the modern superintendent (and particularly of one
who delegates over urban schooling) to tackle outdated, nonproductive site
development, additional findings among educational researchers advocate that
cost-effective and dynamic professional learning is doable (Timperley, 2008).
Such premises are rooted in the credence that culturally accepted professional
development would serve as an impetus for perpetual responsibility for the
36
learning of students, and mutually for targeted or gifted populaces. Consequently,
the ideal resources for a renovated system of learning begin with the actual
collective individuals who represent each school-site and their cognitive abilities
to put words into action. Accordingly, there is little need to allocate for training
outside of the district as most of the skill building among participants occurs
through the organic process of people who are encouraged to think, are held
responsible, are given time to review what works, and are encouraged to let go of
methods that are plainly not working (Elmore, 2002).
The primary duty for educational leaders who are in charge of creating
collegial staff developments is to effectively put together actual teams, group
members working together to achieve goals, and hold participants accountable
(DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2006). The artful administrator understands
the dynamics of a systematic process or the ways in which people work together
for a particular purpose and how the design of such process will directly influence
educator practice for improved outcomes, as certificated staff not only
acknowledges the need for collaboration but will utilize strategies or ideas,
gathered from collegial participation. Once team membership is conducted, the
ensuing crucial step is for the establishment of group norms, or ground rules that
govern over teams. For example, once a topic is presented, members must have
the interpersonal tools to stay on-task, to consider others' viewpoints, to exhibit
the understanding of verbal and nonverbal communication of all members, and to
37
be willing to speak up when individuals violate norms (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker,
& Many, 2006). Norm development is also an empowering experience. Team
members should generate their own norms, which delegate responsibility to the
participants, thus an endeavor that will not need to be regulated by administration.
Team norms are not to be thought of as a way to control people, yet they are
specific commitments, that when executed favorably can lend substantive results.
However, team norms must be carefully constructed, as they are pathways
for group functionality and provide parameters for dialogue among colleagues
concerning results-oriented educational practices. (Hirsh, Delehant, and Sparks
2006, p. 49). Fundamentally, administrators should delegate responsibility to
team members for the creation of their own group norms. Such norms should be
reflective of the expectations of each individual team. Their commitments to the
team should also be transparent and should serve as guidance for the way teams
are to perform, especially with regard to meeting schedules, discourse, and
confidentiality. Through facilitation of productive dialogue and communication
cues, members are able to maintain the necessary balance of advocacy and
inquiry. They understand that they must engage in meaningful discussions from
individuals' perspectives, assumptions, or reasoning, yet should ask for
clarification when member responses are unclear. Examples of effective use of
protocols include giving concrete examples when team members advocate their
own perspectives and using non-aggressive probing language throughout the
38
group inquiry process. Ultimately, group members must be willing to speak up in
a mutually respectful manner when there is ambiguity concerning their
communicative skills and when individuals violate group norms. Members
should remain proactive with their problem-solving abilities and should realize
the importance of pursuing positive behavior and outcomes. Likewise, norms
should be evaluated. Group practices and procedures are to be reviewed to
determine if goals are actually obtained through mutually respectful efforts
(DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2006) (Appendix D).
District and State Expectations in the Collaborative Process
With regard to district involvement in the aforementioned collegiate
processes, oftentimes district administration and even site-based administrators
presume that site-based management, mission statements, and district goals are
sufficient components of organizational strategies for improved outcomes. From
such common artifacts within an educational culture, there is also a belief that
centralized formal planning facilitates results throughout a variety of
organizations (Mintzberg, 1994). Yet the reality of the matter is that educators
and other school stakeholders can become disorientated or overwhelmed by the
volume of local, state, and national goals, while losing site of what is truly
important for the particulars of students and their learning gaps. As the site
administrator is the gatekeeper of information between the district and his or her
39
staff, it would be most advantageous for superintendents to help schools clarify
and simplify goals, as they are related to district initiatives (DuFour, DuFour,
Eaker, & Many, 2006). An example of this would be the channeling of
information from district office to its schools as one voice. Superintendents must
avoid mixed messages and should commit to goals until they are achieved.
Another valuable enterprise would be to become more personally connected to
school-sites by soliciting feedback from site-based leadership. One example of
such inter-office response would be to conduct surveys between superintendents
and site administrators, soliciting such specific questions as, "What do you feel
are the top three priorities of the district?" or "What supports need to be changed,
restructured, or created, to enhance your school improvement efforts?" (DuFour,
DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2006, pp. 123-125). Other survey or questionnaire
topics would include an assessment by individual local schools to determine
specific areas of improvement such as professional development, data analysis,
and curriculum development within explicit departments, all contributing to
comprehensive school reform and student achievement through collegial
participation.
Data Analysis and School Wide Expectations
Perhaps two of the most definitive tools utilized throughout the
professional development process are the capabilities of certificated faculty to
40
analyze student data and to relate such findings towards improved teaching
methods and greater school efficacy (Cotton, 1989). In accordance with Langer,
Colton and Goff (2003), the ability to analyze in a collaborative manner the
individuality of students' work is most beneficial for at-risk, lower-performing
students, as it pinpoints target areas of strengths and weaknesses and subsequently
provides for greater learning acquisition and learner possibilities. Cotton (1989),
found that students in low-achieving schools were viewed often times by faculty
as being limited in their learning aptitudes. Inappropriate or incomplete school
data such as negative remarks from staff members or reports from tracking
systems often advance inappropriate expectations among low socio-economic
pupils, and such biases are difficult to change, reciprocally, without the
facilitation of collegial staff development. Hence, it is compulsory that all
faculties, particularly educators, are cognizant of appropriate data analysis and are
instructed as to how to employ their findings constructively, not only in their
classrooms, but also throughout the staff development process.
As discussed earlier, no professional development strategies can be
actualized until group norms (and communication skills) are formed and
embedded into the culture of the collaborative process. Once established, the
fundamental objective is to verify The Target Learning Area, or "to determine
what it would look like if students reached grade-level expectations" (Langer,
Colton, & Goff, 2003, p. 75). Although Target Learning Areas (TLA) are often
41
ambiguous concepts (as multiple state and national learning standards have their
own definitions of benchmarks, which may not be reflective of the circumstances
of individual schools) selecting target areas can become an obtainable process, if
predicated on the following aspects.
x The TLA is challenging and necessitates improvement.
x The TLA correlates with definitive standards.
x The TLA integrates high order thinking skills into cross-curricular
concepts, such as developing expository essays that are reflective
of science or math concepts (Langer, Colton, & Goff, 2003).
The next step or phase is to analyze assessments and identify targeted
students. The most useful data would be to access school-site disaggregated
results from standardized testing and periodic assessments, which specify
performance strands that correlate with state standards and the rubrics for
determining proficiency within such targeted contents (Langer, Colton, & Goff,
2003). These segments allows for educator participants to record descriptive
analyses of students not meeting their TLA or the desired criteria and are able to
unpack from their findings and to look for patterns in knowledge gaps. This
measure allows groups to form student clusters (common learning issues among
learners, shared by group findings) which can then become the focus students ,
whereby the instructional challenges should be examined over the subsequent
42
meetings and group insight from engaged members thereupon arbitrate over the
development of revised instructional strategies.
Likewise, this phase is not designed to be exclusive towards the lowest
performing targeted group. Proficient or basic students may indicate special needs
such as greater challenges or motivational learning, which can likely be detected
and addressed throughout this data analysis process.
The successive levels of group collaboration involve a more detailed
analysis of student work and allocate for the review and reflection among
participants. Langer, Colton, & Goff (2003) provide four stages that will compel
favorable group data collection through this inquiry practice.
1. The group observes and describes without judgment what is noted
from student work. Examples include, “Student has difficulty understanding
testing instructions. Student is a visual learner and needs more scaffolding.”
2. The group analyzes student work by considering factors that act as
a hindrance towards student progress, such as student interests, prior learning
experiences, cognitive development, etc.
3. The group produces a plan for expediting short-term goals by
asking questions to members. “Which pedagogical methods will further short-
term learning goals” (e.g., instructor feedback, grouped learning)? “Which skills
or information should students learn next to achieve short-term goals?”
43
4. The educators carry out group plans and experiment with
suggested strategies from this process. They accumulate student work that
illustrates progress or explains why agreed suggestions are contributing towards
student achievement.
The final phases are more characteristic of a summative evaluation
process, as groups analyze students' progress from reporting periods or semesters
and reflect upon classroom experiences, stemmed from group discussions and
pedagogical endeavors. These components are integral functions of the total
group analysis system, since cumulative data from standardized testing such as
the California Standard Test (CST's) or California High School Exit Exam
(CAHSEE) serves as a measure to determine any changes in students' aptitude of
core subject matter. Furthermore, this assessment process can highlight which
revamped instructional methods work or simply do not work for the targeted
student. From this assertion, group members will be able to build upon their
knowledge base for the ensuing school years, as data is collected, strategies are
discussed, and plans are in motion to continue in the journey towards
comprehensive student achievement and closed learning gaps. Hence, there must
be allocated time to reflect upon their successes and to examine other means of
broadening or honing their teaching skills for areas of instruction that still need
improvement. Additionally, teachers who are engaged in the collaborative
analysis process should be encouraged to celebrate their victories and should
44
receive acknowledgement for their individual and group successes (Langer,
Colton, & Goff, 2003).
The Comprehensive Educational Leader—a Closing Reflection
All of such favorable endeavors are predicated by the irrevocable support
of district leadership and from the widespread expectation that students can and
will improve in their learning abilities. From an administrative perspective, and
pertaining to the district's educational leader, the superintendency must be fully
invested in aforementioned processes (Bolman & Deal, 2008). Not only must the
support be pervasive, it must transcend into high-performing teams that allow for
flexibility that releases collective energy and creativity. Supported teamwork
essentially translates into the sheer ability to produce a common purpose and to
achieve established goals, in response to a demand or opportunity relinquished by
upper management. It is through the vision of leadership that enables mutual
accountability among collegial groups and that encourages cognitive dissonance,
to challenge repeated educational practices for the purposes of discovering
instructional or learning discrepancies. Likewise, superintendents must engage in
the professional development process and must value professional growth. Group
members will appreciate the efforts made on behalf of the superintendent's office
either to participate as a learner or to personally engage members in open
45
discussion about the successes or dynamics of their teamwork (Langer, Colton, &
Goff, 2003).
From a greater outlook, the first step towards school improvement is to
acknowledge that potentially, current practices among teacher development are
counterproductive towards improvement itself (Elmore, 2002). Despite all
current reforms to enable more autonomy among educational staff such as pilot
schools and small learning communities (SLC's), educators are still working in
isolation, with little or no structure "to engage in continuous and sustained
learning about their practice in the setting in which they actually work" (Elmore,
2002, p. 29). Discipline of improvement not only requires internal accountability
(assigning causality to stakeholders within a school organization and not just
among external forces such as parents and community members) but also a re-
prioritizing in the way that educators receive professional growth and the
resources allocated to actually improve student achievement. The overhaul of a
professional development system, particularly among schools that are steeped in a
culture of dysfunction, pessimism, and low performance, inevitably will be an
arduous transaction, and yet an urgent transaction (Elmore, 2002).
The time has arrived in education for leaders to examine ways to
incorporate competence by differentiating roles of autonomous groups, such as
teachers becoming team facilitators and administrators as delegates over
comprehensive school-reform systems (Togneri & Anderson, 2003). The
46
superintendent of today's demanding learning environment is a solution seeker
from all human, financial, and external realms. His or her capacity to solve
problems rather than dwelling on prevailing issues furthers "a solution-oriented
ethos in districts" (Togneri & Anderson, 2003, p. 36). Findings from
abovementioned educational studies suggests that the efficacious and determined
superintendent does not hide from poor results or low student-performance among
school-sites, but rather uses public data as a wake up call. The superintendent
seizes the opportunity, not to point blame, but to collectively hold the district
office and school faculties collectively responsible, while explaining to public
members that teaching is not the sole culprit as there are other factors beyond the
control of the classroom that contribute to low-achievement rates (Togneri &
Anderson, 2003).
With school reform and accountability on the educational forefront, it is
paramount to recognize that any long-term sustainability towards educational
improvement involves a direct alignment in the cultural logic of school systems
from district leaders into the daily operations of local school communities
(Datnow, 2005). Reform models that prevail in challenged schools, can assist
teachers with their unique endeavors, while enforcing mutual accountability. In
essence, that is the role of the superintendent, which is to support and to sustain
progressive, educational reform.
47
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The previous chapters demonstrated two instrumental concepts in
educational administration concerning the superintendence of American inner-city
public schooling. Widespread learning disparities among targeted students of
urban schools remain perplexing, and the facilitation of site-based professional
development, under the guidance and support of school leadership, is crucial
towards combating vast learning gaps, even among the most challenged
campuses. The aforementioned data and research highlight the significance of
Title 1-eligible students, their particular challenges concerning low-socio
economic and/or English learner statuses, and how their consistently low
proficiency in core subject matter, particularly of English Language Arts, is
relevant towards the means by which their academic issues are addressed.
Subsequently, it is through the vision and delegation of an instructional leader
who promotes professional and collegial learning communities, by which all
affiliates share in the responsibility and participation of improved or feasible
pedagogical strategies, relevant for the particulars of the individual school and the
pupils it serves.
Hence, the purpose of this study was to acquire a greater perspective of an
interdependent and student-centered development through the context of
48
instructional leaders who have served over site-based school management
campuses, whose supervisions have influenced collaborative staff developments,
and the student-related outcomes of such administrations, particularly of learning
improvements among targeted populaces. The premise of this study was to better
understand how superintendents empower or influence site administrators and
certificated staff to convert standard professional banked time into a system of
collaborative inquiry and learner-centered processes. The data collected
indicates:
x Breadth and depth of superintendents' involvement towards the
instruction of his or her students' populations.
x The educational practices that were reflective of their administration and
their research towards collegial endeavors to close achievement gaps.
x The various educational practices that are reflective of the instructional
leaders’ administration and their applications towards their targeted
ESL/EL learners.
x The management of available resources to conduct such improved staff
trainings related to school or student improvement.
x The outcomes of such practices that were believed to be successful in
their specific districts.
The data presents to districts in public school systems of similar
demographics, how revamped efforts among collaborative site-based professional
49
development is not only beneficial to the most challenged learner, yet is feasible,
even in an era of fiscally challenged district budgeting. Additionally, the research
from this study implicitly denotes the role of the superintendent as the educational
leader of his or her district, whose concentration and commitment towards
excellence in education is indicative of advantageous outcomes among varied
student populaces. Specifically, how does the modern superintendent of urban
schooling lead troubled schools with such great numbers of low-performing, Title
1 eligible subgroups? How will instructional leadership efficaciously direct his or
her staff, as schools are still held accountable by state and federal standards while
staff positions and fiscal resources are continually reduced? From current
economic downfalls contributing to the school budget crises, how will
superintendents overcome such obstacles while commissioning their site
administration and staff members to achieve learner-specific goals, even in the
most volatile campuses?
Sample Size and Population
The sample size and population for this study were gathered from a very
low-performing high school within the Hollywood, California community. The
campus, Sunset East High School, was chosen based upon four criteria:
1. The API score of this school is statistically much lower than state and
district averages, within the 540 API range from three consecutive school years.
50
2. The school is Title 1–eligible and serves a minority majority populace
with a significant number of EL/ESL and low socio-economic pupils.
3. The campus is currently limited in its fiscal resources and is not able to
purchase training for staff development purposes.
4. The population and sampling are representative of similar urban
schools in the surrounding Southern California area as well throughout inner city
schooling in the United States.
Patton (2002) emphasized the merits of conducting purposeful sampling,
the process of gathering nonrandom data in an information-rich site for the
purposes of obtaining a more in-depth understanding of such populaces and
illuminating key issues concerning a particular site. Sampling was also based
upon the criteria that are relevant and applicable to similarly challenged schools.
The sampling size of school data, superintendent interviews, surveys, and
question responses were appropriate for this study. Patton (2002) argued "There
are no rules for sample size in qualitative study" (p. 244) as this research is
primarily based on the findings of a qualitative design.
Overview of Sunset East High School
Sunset East High School was a newly opened campus that received its
primary student data by the transfer of its student populace from neighboring,
over-crowded, and year-round schools. Campus community members such as
51
teachers, administrators, and parents were aware of the low ELA performance of
its targeted students such as English Learners, who qualif ied for Title 1 funding,
and were considered socio-economically disadvantaged. For the 2009-2010
school year, roughly 80% of this subgroup did not meet proficiency in the
English/Language Arts portion of the California Standards Test. Additionally,
only 54% of these pupils (both genders) passed the ELA California High School
Exit Exam in the same school year (Appendix E). The CAHSEE (which is based
primarily on 8
th
grade state standards) assesses students' knowledge and skills in
both reading and writing content areas and is required for graduation.
Conclusively, there were major learning gaps in the ELA curriculum
among this demographic, as both of these assessments measure students' aptitude
of the ELA Standards and as referenced from the California Department of
Education. Advantageous solutions for this learning disparity are critical for two
premises: Students become more at-risk of not obtaining their high school
diploma if they continue to fail their CAHSEE exam, and/or they will not pass
their required ELA classes.
School Demographics and Organization
Sunset East High School served grades 9-12, provided services to
approximately 1,600 students with an ethnic population of 2.0% African-
American, 82.5% Hispanic or Latino, 9.4% Armenian, and less than 10% of all
52
other ethnicities. Of these students, 40% were ESL/ English Learners (EL), 12%
of students received Special Education services, and 90% of the students were
considered socio-economically disadvantaged, as they received free/reduced price
meals and qualified as school- wide, Title 1 eligible.
Sunset East High School had a certificated staff of 64 members, 4
administrators, 4 counselors, a librarian, augmented by a nurse, part-time
psychologist, and part-time Pupil Services and Attendance counselor. A
classified staff of 20 members, including Special Education Assistants, supported
the certificated staff . Nearly 80% of the school's faculty was considered "Highly
Qualified" under the federal provisions of No Child Left Behind (United States
Department of Education, 2002) and had obtained their Cross Cultural Language
and Academic Development certification, which met the requirements to teach
English Language Learners in the state of California. (This credential was
imperative, as there were significantly high percentages of students from grades
9-12, who were ELL's, low-performing, and socio-disadvantaged.) For the
purposes of creating a more diverse educational environment in a challenged,
urban school-site, Sunset East High School housed three Small Learning
Communities for all grade levels. Students were able to choose their community
based upon their interest in the career paths offered from the curriculum of Arts
Media and Entertainment, Science Technology Engineering and Medicine, or
Business Technology and Labor Relations.
53
The certificated faculty met once a week during their professional
development banked time, either by their community or by their curriculum
department. The agendas were designated from the school-wide administrator,
were delegated out by the assistant principal of each SLC or departmental chair,
and were of similar content for each SLC or departmental meeting, such as data-
analysis and/or ongoing (school-wide) project-based learning. Furthermore,
Sunset East High School stakeholders were fully cognizant of the students'
learning challenges; the Academic Performance Index average was 540, and the
school was at Program Improvement status.
Data Collection Practices
This mixed- method study utilized both quantitative and qualitative
measures throughout the interviews, observations, written responses, and data
analysis processes in this triangulation-based research inquiry. According to
Patton (2002) triangulation enhances the data collection process. As each method
exposes unique components of evidence, various methods of observations must be
exercised. The intention of this applied research case study was to spotlight a
societal issue, such as the vast numbers of low socio-economic subgroup of
students in American public schooling, who were continually performing well
below proficiency in core subject matters such as English Language Arts. This
inquiry ascertained, through data descriptive approaches, both formative and
54
summative evaluations of the professional development practices throughout
school districts, whose student and school demographics were comparable to
those of Sunset East High (for the purposes of explicating teacher-training
effectiveness, its relation to student achievement, and general teacher quality).
Concomitantly, the quantitative data from Sunset East High test scores
from standardized testing mitigated as the premise for determining low
performance for the purposes of this inquiry, as disaggregated data from this
school-site revealed subgroup performances from each curricular strand within
the ELA portions of both the CAHSEE and the CST exams. The subjects who
were surveyed, interviewed, and observed were all superintendents within the
Southern California area. The criteria for choosing the subjects were that
superintendents were employed during the data collection process, they served or
had served inner city, low-performing pupils more than one school year, and they
were within close proximity to the researcher. The online data collection
instrument, including open-ended and close-ended questions, was created by the
researcher and comprised three sections: the superintendents' backgrounds and
experiences in education, professional development and student achievement
methodologies, and assessments of their districts' certificated staff (Appendix F).
The superintendents' replies were measured to determine their central tendencies
using descriptive and interferential statistics through data point computations
from Survey Monkey's online data analysis Results and Reponses assortment.
55
The intent was to not only create a visual data set that would determine the
percentages of the collected responses but also to make inferences from a sample
of this study's population, based upon the characteristics of the selected sample
(Salkind, 2011). Furthermore, this measurement was designed for the purposes of
achieving validity and reliability, in that this inquiry instrument from Survey
Monkey provided for statistical deductions from the collected data, comparing the
student-test scores (from Sunset East High School) to the subjects' responses,
pertaining to their demographics and targeted groups, which were assumed to be
unbiased and truthful .
The open-ended responses, interviews, and observations of subjects were
analyzed through qualitative methods. Patton (2002) stated that the purpose of
open-ended responses is "to enable the researcher to understand and capture the
points of view of other people without predetermining those points of view
through prior selection of questionnaire categories" (p. 21). The open-ended
questions in this inquiry were employed to provide a framework that would allow
for subjects' responses regarding their perspectives and professional opinions
concerning collegial staff site training. They were also utilized to compare the
subjects' responses from the on-line questionnaires, as both were e-mailed
together to inquiry and interview participants. Yet, for the purpose of capturing
how interview subjects viewed the world, to learn their terminology and
judgments, and to better understand a person's complex perceptions and
56
experiences, the interview process was conducted among three analogous
participants (Patton, 2002).
Open-ended questions and close-ended questions were both applied, as it
was vital to obtain as much data from subjects within the time allowed and to
render succinct responses from subjects. Participants were asked a series of
questions, which comprehensively depicted their perceptions of collaborative
professional development practices at school-sites, and how their role as an
instructional leader influenced or shaped collegial practices throughout their
districts, particularly in low-performing secondary schooling. To enrich the
interview process, the researcher spent additional time for fieldwork observations
of the superintendents in their offices. The objective for this activity was to
capture the context by which people interact and to discover attributes about the
subject's environment that may not be noticed while interviewing. Observations
also provided for the researcher to learn of attributes that subjects may not be
willing to talk about during an interview (Patton, 2002).
Data Analysis Procedures
The researcher began the data analysis process by focusing on the primary
purpose of the study, which was to solicit valid and reliable data from the subjects
regarding school-site professional practices that would improve student
achievement. The inquiry data was organized by its units of analysis such as the
57
superintendents' responses, Sunset East High School measurements, and notes
from observations. The design or control of this study was primarily a qualitative,
naturalistic inquiry, by which the researcher did not attempt to manipulate the
phenomenon studied in a real world setting (Patton, 2002). As this inquiry
utilized mixed-methods, content, thematic, and statistical analyses were
appropriated, as there were multiple data sources, primarily from qualitative
aspects. For the data that were assigned numerical values, the visual
categorization from Survey Monkey quantified the survey instruments through
subjects' answers through graphs and charts.
Subsequently, the researcher reviewed the notes and responses from the
participants' interviews, surveys, open-ended questions, and observations. The
researcher arranged the data into categories such as superintendents' experiences,
thoughts, or practices. The responses were coded for similarities or patterns
throughout the analysis process, and the researcher compared the findings to the
Literature Review in Chapter 2. The data was then organized into sections such
as superintendents' suggestions, data plans, professional development tools, and
evaluation practices. The researcher tabulated the collections, accordingly to the
aforementioned comparisons throughout the analysis process, and appropriated
the research findings, from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives.
Additionally, all interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim. The
audio-taped responses were reviewed along with field notes and earmarked for
58
any supplementary findings or discoveries that would render more comprehensive
information. Additionally, the online company, Survey Monkey, provided the
framework and online management for the data collection process. The online
company provided analysis instruments, not only the percentages of subject
responses for each category (as mentioned previously), but the online instrument
created text analysis—an analytical feature that highlights themes from typed
responses. Furthermore, all of the aforementioned resources provided by Survey
Monkey's data services were contributory towards the data collection and analysis
practices. The researcher likewise documented time constraints or logistic
concerns, as accessibility or allotment of time between the researcher and the
subjects were legitimate concerns.
Ethical Considerations
The data collected in this inquiry was submitted and approved by the
Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California.
Further, Sunset East High School's name was changed for the purposes of this
study, and all of the school information and its data were collected from the
public website of California Department of Education. Student and employee
names or contact information were not published at any time during this inquiry.
Subjects were referenced by a code, and all responses were documented as
anonymous. Interviewees and subjects were mailed or e-mailed letters asking for
59
their voluntary participation prior to data collection. They were also fully aware
of tape recording devices throughout the interview process and were told by the
researcher when they were being recorded. Moreover, at any time, the subjects
could request to comment off record. Any names or identifications of privileged
information obtained throughout the data collection process were omitted or given
alias descriptions.
60
CHAPTER 4
QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS
The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview of the data analysis
process and its findings, as well to provide data descriptors that explicate the data
collection methods and the subjects' responses regarding the aforementioned
research questions. The results of the three types of data collection methods—
online surveys and questionnaires, interviews, and observations—are cited from
the researcher from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives. The
quantitative findings were generated by Survey Monkey's text and data analysis
services from all online responses from the subjects, who were superintendents
within the Southern California area. The interviews and observations of
superintendents were qualitative-based and were analyzed accordingly. The
questioning and observation process were constructed with the intent of collecting
a vast spectrum of descriptive accounts, from the subjects' environment,
mannerisms, and their means of responding, synthesized with the intent to
expound upon four research questions, from one-on-one discussions of individual
interviews with three selected superintendents. The selected superintendents have
held office within Southern California and were chosen for the knowledge of
serving diversified districts, from certificated staff members to student populaces.
Furthermore, the focal point throughout the data collection process was to
61
ascertain knowledge from all selected participants concerning school-site
professional development methods that would best assist targeted low-performing
students. The subjects were chosen based upon their experiences as instructional
leaders of their districts whose professional training methods were endorsed and
supported from their district offices, whose leadership facilitated academic
growth, and closed achievement gaps, particularly in English Language Arts
among targeted ESL/EL elementary and secondary populaces (similar to the
demographics of Sunset East High School).
Research Question # 1
As the instructional leaders of their districts, what roles do superintendents
play in their school-sites' professional development?
Overview of Subjects' Background and Experiences
as Instructional Leaders
Qualitative responses. From the data findings, the subjects' participation
in their district-wide professional training derives from their previous experiences
from their various assignments (which includes serving targeted disadvantaged
students) prior to becoming superintendents, such as previous teaching
assignments, teacher specialists, directors of professional development, student
services programs, as well administrative duties. (Not all interviewees had
62
pertinent responses to fully answer each question.) Two interviewees had the
following various responses:
Interviewee 2: Being a teacher is one of the most important things in
becoming a Superintendent. By the time you become a Superintendent,
those memories of teaching are more distant. Yet, I think that that was a
critical part of becoming a superintendent. You are always a teacher.
However, I will say that the most recent one, when I was Director of
Human Resources, was critical for becoming a Superintendent, to really
understand what was going on in the district and the legal aspects such as
working with lawyers, union officials, etc.
Interviewee 3. I taught for 15 years and I taught all grade levels from 1
st
grade through 8
th
grade. I was the teacher on special assignments when
we went year-round. I was the year-round specialist for the district and
was a special projects teacher. I worked with all the Title I kids and the
Gate kids, and the EL kids at an elementary school, and then became an
assistant principal at both a small school, and then a very large K5, four
tracks, year round, with about 1,400 kids. I was also president of the
Teachers Association for 6 years and that was great training. I have to
say, every single one of those assignments gave me the skills that I have
today. Being a principal gives you a special skills-set just like being a
classroom teacher gives you a special skills-set so I think that I couldn’t
pinpoint one of those jobs that best prepared me, as it was just a
cumulative end result of everything that I have done over the years.
Quantitative Findings
The following display shows percentages of assignments prior to becoming
superintendents from surveyed participants:
x Assistant Principal - 45%
x Director - 36%
x Assistant Superintendent - 36%
63
x Administrator - 18%
x Services - 18%
Regarding the average number of years of service as a superintendent among
all surveyed and interviewed was 7 years, and all serve or have served Title 1
eligible students.
Table 1
Does Your District Serve Title 1 Students
Answer Response Percent
Yes 100%
No 0%
The majority of superintendents (90%) had targeted sub-groups within
their districts such as ESL/EL or low-socio-economic.
Table 2
Targeted Subgroups
Are there substantial targeted student subgroups (such as EL/ESL
or low socio-demographic) in your district, whose test scores are
below proficiency?
Response
Percent
Yes
90.9%
No
9.1%
64
The average demographics of students enrolled in districts from the
surveyed superintendents were 65% Latino/Hispanic, 10% Asian, 10% African-
American, and 15% White or Other. The largest targeted-group among all
responses were ESL/EL (majority Latino). African-American and Special Needs
populaces were noted as having low proficiency scores in various strands of the
English Language Arts standards. Some of the superintendents had been assigned
or were currently in office of schools that were classified as Program
Improvement.
School-Site Professional Development—
the Superintendents' Perspective
Qualitative responses. All subjects interviewed, observed, and surveyed
believed that school-site professional development is necessary and is a critical
component of closing achievement gaps. Participants expressed their views
through various responses, but the resonating text regarding instructional leaders
of educator development was the ability to target the specific needs of each
individual school site. Interviewees 1 and 3 further explained this.
Interviewee 1. Each principal prepares an overview of the goals and
academic needs of their school site in a daylong workshop before the
school year begins. They also collaborate with our professional
development specialist, the technology person, the EL specialist, and me.
Then the principals take their itemized goals and plans to their staff
members, and they work together to develop strategies to best accomplish
their targeted areas through school-site professional time. We help our
65
principals and district specialists with their school plans to identify, and to
retain focused and appropriate goals for the coming year. Then, we ask
that they align their goals with district-wide expectations so the Board has
approved goals for both student achievement and other areas. Additional
areas are parent involvement and employee wellness, which our district
deems necessary for successful staff trainings and year-round goal
obtainment.
Interviewee 3. The research shows that when you provide professional
development that is applicable to the people who are receiving that
professional development, they are more inclined to use it and become
proficient at it than just providing a “one size fits all” professional
development. The needs at site A are going to be very different from the
needs at site B. I may have a school that is really struggling with writing
instruction and another school that is really struggling with building
academic vocabulary. The professional development of those two sites
needs to be specific to the needs of those sites. Therefore, I have charged
my principals with making sure that they determine what those needs are
and meet the needs of their sites while still providing some level of
common professional development. I really want them to tailor and alter
their professional development to fit their needs.
The following responses were obtained from the online data collection
instrument with regard to how superintendents—the instructional leaders of their
school districts—engage in the school-site professional development process.
x Bring teachers into the design and delivery of all professional
development.
x There must be a respectful culture that promotes teacher leadership related
to teaching and learning.
x Our district has Small Learning Communities at each school which are
supported through distributed leadership.
66
x Provide time (release time or extra hourly) and
structures/materials/resources which support collaboration.
x Facilitate training on developing professional learning norms and
processes.
x This year we will have the Educational Services team work with the
principals to use our Thursday afternoon planning times to work on
effective instruction.
x We collaborate with the leadership team made up of teachers and
administrators.
x I work with the principals and leadership teams to ensure that professional
development is meaningful.
x I provide release time for teachers to work in groups to evaluate data and
discuss strategies and needs of students. I facilitate tools for collecting
data and require site administrators to facilitate collaboration at each site.
x We (our district office) started by negotiating a district-wide weekly
modified day for collaboration, purchased a new student-information
system, and trained administrators and teachers on how to review and
respond to student data.
x Resources must be allocated; time and money must be well invested if you
want greater results.
67
Data Summary for Research Question # 1
As determined by the data, the subjects altogether agreed that school-site
professional development is necessary for improved academic achievement and
regarded themselves as responsible players and agents of change for the particular
demands of every campus in their districts. They seemed to be very familiar with
the ongoing dilemma of how to best reach targeted groups and realized the
significance and impact of district-supported and collaborative-based professional
development. The superintendents also realized that their prior assignments and
experiences in the educational profession had prepared them to become more
successful as instructional leaders. They recognized that they must be able to
practice what they preach as they may be asked to model a professional
development practice among staff members to continue to earn the respect of their
peers.
One of the greatest roles as an instructional leader that was recited
numerous times throughout this analysis was to be a collaborator throughout all
meetings. The superintendents began their school year as visionary planners of
innovative and appropriate professional growth and allocated time for
interdependent discussions with their administrative staff. Consequently, these
methods contributed to their principals' empowerment and expectations of school
site collegial endeavors towards meaningful staff training. From the art of
collaboration, the ability to formulate specific goals towards student achievement
68
begins. The practices of listening, working together, establishing specific goals,
and providing the necessary support all contributed to individual and group
successes, from K-12 settings, to very low-performing or low-socioeconomic
student populaces.
Additionally, the instructional leaders must be data interpreters and must
know when and how to use data (such as school demographics and test scores)
throughout collaborative, goal-driven meetings and conferences. They must also
instruct their staff as to how to utilize school data in order to appropriate the most
optimal educator trainings.
Research Question # 2
Which types of methods or resources do superintendents appropriate
towards their school sites to facilitate collaborative professional development?
The Magnitude of a Vision from Instructional
Leadership and its Relation to Sustaining
Collaboration from the District Office to Campus Stakeholders
Emphatic school-wide collaboration begins with the vision and relentless
reinforcement from district instructional leaders who not only understand the
value that collaboration brings to a staff training, but also have the know how to
put their words into action. Most subjects either surveyed or interviewed
69
associated the realization of interdependent faculty members with their districts'
vision or a clear purpose that drives and nurtures the collaborative process. In
essence, the successes of a collaborative staff begin with the dedication and
mutual beliefs from superintendents, whose core values of mutual support,
guidance, and professional responsibility through distributed leadership are all the
makings of a very engaged and productive staff, even in the most challenged
school sites.
Qualitative Reactions from Interviewees Regarding
a District's Purpose or Vision and their Correlations
to Successful Collaboration Throughout the School Year
Interviewee 1. I think what inspires people is a vision that elicits hope,
energy, and enthusiasm. For example, if you worked in a school district
with high poverty and many, many challenges and you are able to inspire
people with stories of success and encouragement about your vision of
effective teaching, these ideas will become tools of empowerment to your
educators which will likely translate into the classroom.
Interviewee 2. You have many choices being a professional you can go
down a million different roads for PD. You really have to have a focus.
There needs to be a vision and it needs to be a shared vision. It should not
just be the leader’s vision. I think that is often where we as administrators
make mistakes. It needs to be a collaborative vision with the staff, and I
think that is when the purpose becomes apparent. Then you link your
professional development to the vision. I think that is very important to
do, and it is easier said than done. It usually takes more than one year. It
takes many, many years actually. In addition, I think that part of
developing the shared vision and the mutual collaboration process is that
the teachers need to be a part of those practices, and it should not be
imposed upon them. You may have to nurture it along, and you are going
to have teachers who are going to be resistant and difficult. That is part of
70
the culture we have to recognize, and the course of action can be very
laborious. However, if you include the teachers in the process of
developing the vision and the methodology of how faculty members will
increase student achievement, then administrators will often obtain
devoted and engaging support from their peers and educators. Also, do
not bring in a speaker for professional development so that everybody has
to pay attention because this is what we are going to do now in our
schools. That rarely works well.
Table 3
Quantitative and Qualitative Replies from Online Survey
Question/Response Response Percent
Should school administrators facilitate
a campus vision that will promote
student achievement?
School administrators should always
facilitate a campus vision that will
promote student achievement.
100%
School administrators should
sometimes facilitate a campus vision
that will promote student achievement.
0%
School administrators should never
facilitate a campus vision that will
promote student achievement.
0%
The question was also asked: How do you facilitate a campus vision that
will promote student achievement?
x Engage in courageous conversations related to expectations and look
at data for decisions. The data guides the conversations.
x The district establishes the direction to move, and coordinates efforts
between schools.
71
x The principal must work collaboratively with staff, look at student data
and evidence, set goals, and motivate staff to achieve goals.
x Be the instructional leader.
x I make sure everyone knows the vision for the school. The vision was
developed by the entire staff and everyone must buy into it. My role is
to make sure all decisions at the school are made with the vision in
mind.
x It is necessary for all stakeholders to participate in creating a vision to
promote student achievement. All staff needs to be involved. Parents
and students need to be a part of creating the vision.
x Creating a district vision and charging site leaders with developing a
site vision that involves all stakeholders.
Student-Centered Learning
Once districts and school sites enact upon their plans as to how they will
achieve their goals, the art of implementing a learner-focused collaborative staff
must take shape and sustain throughout the school year. As highlighted earlier,
instructional leaders must have an exact vision with faculty buy-in, which will
enable professional development and will address the particular demands of each
campus.
72
Therefore, what is a learner-focused collaborative staff and how does an
instructional leader create a culture of motivated professionals and uphold such
endeavors, especially in low socio-economic school populations? Qualitative
answers to the aforementioned question are presented from perspectives from the
following interviewees.
Interviewee 1. I think the main thing is that the teachers (this is partly my
philosophy about what works and what does not work), some people, and
some leaders are very directive and adult learners do not like to be
directed. They like to develop their own learning goals and be provided
with resources to pursue goals for themselves and their students. What
really works is when principals are able to support teachers in identifying
what they want to work on and adapt their teaching methods from district
guidance. Consequently, there is a lot of differentiated PD that needs to
happen. It is difficult at the district office level to come up with
meaningful activities for such an array of teachers from everything from a
middle school PE teacher to a kindergarten teacher, or a music teacher.
For example, we ask our educators to look at student engagement and
learning objectives. That is what we are trying to do—to engage teachers.
We speak to them and let them select what they can identify as an area of
need that they have as a teacher. Then we look at the evidence that is
available and ask them how their students are doing in certain areas and
how we can support them.
Interviewee 2. Collaborative teams are very important; when we hire
people, we look for team players. I make sure that the schools know how
important it is that everybody works together. We called it building lateral
capacity, which is a term by Michael Fullen (2005). 'Lateral Capacity' in
other words states that you know if a student is struggling at one school
that is not just the problem of the teacher in that classroom or the principal
at that school, but it is also a problem for a teacher and a principal at
another school. In other words, as a district, we have a common goal and
a joint shared moral purpose for educating all of the children and making
sure that they are all successful. An idea from one school can be useful at
another school to help a student achieve. We are all about sharing and
pulling it all together, and that minimizes competition among schools.
You can bury schools with test scores, and that sort of thing is not right.
In addition, collaborative professional development or collaborative
73
planning time is mandatory, yet flexible for the teacher's schedule. We
have worked very hard to facilitate that at our schools. All of our schools
have a program where teachers have time each week to plan or work
together, to really collaborate.
Interviewee 3. We spend a lot of time talking about what good
collaboration looks like. We have a core group of teachers that we
thought could be leaders at the sites to kind of start implementing teacher
interdependence. Once you start seeing success, you take away the scary
factor because, frankly, teachers are used to being in private practice; they
are used to walking in the room and shutting the door and that’s it. I think
appropriating the model of observation and demonstration (and we had so
many younger teachers that have gone through that model it wasn’t scary
to have somebody come into their room and talk with them or work with
them or observe them) are all crucial components of a collaboration
model. I think giving the right tools to facilitate the process is a huge step
that many people leave out. We had to find the time to allow teachers to
collaborate. That is an arduous process, but we became very creative
towards how we would succeed. At our middle schools, we use PE
teachers to teach a period of the day so that we could free up teachers to
go and collaborate. At elementary schools, most of them are doing it after
school and we are paying them a stipend to do it. You have to provide the
tools to make it successful. If you are willing to do that, I think you are
going to get more buy-in from the staff because you have put importance
on it. If you do not put importance on it, it is not important to anybody.
Quantitative and Qualitative Percentages and
Feedback from the Online Survey
An additional question was included in the online survey through
quantitative and qualitative feedback: "How do you provide the necessary
support and resources available to espouse an interdependent system of
professional development at school sites?"
74
Table 4
Learner-Focused Professional development and Allocated Resources
Question/Response Response Percent
Should school-site professional
development be collaborative and
learner-focused?
School-site professional
development should always be
collaborative and learner-focused
90%
School-site professional
development should sometimes be
collaborative and learner-focused
10%
School-site professional
development should never be
collaborative and learner-focused
0%
x We rely on site-level categorical resources and use centralized resources in
alignment with agreed upon site priorities.
x Dedicated SLC time and Early Release Tuesdays, setting priorities, giving
reasonable autonomy to each site.
x Make sure the board, superintendent, district staff , and site principals are
cohesive in their support of student achievement as the highest
organizational priority. Once this priority has been established, align
resources in support of student learning.
x Our educational services team is out at the sites as much as possible. We
are working on systems to ensure all teachers are getting the same
professional development.
75
x Through the Leadership Team, we work to develop the school budget
where PD is a priority.
x Making professional development a priority district-wide sends the
message of importance to all staff. This requires schools to allocate
resources appropriately to facilitate quality professional development.
x Communicate with principals, and use categorical monies, when available.
Data Summary for Research Question # 2
Interestingly enough, the primary methods or resources mentioned
throughout the findings were not fiscally based but were rather philosophical and
relevant to the demands and available resources of each district or school site.
The most crucial enterprises were the faculty, the certificated members and their
beliefs in the vision of the district, and the instructional leaders who recognize
where specific support must be appointed. The preponderance of responses
indicated that time and how it is appropriated among school sites were two of the
most valuable resources, as well as the utilization of district specialists and
principals to emphasize the priority of a well-engaged professional development.
As evidenced by the data, professional development must be learner-
focused and prompted by a vision through collaborative efforts. Hence, educators
are more likely to become empowered in the professional development process if
they deem their thoughts and attributes are not only welcomed, but also employed
76
in the collegial training process. Additionally, a one size fits all mentality from
instructional leadership was not only opposed, as interpreted from the data, but
was reiterated numerous times by subjects that each school should be examined
and developed distinctively by its student demographics and their disaggregated
data, as well the attributes afforded to the campus by its stakeholders.
Yet, regardless of the time, methods, or resources committed to schools
among a district from instructional leadership regarding professional
development, if there is no acceptance or adherence to a clear purpose among
group members, then there will likely be no change or obtainment of goals. The
school and district vision must be aligned and created by its associates. The
people working in the school organization must believe in what they are doing
and must work together, not only to obtain a credence that will guide them, even
through grueling phases of change, but will provide them the necessary pathways
for optimal practices within classrooms. Though the creation of staff
development can be very demanding, given the very nature of the grade levels,
the subjects taught, and the variance of academic levels among all school sites,
the fundamental focal point is to begin with the specific academic discrepancies,
that which is most important for the learning challenges of the students. In
addition, the instructional leadership must ask of their faculty how they will meet
the demands of their pupils while providing succinct guidance that is unwavering
and culturally accepted.
77
Research Question # 3
Which professional development strategies do superintendents endorse
that increase proficiency levels in English Language Arts, particularly among
targeted ESL/EL populaces?
Creating a Culture of Inquiry Throughout
the Professional Development Process
As noted previously, district wide and school-based visions, which are
actualized from a collegial, collaborative process, contribute to the dynamics of a
productive and learner-focused professional development. Once the instructional
leader begins to endorse an engaged staff development that is meaningful and
relevant to the vision, the culture, and the requisites of his or her student
populaces, then the thought processes among stakeholders will evolve and
advance towards meta-cognitive thinking. They subsequently can become
introduced or better educated towards understanding their students' data and its
relation to the instruction within their classrooms. In other words, educators will
have the opportunity to analyze data such as test scores and results and will be
given mutual responsibility throughout their professional development methods to
brainstorm for improved teaching methods that are relevant to the learning gaps,
predominantly among ESL/EL or other targeted students. Creating a culture of
inquiry facilitates a greater usage of school data among certificated professionals,
78
and provides a safety net for intimidated group members. It promotes higher
order thinking through mutually respectful discussions and allows for questioning
and probing in order to determine ideal and appropriate pedagogical strategies and
to pinpoint instructional endeavors that either must change or be eliminated.
The following interviewees discussed their thoughts of creating a culture
of data inquiry throughout the professional development process and its
correlation to closing achievement gaps among targeted populaces with regard to
core subject instruction, such as ELA.
Interviewee 1. I think one of the first things you have to do is just always
be asking questions as a leader. Constantly ask questions. I will say to the
principal, I am not questioning you; I am asking questions. Because I
think sometimes when, especially a person with a position of power or in a
hierarchy asks a question, it can be interpreted as an aggressive gesture.
So, a principal who is asking questions to his or her staff might feel
threatened to educators because that person evaluates them. Nevertheless,
part of creating a culture of inquiry is just saying, I wonder. You know, I
wonder about this. I am looking at this data and this is what I see. What
do you see? So make it safe to ask questions and to reveal that one knows
little or nothing about something. The questioning practice has to be a
completely safe activity or action in order for people to feel comfortable
about inquiry. There has to be no comparisons, just be more scientific
about it. I just want to know so that we can do a better job. Another
component I would endorse is to examine our tools and skills by which we
analyze our data. It is not just looking at an API score that really does not
tell you very much. You really have to focus on formative or benchmark
assessments to find out what is happening within Language Arts and other
core subjects to understand what the students are learning or not learning.
What trends and patters are there? You have to study the data patterns
over time. You really have to ask many questions.
Interviewee 2. Well, I think there are many different ways and a lot of it
can be teacher developed. One example is right now we are working on a
process of developing writing rubrics and assessments. Teachers
volunteered to attend staff training based on data and rubrics through the
79
Columbia Writing Project. We developed our data decisions based upon
the information learned from the workshop, and by using the information,
this allowed us to evaluate student writing and create anchor papers. Now
what is interesting about that, is number one, it came from the teachers,
not from the school or the district about how to do it. They wanted to do it
because they saw a need for it. Their ambition shows me that we have a
culture of inquiry. The teachers are looking and trying to improve
teaching methods without the administration telling them how to create a
culture of inquiry. Secondly, we did not say oh no, we do not want you to
do that; we did not state what we as administration deemed important.
The teachers are leading the professional growth. We said, we, the district
office, will be forthcoming and we want you (the teachers) to go ahead
and do it. We will find the money and the necessary means. We arranged
everything to make it work. I know it is successful. It is based on
something that they have been trained in, and they have the common
language for data inquiry. It takes a long time to get to that point, where
you have developed that sort of culture where that initiative continues in
your school district or at your school. What you need to do is to try to
focus first with the teachers and the students on what they are actually
doing in class and then the rubrics can be developed after you know what
they are generally going to be working on and developing. However,
most schools do over assess. Most of the students in our schools today are
being what I would consider, under taught, and there is a lot of research
that supports that.
Interviewee 3. We have accountability. Data became available for
everybody. We created data rooms at our schools. The staff walks into
the data room, and the entire walls are filled with every teacher, every
classroom, and every student's data. There is a sticky note with every
student on there. If they are a free or reduced lunch student, they may
have a red bubble. If they are an EL student, they may have a red and a
yellow bubble, a sticker. We have five bands, advanced, proficient, basic,
below basic, and far below basic. Therefore, I could walk into the data
room, and I could see that a teacher has 15 kids that are advanced and 5
kids that are far below basic in ELA. Moreover, I can see that Mrs. Smith
has 5 advanced kids and 15 far below basic kids in ELA. Well the reality
is, there is some peer pressure that goes along with that. It also drives the
conversation among teachers, "what are you doing on this unit, because
we’ve all taken the benchmark at the same time?" "What are you doing
that you have 15 kids that are advanced and I only have 5?" Both
educators are teaching 3rd grade, and the demographics are similar. Then
we start sharing good practices, and that is part of what comes out in the
80
collaboration process too. The collaboration for each grade level happens
in the data room. You cannot run away from the data. It is right there
staring you in the face. We also make sure that the data is up in every
classroom so the kids see it too. We have a motto: go for the green and
the proficient, and the advanced kids show up in green on the data analysis
page. It is in your face, all the time. We (the district) have made data
become an intricate part of everything that we do. I mean every decision
we make; what does the data show and how are we using the data? We
are making data decisions based on potentially positive results, and we all
know that positive outcomes are what is best for kids.
Qualitative Summary of Subjects
Regarding Question 3
As depicted in the interviews, each superintendent had their own unique
response to data usage and its benefits towards emphasizing the academic
challenges of targeted groups. The interviewees characterized three tactics
regarding school site data analysis and its connection towards learning
advancements among targeted groups, which are: creating a culture of data
inquiry, correlating professional development practices with educator suggestions,
and ensuring that data is transparent and openly discussed through out
departments and campuses.
Interviewee 1 believed that providing a culture of inquiry simply means to
ask questions about the school data that are non-threatening, yet to constantly
share out responses from principals, district personnel, and educators alike.
Furthermore, to understand data comprehensively, Interviewee 1 accredits inquiry
from a variety of sources throughout the district and school sites and from this
81
system, more interpretations and answers can be derived that will lend
advantageous results, such as adapted teaching methods or improved means of
reaching lower-performing students. Interviewee 2 felt that inquiry is based upon
what the teachers consider significant to learning. The district should support
their professionals' endeavors, such as creating rubrics, predicated not just from
the data or from test scores, but perhaps from the learning gaps that are not always
indicated from standardized testing, such as writing, which is very subjective.
Interviewee 3's interpretation of data inquiry was very direct and correlated her
beliefs towards district-wide accountability. The subject regarded data analysis
and a culture of inquiry as a very apparent and visible process, whereby all
certificated and classified members, students, and community stakeholders are
entirely aware of their school's data. It is expected in her district that professional
dialogue be conducted throughout grade levels and departments concerning what
the data signifies, given the analogous demographics and variances in
standardized testing results.
Interviewees’ and Survey Responses
Pertaining to Question 3
Professional development equipped with collaboration and data inquiry
meeting the challenges of targeted populaces in ELA. Based upon the
82
aforementioned data, the makings of a comprehensive professional development
that will especially improve the learning challenges of targeted groups include:
x Instructional leadership that is knowledgeable of his or her demographics.
x Administration that compels a vision and is embraced by a faculty and
furthers goal obtainment.
x District-wide endorsement and expectation of collaboration.
x The practice of stakeholders using school-site data that espouses a culture
of inquiry and mutual accountability to determine compelling or reformed
pedagogical methods.
As the foundations for optimal staff training were revealed in the findings
from this study, the ensuing statistical replies describe what the professional,
surveyed subjects affirm to close achievement gaps among low socio-economic
and/or low-performing students, particularly target groups who are struggling in
ELA.
x Beginning with cultural proficiency, we engage in conversations about
what high expectations and rigorous instruction look like. Then we look
at the data to determine trends and exceptions to trends. We look at what
is working to learn from our successes.
x Instructional Coaches model effective ELA modified lessons.
x Our district uses a core reading program and supplemental ancillaries such
as thinking maps with ELL strategies built into our program.
83
x Provide staff development that specifically addresses the needs of the EL
students. Discuss EL/SDAIE methodology.
x Build academic vocabulary while accentuating specific strategies for
Second Language Learners.
x Data driven instruction, classroom walkthroughs, student engagement,
thinking maps, and empowered SLC training for EL/ESL pupils are
successful practices for our district.
Furthermore, the interviewees expressed their district endeavors of staff
training and/or practices that they credit as valuable towards meeting the array of
demands for targeted groups. To reiterate, the targeted groups of their districts
are not limited to the ESL/EL population, as students with learning disabilities or
other lower-performing groups are able to benefit from the following
superintendents' recommendations.
Instructional Practices Directed Towards
Targeted Learners
Interviewee 1. We always talk about comprehension skills of English
learners and maybe they can decode but they do not become fluent and
they certainly do not develop the comprehension skills, which is what
reading is about. Reading is not a mechanical process. It is a process to
glean meaning from text. So, if you cannot get the meaning, then what is
the point of reading? One other concept that has not been done very much
with English learners, or at least in not vast numbers is, a more cognitive
approach to reading, a more meta-cognitive approach which the readers’
and writers’ workshop does. This district has taken that on as an effort
throughout the elementary schools. Some of the schools are the highest
84
priority. Highest minority schools are doing really well and have reached
800 on the API, and have pretty much closed the achievement gaps.
When you are in a reader/writer workshop, you select books that are at
your independent reading level. You get instruction that puts you in
conversation with your peers as well as your teachers. There is a lot of
teacher conferencing with individual students. There is this whole
dynamic among students to sit with another peer, and they have
conversations about their reading! What I found in classrooms with lots of
English learners and African-American students is that there are a lot more
lively classrooms, where conversations are going on about reading through
out instructional time. They practice the language, which is fundamental
in listening, speaking, reading, writing skills. You first listen, and in order
to produce language skills, you have to allow students to practice all four
aspects of ELA. Too many classrooms are silent with the teacher doing
most of the talking.
Interviewee 3. I strongly, strongly believe in building academic
vocabulary. I really do think that that is key. We have trained all of our
middle school teachers, and we did a major training after school where we
brought in a consultant. She focused on building that academic
vocabulary. It is not just for our EL kids; it is my African-American
students, and my poor students who are arriving at schools with a definite
disadvantage because they are not grounded in their native language. We
have to build that academic vocabulary where we can, and we are charged
with teaching English. Fluency is also important. Without fluency, you
cannot read, and building academic vocabulary with fluency is essential
for our EL's. We need to build that English academic vocabulary, yet, it
makes it more difficult when parents have a difficult time supporting their
child's language acquisition.
Qualitative Summary of Methods or Resources
Utilized for Targeted Groups in ELA
Meeting the unique demands of low-performing targeted groups in ELA is
not only grueling, but as demonstrated from the data, there is not one distinct
strategy that will expedite the closing of achievement gaps of such student
populations. For example, some subjects expressed successes with scripted
85
reading and writing programs, while others believed that district specialists who
are able to model modified teaching strategies and work with teachers and
targeted students are greatly beneficial.
Such are the differences between Interviewee 1 and 3. Interviewee 1
credits using meta-cognitive skills which allow for the students to think about
what they are reading and discover meaning in what they are reading, as they are
allowed to select their reading materials and reflect upon what they have learned
with their teachers from vocabulary inferences. From this process, students
become more motivated to read and to retain knowledge, which furthers critical
thinking skills, which can be transferred to other subjects or curriculum, such as
writing, speaking and listening—all of which are pivotal components within every
subject matter.
Interviewee 3 was very adamant about building academic language in
every classroom while speaking and engaging with students in a pedantic manner
at all times. This subject concludes that most of her low-performing students
arrive from living arrangements whereby they have not been acquainted with
scholastic or even standard American English. Therefore, it is the responsibility
of all educators and educational leaders to ensure that they endorse the academic
language that is necessary for each grade level, and that the students are visually
and orally exposed to words and vocabulary building as part of their daily
learning, as they are increasing their social capital as well.
86
Research Question # 4
How do superintendents evaluate school site collegial development?
An Analysis of the Dichotomous and Subjective Measures
Instructional leaders are requisitioned with the duties of evaluating their
staff with the underlying focus of measuring to what extent did their educators
and other certificated members facilitate learning and academic growth among
their districts' pupils. Evaluations can be formative and summative, written and
observed, subjective and objective. Yet, with regard to the methods
recommended and supported from instructional leadership in collegial training,
how does administration truly evaluate successes or even failures, given the fact
that API or other standardized testing cannot comprehensively detect
achievement? Given the nature of an ever-changing school organization, as
students and faculty transition continuously to other campuses or encounter
personal issues that can be detrimental to the culture of the school or the
classroom, how does the instructional leader accurately asses his or her district or
school sites? As discovered by the data, instructional leaders believe in the
positive effects of a learner-focused professional development and are willing to
support what is best for the individualistic needs of their students and educators
alike. Nevertheless, the data illustrated that perhaps there is a disconnect between
the mandatory formal evaluations (in terms of teacher performance) and the staff
87
training that is provided to ensure academic gains, particularly among targeted
students. Alternatively, is the current system of evaluating teachers verifiable and
comprehensive? To define how educators exceed expectations in a very diverse
and evolving classroom can be both enigmatic and onerous undertakings for the
evaluator, the administrator, who may or may not have had the adequate time or
capability to accurately assess his or her staff.
The subsequent quantitative percentages concerning Question 4 further
depicts the complexities between perceptions of instructional leaders' staff
assessment methods, the construction of their districts' curriculum and how it
generally relates to meet the requirements of all grade level standards, as well
their perceptions of certificated staff morale that provides additional data
regarding the climate of their campus and/or district.
Based upon the quantitative results, the subjects perceived their districts'
measures to determine evaluation methods to be only 60% effective, in terms of
deciding to what extent their teachers are competent and productive in their
particular classrooms. These results appeared to be somewhat contrary, given the
fact that 100% of the respondents' educators are fully credentialed and highly
qualified, and 54.5% believed their certificated employees' quality of work to be
satisfactory and 45.5% answered with a response of excellence in overall
performance.
88
Quantitative Responses
Table 5
Teacher Evaluations, Districts' Alignment to State Standards, and Staff Morale
Questions/Responses
Response
Percent
To what extent do you find the means of assessing teaching
performance in your district to be effective?
Our evaluations of teaching are quite ineffective. 10%
Our evaluations of teaching are somewhat ineffective. 20%
Our evaluations of teaching are somewhat effective. 60%
Our evaluations of teaching are quite effective. 10%
To what degree are school sites in your district aligning their
curriculum with the grade level standards of the state?
Completely inconsistent. 10%
Somewhat inconsistent 0%
Somewhat consistent 30%
Completely consistent 60%
How would you rate the overall morale of the certificated staff
in your district?
Morale tends to be very high 10%
Morale tends to be high 80%
Morale tends to be moderate 0%
Morale tends to be low 10%
Perhaps there is a divide between what is expected from certificated staff,
particularly among teachers with regard to their performance and pedagogical
skills, and their alignment with standards, as set by the State and the formation of
mandatory standardized testing for each grade level.
89
Bridging the Gaps: Different Approaches
Towards the Complex Realm of Evaluations
Qualitative arguments. The subjects' interview responses made little to no
references to the standard evaluation procedures utilized at their districts. Rather,
more emphasis was placed on the interpersonal connections between the
instructional leader and the individual educator, as a means of direct, immediate
feedback. Providing a professional development system with a variety of
specialized support with consistent training and response time from
administration was endorsed by the surveyed instructional leaders . The subjects
made it clear throughout their answering that they simply cannot understand the
full spectrum of a classroom (and its successes and issues) without continually
providing the guidance and necessary resources for educators. They also
reiterated that their approach towards evaluation was not one of spying on
teachers, looking for 'bad' teaching, or creating a sense of inferiority from
administration towards teachers. The consensus among the interviewed was that
district-wide expectations should be transparent and that administration, mentors,
and other adapted measures from staff training should be readily available
throughout the school year. Additionally, it would seem to be impossible to fully
understand the growth or discrepancies within classrooms by not having an open
school climate and buy-in from teachers, who are able to decipher their
90
improvements or lack there of if there is infrequent communication among
certificated staff about their performance. Hence, there is a necessity of a
renewed evaluation process that may expectantly connect classroom performance
and summative appraisals.
Qualitative Beliefs Regarding Comprehensive
Teacher Evaluations
Interviewee 1. The feedback has to be short and it has to be meaningful
and specific feedback. It has to be supportive, meaning you cannot be
punished when you are not being successful. You have to be told exactly
what it is that you are doing that is ineffective as a teacher. Teachers need
immediate and corrective feedback, and then once they have corrected
something, they need to have that feedback also. You cannot change
everything at once. You just focus on one thing at a time, that is what we
are trying to do, focus on just a few things but do them well. Do the
teachers know what their students' learning goals are? Do the students
know what their learning goals are? That is one of the key components of
learning. If you approach students and ask what are you learning, and
they do not know, that is not good. It might be the teacher's form of
communication, the student was not listening, or it might be that the
teacher never thought to say, "today we are going to learn about this
lesson or concept." To recap, the methods I endorse are shortened,
concise feedback and clear specific measurable changes. If you (as an
educator or administrator) know if you are never checking for
understanding, set a reasonable goal and follow through with professional
feedback.
Interviewee 2. Our model of professional growth is not an evaluative or
judgmental process. First, we have trainers who are very professional and
work in classrooms directly with teachers and students. The process is
reciprocal. The teachers learn by doing as trainers guide them throughout
the model lessons. Second, our district is invested in the entire model
lesson process, and it is understood that once teachers engage in this form
of peer collaboration and feedback, it, in fact, endorses methodologies that
are discovered from the educators. They actually see the results and
91
become less intimidated when they are observed in their classes. Most
importantly, the goal is not to improve teaching, it is to improve learning,
student learning. It is really a student-focused professional development
and evaluation progression. Of course, in order to do that, you must invest
in the model that the district chooses and especially the teachers. The
model that you use and choose is critical. It will lend far greater results
regarding the complex evaluations system and will indicate how we, as
evaluators, assess not only improved learning but also how the teachers
have obtained school goals through school site leadership. We have to be
visible, supportive, and hands-on. We must know the heartbeat of the
school—the classroom. That is true evaluation.
Summary of Evaluation Responses from Subjects
The subjects declared that state standards and curriculum are embedded in
their districts adopted texts and ancillaries and that school and student data are
readily available to all certificated members. However, the issue of meeting the
definitive challenges within classrooms and aligning instruction towards
mandatory standards often produces convoluted outcomes. The alliance of the
two is not only demanding, given the complexities of an array of individuals
within an organization. The outcomes, as determined by evaluations and test
results, often lend ambiguous answers for schools to determine successes and
areas of improvement. Interestingly, the interviewees never referred to a standard
set protocol for evaluating teachers or even student performance. Data, such as
CST results, serve as one guidepost, just as limited teacher observations for
performance evaluations do as well. Perhaps a revamped evaluation system
should derive from the methodologies and learning processes that occur from a
supportive, visible, and feasible staff development.
92
Stakeholders are encouraged to better themselves because they are
knowledgeable of their expectations. They receive unyielding support and
dependable leadership and are more aware of their practices, as related to their
renewed involvement and awareness of their teaching practices apropos to their
students' performance. An evaluation cannot be merely regulated as a formal
summative procedure to measure academic growth or even professional growth
by educators. It must begin as a continual process that is guided by the district
culture, accountability, support, and it must progress from the flexibility and
growth from evaluated staff, who are willing to better themselves in the
educational sector. Furthermore, an educator cannot be expected to flourish if he
or she is not given the necessary tools, just as their students necessitate the skills
to succeed.
The instructional leader must ask, "Have I given the support and time
necessary throughout the school year to ensure that my measurement of a
teacher's performance is accurate?" If the answer is no, then it is likely that
current standard teacher evaluations do not holistically verify the prosperities or
even failures that can be so easily overlooked, especially in an unobserved or
unnoticed classroom. Yet, through the suggestions of the aforementioned
respondents, leadership visibility, clear, professional feedback, and the
incorporation of district-wide teacher support models will inevitably yield greater
depth and breadth towards a better understanding of the evaluation process.
93
Accordingly, the collegial development process evolves into both a formative and
summative analysis. As stated previously, it commences with the school
leadership's vision and the relentless pursuit to reform professional development
practices to ensure not only school-wide accountability but to create conviction
and alignment from staff members.
Field Notes of Observed Interviewed Subjects
Interviewee 1: This subject was interviewed and observed in her district
office. Upon arriving, the subject greeted the interviewer in a very relaxed and
friendly demeanor. The interview process ensued in her office, whereby she was
in the process of re-organizing her books and files and preparing for the upcoming
school year. She appeared a bit overwhelmed, yet she made it very clear that she
was elated to proceed with the interview, as she expressed how it is beneficial for
her as well to engage in an interview and was simply "happy to accommodate."
Throughout the questioning, the interviewee was thoughtful and very
thorough in her answers. She paused and at times asked for clarification to ensure
that she would respond to the best of her ability, perceivably from the interviewer.
She spoke not just from experience but also from progressive and yet heartfelt
content, whereby it became more apparent that her best interest was what would
be most optimal for both students and certificated persons alike. Likewise, she
considered herself a teacher foremost (as her statements relating to teaching and
94
learning were echoed numerous times throughout the interview). In essence, she
showed compassion and related how her interests in learning as a professional had
carried throughout her career in education. The overall context from this
interviewee was her absolute concern for all her students, and predominantly
those who were in targeted groups. Nevertheless, she was well versed in a variety
of useful research and resources. She expressed her thoughts as a leader and a
professional in education and provided solutions she deemed truly necessary to
her site administrators, support staff, and educators. She was self-reflective,
humble, and yet incredibly insightful about how she would meet the demands of
her district.
Interviewee 2: This interview took place at a satellite office between the
subject and the researcher. Although there were no personal artifacts to observe
such as the subject's office space or interactions between his staff or colleagues,
his demeanor and non-verbal cues were apparent in the interview. He displayed
his convictions throughout his answers as he seldom paused before answering and
replied elaborately from his experiences with professional development such as
his advocating for progressive staff growth and evaluation that provided positive
outcomes throughout his district. He articulated numerous times about the need
to revamp current teaching and testing methods by interjecting his various
sentiments, using both unmitigated verbal and non-verbal signals, such as eye
contact, direct dialogue, and hand gestures. He was very forward in his beliefs
95
concerning the over-assessment of students and accredited other supportive
components such as teacher labs or private-sector investment in schools to better
assist targeted areas such as reading and writing. Yet, he was cordial towards the
researcher, and subsequently, he credits being approachable and open-minded as a
leader of instruction of core values, which has generated trust and successful
productivity among his staff.
In closing, he was communicative but unwavering in his research and
experienced-based replies, as he advised to scrutinize models or programs that
will best benefit all school sites. His overall motto was once a leader invests in
authorized resources, make it known that they are endorsed from the
superintendent, and long-term district backing will be readily available to all
campuses. According to this subject, short-term, or one size fits all program
investments rarely produce impressive outcomes, either from instructional or
learning endeavors.
Interviewee 3: The researcher met this interviewee at her district office.
Upon arriving, it was quite perceivable that her education was highly important to
her, as she had displayed numerous artifacts of her university affiliations and
honors, such as framed diplomas and certifications. She proudly expressed the
significance of visually demonstrating her achievements through education, as she
is the instructional leader of her district. From faculty, district personnel, parents,
students, or community members, she asserted that her office should be reflective
96
of her leadership, organized, and welcoming, while emphasizing education and
learning as the top priority. Her form of answering was very absolute, and she
made it very clear, as to what she expected from her administration and her
faculty, as she was visible and observant of classrooms and school sites. She was
emphatic with her answering and maintained direct eye contact with the
interviewer. She had no qualms with describing what she felt was ineffective and
spoke of her directives to affect change in challenged school sites. Additionally,
she provided an array of examples of improved teaching methods and
professional growth, based upon her perceptions of education.
Comparisons and Conclusions
The following summaries of the findings from all four questions of
Chapter 4 demonstrated correlations between the aforementioned data analysis
and literature reviews. The analogies among research interpretations and studies
from the authors in Chapter 2 consisted of themes such as collaborative
teamwork, allocation of appropriate resources, development of a data inquiry
culture, and the creation of more dialogue between educators and administrators.
Discussion of Research Question # 1
1. As the instructional leaders of their districts, what roles do
superintendents play in their school-sites' professional development?
97
As evidenced by the responses from both qualitative and quantitative
perspectives, the subjects' credence in leadership stems from not only a
culmination of experiences in education but also from recognizing the magnitude
of reinforcing interdependent organizations that are culturally accepted and
synonymous with district leadership. Elmore (2002) reiterated teamwork among
school leadership, as a conduit for greater achievement among staff. The
instructional leader or superintendent must take on many roles as well as be
cognizant of the pedagogical skills or resources that are necessary for their district
(Bolman & Deal, 1994). The leader must also be visible and accessible to the
staff, as the culture of the organization that enforces collaborative efforts strongly
correlates with the leadership of the organization (Schein, 2010).
Researchers and subjects alike concluded that effective and feasible
professional growth among faculty members is not only the responsibility of
instructional leaders but also a necessity based upon the integrated efforts and
knowledge of administration and the facilitation of a purpose within school
cultures. Langer, Colton, and Goff (2003) referred to such professional endeavors
as collegiate interactions, akin to the responses of interviewed subjects and their
roles in the professional development process. Further, leadership is the
conductor of change and optimistic results, not of a solitary enterprise.
98
Discussion of Research Question # 2
Which types of methods or resources do superintendents appropriate
towards their school sites to facilitate collaborative professional development?
Elmore (2002) surmised that the eagerness of an administration to provide
compulsory resources throughout school sites equates to enhanced teacher
cognition, which facilitates widespread pupil learning and professional growth.
As discovered in the data, before fiscal support or methods are allocated,
instructional leaders emphasize a coherent vision and plan accordingly, by
delegating out responsibilities to district personnel or utilizing resources that later
evolve into collaboration among certificated staff and other stakeholders.
Concomitantly with the findings and reviews, the advocating of productive staff
time was apparent, as the instructional leaders are expected to provide for
working systems of team interdependency and mutual accountability. DuFour ,
DuFour, Eaker, and Many (2006), advised for the establishment of group norms
and responsibility among participants, which they believe ensures more
commitment towards the professional development process and engagement in
pedagogical practices.
Langer, Colton, and Goff (2003) emphasized the analysis of Target Learning
Areas, which signifies the transparency of low-performance data among schools
and for school sites to determine meaning from data that will facilitate the most
appropriate choices for resources or methods to close achievement gaps. With
99
regard to the interviewed subjects, each interviewee had various responses to how
they provide district-based assistance to their campuses and educators. Yet, the
commonality between all three was the custom to routinely sustain collaboration,
under the direction of visible and accessible leadership.
Discussion of Research Question # 3
Which professional development strategies do superintendents endorse
that increase proficiency levels in English Language Arts, particularly among
targeted ESL/EL populaces?
As denoted from the discoveries in data analysis and the researcher’s
acknowledgement of collegial development for a targeted population, the
congruent response for increased ELA abilities (especially among ESL/EL
students) is to develop a culture of inquiry that will earmark and employ suitable
instructional schemas and simplified goals throughout staff training. Dufour and
Berkey (1995) also concurred that promoting an inquiry-based, collaborative staff
development will not only accelerate more resolute involvement among
certificated faculty but also will provide for a greater depth of cognition, or
strategies that will best serve low-performing students. They, along with other
educational researchers, recommended that staff members welcome change when
necessary, as they begin to obtain new skills or teaching methods that are
beneficial for all students.
100
From the subjects' perspectives, be it from interviews or through online
reactions, the data demonstrated variances as to how instructional leaders respond
to meet the demands of low performing ESL/EL students in their districts,
especially in such a vital core subject as ELA. However, the preponderance of
replies denoted that student data and its analysis concerning particular challenges
of such low-performing students, is the foundation for determining how to best
construct professional development and instructional approaches. The subjects
reiterated the delegation of specialists and district programs for ESL/EL students,
and leadership must subscribe to their districts' efforts.
Discussion of Research Question # 4
How do superintendents evaluate school site collegial development?
Conclusively, the evaluation process of school site development and its
relation to enhanced teacher performance and improved learning is a formative
and summative procedure that is predicated on the immanent appraisal of district
and school site administration as well as the quantitative disaggregated results
from standardized testing. As revealed f rom the interviewees regarding
evaluations of teachers and programs, the comprehensive process is complex,
given the variables of each individual teacher or classroom per school year.
Researchers such as DuFour, Dufour, Eaker, and Many (2006) as well as
Langer, Colton, and Goff (2003), highlighted in their work that perhaps educators
101
and administrators require clarification of immediate, prioritized goals from
district offices before conducting informal or formal evaluations. As well,
increments of time allowed for revamped professional growth must be taken into
consideration and likewise the opportunity to reflect upon accomplishments and
deficiencies were also reprised throughout the literature review, concerning
administrators' feedback and formal assessments of certificated development.
Nevertheless, the quantitative responses indicated that the evaluation methods
utilized in districts were not 100% effective. The interviewees indicated that the
appraisal methods should not be perceived as a reprehensible checklist but as a
means of opening honest dialogue between administration and staff regarding
goals either obtained or missed, from the beginning of the school year to the final
days of instruction. To further successes, instructional leaders should
commemorate collaboration and its cultural acceptance of administrators and
educators working interdependently, with the expectation of continuous,
transparent dialogue and immediate and constructive feedback from evaluators.
102
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
The significance of this study was to ascertain professional knowledge
from veteran school leaders, such as superintendents, about how to best close
achievement gaps in low performing, low socio-economic schools. The
cogitation was modeled from Sunset East High School, whose greater student
populaces are or were former ESL/EL pupils and continued to perform below
proficiency in ELA (as per state standardized testing). The prominence of the
research began by reviewing literature from a variety of esteemed authors within
the educational sector, who all comprehensively agreed that reformed professional
development among challenged schools is not only necessary but also is
contributory towards the interdependence of constructing imperative
methodologies among educators and all stakeholders. Hence, the premise of
meaningful and appropriate professional growth from school sites under the
support and guidance of instructional leadership which facilitates mutual
accountability, ameliorates campus cultures, and ultimately facilitates improved
instruction and learning were highlighted and examined from the previously
reviewed data analysis.
103
Summary of Findings
All subjects interviewed, observed, or surveyed online served or had
served low performing, Title 1, targeted, or at-risk students, including ESl/EL
pupils, whose proficiency levels in English Language Arts were below state
standards. The instructional leaders had well-rounded backgrounds in education
prior to becoming superintendents and all verified their variances of experiences
as beneficial towards their successes as leaders of their districts. Additionally,
they continue to lead majority minority campuses and remain keenly aware of the
learning disparities through out their school sites. Accordingly, their
acknowledgement of a school-centered professional development system that
converges on the particular challenges of individual students and schools was
both evident and explicated in this study, as a realistic and reliable antidote for
closing staggering achievement gaps.
Regarding the data concerning school site professional development, the
interviewees and online surveyed subjects concurred that staff training must be
meaningful, collaborative, equipped with district recourses. Most importantly,
collegial development must be supported from the district office and the
instructional leader. The collegial process must begin with a shared vision among
stakeholders along with a transparent district vision or focus, which would guide
the growth process throughout the school year and potentially through subsequent
years of schooling. Once more, the beginnings of optimal staff advancement,
104
pertaining to enhanced learning and instruction, originated from the
superintendents' overwhelming responses of emphasizing collaboration between
certificated staff and administration. Interviewees either referred to collaboration
as simply taking time with educators, asking questions and becoming engaged
with staff, or through the creation of collaborative teams. By hiring team players
who would then delegate out partnerships to mentoring novice or potentially
antagonistic teachers towards mutual sharing and accountability, a more favorable
school culture would likely activate and avail as a flourishing school climate.
Clearly from the findings, the crux of a collaborative school site actualizes from a
school environment that consistently enforces norms such as faculty input,
suggestions, and potential solutions that would best assist a conglomerate of
learning levels within individual classrooms.
Concomitant with an interdependent convention of professional
development, sustained from instructionally based district leadership, the statistics
demonstrated that all certificated members should be exposed to a well-
constructed, apparent culture of data inquiry as well as how school data is
interpreted and utilized throughout professional growth practices. Yet, data
interpretation is not just allocated to standardized testing or periodic assessment
results. Supplementary evidence of student data can be distinguished through
idiosyncratic components of ELA such as writing samples or variations from
students' progress reports and their scores from test results. Ergo, data
105
interpretation is a vital and necessary component of the cooperative professional
growth process for all constituents who are engaged in the educational sector. By
holistically understanding student data, educators and administrators can
inevitably spearhead instructional methods, rubrics, or other relevant intercessions
that will address the intrinsic pedagogical issues, per each school site and its
demographics.
Once the collaborative and data inquiry culture is implemented from
instructional leadership, school sites must focus on strategies or practices, aimed
at targeted groups. Although the responses from the participants varied in terms
of how to best serve low performing, ESL/EL populaces who are struggling in
ELA, there were some similarities from their responses. Given the fact that most
public instructors in California should obtain their CLAD credential (for single
subject or multiple subjects, elementary and secondary classrooms), it is likely
that a majority of educators have had various trainings or classes pertaining to
SDAIE and are, at the very least, familiar with modified instruction for ESL/EL
students. Furthermore, the superintendents who were either interviewed or
surveyed affirmed that their districts had departments in their districts, equipped
with specialists who were able to coach educators or model lessons for English
Language Learners, while upholding the expectations of learning that are
stipulated by the state standards.
106
The essence of enhancing the learning process for such targeted groups (as
shown from this research) is to build upon the student's individual level through
reading and utilizing academic language through second language acquisition
skills. The student needs to be able to take ownership of words and be taught how
to develop his or her own mechanisms of not just reading, speaking, or writing,
but also to associate meaning with the second language, while employing higher-
order thinking skills throughout lessons and group projects. Expressly, targeted
learners must be exposed to a variety of level-appropriate reading material and
must be able to express what they have read or discovered either verbally or
through writing exercises. From their acquisition of words and word usage, they
must be encouraged to build their vocabulary from prior knowledge. Amid their
learning processes, their means of achieving progress in ELA will inevitably
transfer to other core subjects, such as word problems in mathematics and science,
history passages, as well electives. Undeniably, once ESL/EL learners begin to
take possession of the English language (through reading, fluency, and the
guidance provided through district programs and specialists), they will become
more apt to overcome second language obstacles and will acquire the necessary
tools to perform and excel as their mainstream pupil counterparts.
Lastly and importantly, superintendents claimed that the overall
systemization of evaluating teachers and their collegial efforts were not entirely
perfected and, in fact, some measures could be ineffective or outdated. The
107
process for most schools is conducted by a dual manner—a formative and
summative yearlong evaluation. Teachers are visited or monitored periodically in
their classrooms or within groups such as their banked professional development
time. They are then formally and individually assessed by the administrator,
typically after the teacher and the administrator have had the time to discuss the
educator's instructional goals and objectives for the school year.
From the findings of the participants' responses, immediate, corrective,
and supportive feedback must be given periodically from the administrator to the
teacher. Educators must also be agreeable to peer teaching and coaching,
whereby educators learn from each other's instructional techniques and should be
allowed time to confer about what the colleagues learned from these types of
instructional approaches. However, the administration should not only support
peer collaboration, they should be visible in classrooms and communicate with
individual educators, regarding any noticeable improvements or teaching methods
that they believe to be shared with the faculty.
Instructional leaders must also know what to look for when observing or
evaluating a teacher, and often the focus of completing the evaluation form by the
evaluator takes precedence over truly capturing the pulse and the climate of a
classroom. The organic exchange between the teacher and students or the
discussions and engagement among students and educators regarding the lesson or
group projects are just two components of many evaluation guidelines that were
108
identified in this study's findings. Conclusively, the evaluation process should not
be appropriated to chastise educators or to communicate indeterminate remarks,
which either way will not be beneficial to the teacher or the students. The
evaluation should be a more transparent and professionally amicable approach to
assist and praise teachers' efforts, while providing constructive criticism when
necessary. That, in essence, is the instructional leader's duty—to determine the
quality of instruction and to appropriate reinforcements where needed.
Limitations
As stated earlier, all superintendents who participated in this study were
within the Southern California area and mostly within Los Angeles County.
Furthermore, the researcher is not a superintendent and had never interviewed or
surveyed superintendents prior to this study. From the Survey Monkey
instrument, not only did some of the participants choose not to fully answer the
entire survey, an additional list of superintendents who were emailed had either
retired or moved to another district. Consequently, some of the online responses
to various questions were somewhat redundant or were answered “See above
response.” In addition to the online surveys, one of the interviews was not
conducted in the participant’s district office. Although the responses were very
beneficial, the researcher was not able to observe the subject in his own
environment or his interactions with other professionals in their office. And
109
lastly, and if time had allowed, it would have been even more advantageous for
the researcher to have conducted interviews with superintendents who oversee
schools with targeted groups, in perhaps another area of California or even
outside the state, to obtain an even greater perspective or responses to the issues
of this research.
Implications for Practice
When the researcher began her quest for a dissertation topic, she realized
that from her experiences of a wide spectrum in education that professional
development time was typically wasted by the standard and disengaged agendas,
as teachers were not interconnected and empowered to collaborate for the
purposes of affecting positive changes within their school site. One of the
primary concerns among schools, particularly among troubled campuses, was that
the certificated staff were not communicating or supporting each other in
meaningful and appropriate expedients. All the while, private sector businesses
and other organizations continue to progress with regard to how they train their
staff, yet inner city public schooling staff development remains stagnate. Not
every school in California or even the United States has the levels of dissension
and low achievement as Sunset East High School or other campuses in urban
domains, but there are still many campuses that desperately need a professional
110
growth overhaul, and it must begin within the talents and merits represented at
each school site.
If the certificated or even classified staff becomes so frustrated with the
disorganization or atrophy of support in such demanding schools, society will lose
for a variety of reasons. Promising teachers will leave the educational sector,
professional expertise will be lost, and ultimately, the students will be stuck with
status quo or substandard divisions of education. Henceforth, the commitment
from instructional leadership to utilize professional growth time in a productive
and symbiotic manner is urgent and critical for reformed and dynamic schooling.
Furthermore, there is really no excuse not to formulate an open-school climate
and compelling communication among staff that is expected, especially in the
information age of technology and advanced educational resources.
Most importantly, teachers commonly want to be heard and share their
pedagogical discoveries with their peers, and naturally, their colleagues will
benefit from such dialogue. It is the responsibility of instructional leaders to
facilitate communicative campuses and administer mutual accountability to
ensure prosperity—either meager or immense gains from both educators and
students alike. The cultural thread that binds the campus, despite very arduous
times, is the interpersonal connections that are shared among all colleagues—the
willingness to better oneself despite obvious obstacles. Collegial growth is the
foundation of all ensuing school site progression.
111
Future Research
As noted in the literature review, authors who prescribed various methods
of constructive and desirable plans of professional development demonstrated
working blueprints for successful implementation of collaborative, school site
collegial teams. Although there are a variety of ways in which instructional
leaders are able to guide their staff towards more meaningful and engaged
professional growth, further studies should be conducted to test the validity and
credibility of each particular professional development, their norms and
expectations, and assert the impact towards improved or effective instruction and
learning. Despite the numerous and ever-changing variables to conduct such a
study in a school setting, there must be some type of quantitative and qualitative
effort to examine to what extent does an interdependent and mutually accountable
professional growth system contribute to learning, and distinctively to the
tribulations of at-risk, targeted, or ESL/EL demographics. Likewise, are there
other means of promising professional growth such as incorporating district
specialists or private sector professionals who could aid in data interpretation and
assist in grouped collegial practices?
Alternatively, perhaps instructional leaders should formulate a series of
questions related to the instructional, didactic demands from specific school sites
and ask of their colleagues to best answer or resolve such issues. A sample
question could be, "How do we increase reading fluency and comprehension for
112
our targeted, low-performing students, so that they may pass the CAHSEE?"
Based upon the responses from a school's professional growth system, school
leaders should be aware of the reciprocally agreed upon methodologies and the
actual usage of such practices within classrooms to obtain passing scores on such
mandatory tests.
Strictly speaking, are teachers practicing what they preach and do they
doubtlessly believe in the incorporation of such strategies? Incontestably,
educators will gravitate to conducting their instructional methods as they have
done so in the past, as they are their particular styles of teaching, which have
become both familiar and perceivably successful means of instruction.
Nevertheless, more studies must be conducted to determine if collaborative
professional development can accomplish short- and long-term goals and to what
magnitude does it sustain progress, given the diversity of people and professional
beliefs within campuses.
The ability to shift the way individuals think about their endeavors within
their profession is by no means an easy task. People in general must be
compelled to be motivated and must be challenged to exercise meta-cognition, to
think about how they think and apply what they have learned from their cognitive
developments into their everyday professional practices. Again, further research
is needed to evaluate the outcomes of revamped techniques that require viable
commitments and the restructuring (especially in some cases of substandard
113
instruction) of classroom methodologies, from utilizing technology to enforcing
project based or diversified group learning throughout all classes. Other questions
must be raised for further studies such as, "Which methods or professional
development discoveries are actually working, and if they are deemed beneficial
to one school site, how do we transfer and apply these mechanisms to schools of
similar demographics or learning gaps?" What may work for one school site of
similar challenges may not necessarily work for another, ergo the necessity to
study school developments, challenges, and outcomes, without solely relying on
standardized testing results at the end of a school year. Nevertheless, a more
accurate account of conclusive data cannot be determined if the leadership has not
been a plausible supporter of change.
Final Conclusions
Within the vast and highly changeable realm of public education, the
professionals such as the administrators and certificated staff are constantly
charged with meeting constant pressures, obligations, and legal or financial
constraints. They are inevitably dealt with challenging issues, by the very nature
of school regulations and the necessities of the people who are served from this
type of an organization, such as students, parents, and community members. In
the era of school accountability and reduced fiscal support, educators and school
leaders remain in dire situations, as classrooms of core subjects are overcrowded,
114
resources and programs are reduced, and supplementary support from parents or
teaching assistants seem highly unlikely in this unstable economy.
Due to dwindling school budgets and cutbacks in education, school sites
must look to what can be done that is feasible for improvements in education,
regardless of the fact that all schools are held to state and federal accountable
measures from standardized testing. Possibly, solutions to overcome such
impediments is not found by the allocation of funds towards supplementary
programs or the purchasing of newly designed educational products, but from the
delegation of human talents at school sites and the empowerment from school
leadership to designate newer or revitalized means of school organization and
practices. Simply stated, not all the money in the world can purchase a robust
educational system. The improvements, adjustments, and cumulative results from
students, teachers, and administrators alike begin with a course of action among
team players, who ingenuously arrive at solutions by merely thinking in agreeable
forms of collaborative thinking. This grass-root application of utilizing
professional resources, accessible at every campus, fundamentally, is professional
development at its finest.
115
REFERENCES
Andrews, R, & Grogan, M. (2002, April). Defining preparation and professional
development for the future. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38,
233-256.
Bensimon, E. M, & Neuman, A. (1994). Redesigning collegiate leadership:
Teams and teamwork in higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Bensimon, M. E. & O'Neil Jr. H. F. (1998, Fall). Collaborative effort to measure
faculty work. Liberal Education, 84 (4),. 22.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1994, February). Looking for leadership: Another
search party's report. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 77-96.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations artistry, choice,
and leadership 4
th
Ed. San Francisco: Josey Bass.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the
terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 1-49. Retrieved from
http://www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/Journals_and_Publications/
Journals/Educational_Researcher/Volume_33_No_8/02_ERv33n8_Borko.
pdf pp 1-49.
Bottoms, G., & O’Neill, K. (2001, April). Preparing a new breed of school
principals: It’s time for action. Southern Regional Education Board,
1-32. Retrieved from www.wallacefoundation.org.
California Department of Education. (2009). Star Program Results for 2009. Retrieved
from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr09/yr09rel119.asp.
Chilcott, L. (Producer), & Guggenheim, D., & Kimball, B. (Writers). (2010).
Waiting for Superman (Motion picture). United States: Paramount
Vantage.
Christensen, C. M. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will
change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw Hill.
Corcoran, T.B., Fuhrman, S. H., & Belcher, C.L. (2001, September). The district
role in instructional improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(1), 1, 78-84.
116
Cotton, Kathleen. (1989). Expectations and student outcomes. Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Darling-Hammond, L,& McLaughlin, M W. (2003). Policies that support
professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8),
597–604.
Datnow, A. (2005, February). The sustainability of comprehensive school
reform models in changing district and state contexts. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 41, 121-153.
Drake, T.L. & Roe, W. H. (2003). The principalship (6
th
ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
DuFour, R. (2001). In the right context. Paper presented at the meeting of the
JSD Winter National Staff Development Council, Oxford, OH.
DuFour, R. & Berkey, T. (1995). The principal as staff developer. Journal of
Staff Development, 16, 2-6.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R, Eaker, R. & Many, T. (2006). Learning by doing. A
handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington,
IN: Solution Tree Press.
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement.
The imperative for professional development in education. Washington
DC: Albert Shanker Institute.
Elmore, R. F. (2005, Winter). Accountable leadership. The Educational Forum,
69, 134-142.
EdSource (2007). Resource Cards on California Schools. 1-37
Fullen, M. (2005). Leadership and Sustainability: System Thinkers in Action.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gusky, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Hallinger, P. (2003, November). Leading educational change: Reflections on the
practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge
Journal of Education, 33(3), 330-351.
117
Hancock, M. & Lamendola, B. (2005). A leadership journey: The road to
improvement takes the staff of a high-poverty urban school from isolation
to collaboration. Educational Leadership, 62, 74-78.
Hirsh, S., Delehant, A., & Sparks, S. (2006). From keys to successful meetings .
Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
Jeffrey P., Robert I. S. (2000). The knowledge and doing gap: How smart
companies turn knowledge into action. Boston, MA: Presidents and
Fellows of Harvard College.
Jones, T. G. (2002, February). Preparing all teachers for linguistic diversity in K-
12 schools. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Associaton of Colleges for teacher Education (54
th
). Research report,
ED463264. New York.
Lambert, L. (2002, May). A framework for shared leadership. Beyond
Instructional Leadership, 59, 37-40.
Langer, G. M., Colton, A. B., & Goff, L. S. (2003). Collaborative analysis of
student work. Improving teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA.:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Lashway, L (2002, July). Developing instructional leaders. ERIC Digest 160,
1-5. Retrieved from file:///D|/digests/digest160.html.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S. & Wahlstrom, K. (2004, September).
Review of research: How leadership influences student learning.
Retrieved from
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/NR/rdonlyres/E3BCCFA5-A88B-
45D3-8E27B973732283C9/0/ReviewofResearchLearningFrom
Leadership.pdf.
Mac Iver, M. A. & Farley, E. (2003, August). Report 65. Bringing the district
back in the role of the central office in improving instruction and student
achievement. John Hopkins University.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works
from research to results. Alexandria, VA: Educational Leadership
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning: Reconceiving roles
for planning, plans, and planners. New York: The Free Press.
118
Mulford, W., Silins, H., & Leithwood, K. (2003). The critical role of leadership
for organizational learning and improved student outcomes. Educational
Leadership for Organisational Learning and Improved Outcomes, 1-19.
Murphy, J., & Datnow, A. (2003). Leadership lessons from comprehensive
school reform designs. In J. Murphy & A. Datnow (Eds.), Leadership for
school reform: Lessons from comprehensive school reform designs
(pp. 57-82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3
rd
Ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. (2000). The knowing-doing gap: How smart companies
turn knowledge into action. Cambridge: Presidents and Fellows of
Harvard College.
Quinn, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ramaley, J. A. (2002). Field guide to academic leadership. San Francisco: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Salkind, N. (2011). Statistics for people who think they hate statistics (4
th
ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership 4
th
ed. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The leader's new work: Building learning organizations.
Boston: MIT Sloan School of Management.
Sparks, D. & Hirsh, S. (1997). A new vision for staff development. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (2000, February). A national plan for improving
professional development. National Staff Development Council. Oxford,
OH. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED4427798).
Spaulding, S., Carolino, B., & Amen, K. (2004, January). Immigrant students and
secondary school reform compendium of best practices (86). [Electronic
version]. Washington D. C.: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED484705).
119
Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. The
Educational Practices Series–18. In Jere Brophy (Ed.), International
Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education (1-32):
Brussels: International Academy of Education.
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What
districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools.
Washington, DC: Learning First Alliance. Retrieved from
http://learningfirst.org/publications/districts/.
United States Department of Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative
for educational reform. A report to the nation and the Secretary of
Education. Washington, D.C.: The National Commission on Excellence
in Education.
United States Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act of
2001. Retrieved from http://www.nclb.gov/next/overview/index.html.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & Mc Nulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What
30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student
achievement. A working paper. ED 481 972, pp. 1-21. Aurora, CO:
Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab.
120
APPENDIX A
THE THREE LEVELS OF CULTURE.
Artifacts Visible organizational structures
Ç È and processes (hard to decipher)
Espoused Values Strategies goals, philosophies
Ç È (espoused justifications)
Basic Underlying Assumptions Unconscious, taken for granted beliefs,
perception, thoughts, and feelings
(ultimate source of values and action)
Source: Schein (2010, p.23).
121
APPENDIX B
ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ITS RELATION TO COLLEGIAL
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Establishing a trusting and collaborative climate É È Ì
È ongoing relevant
Having a shared and monitored mission Å Æ professional
È development
È Taking initiatives and risks Ë Ê
Source: Mulford, Silins, and Leithwood (2003, p. 9).
122
APPENDIX C
BENEFITS OF A TARGETED LEARNING PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
Benefits to Students
x Improved student learning
x Increased student clarity about intended outcomes
Benefits to Teachers
x Commitment and confidence in ability to promote student learning
x Analytical and reflective inquiry skills (e.g., examining multiple factors
and perspectives when analyzing a situation)
x Professional knowledge
ß Content understanding
ß Student development and learning
ß Methods and strategies (pedagogy)
ß Assessment design and interpretation
ß Contextual factors
x Alignment among classroom standards, instruction, and assessments
x Collaborative expertise
x Awareness and self-assessment
ß Strengths and weaknesses in professional practice
ß Influence of feelings and beliefs on assumptions and actions
ß Professional development needs
x National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Certification
Benefits to Parents and Organizations
x Parent clarity about learning targets and student progress
x Curriculum alignment within and across grade levels
x School improvement goals and resource allocation driven by classroom
data
x Professional development targeted to teachers’ needs
x Collaborative culture for inquiry into student success
Source: Langer, Colton, and Goff (2003, p. 19).
123
APPENDIX D
ESTABLISHING GROUP NORMS FOR COLLABORATIVE
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
When establishing norms, consider:
Time
■ When do we meet?
■ Will we set a beginning and ending time?
■ Will we start and end on time?
Listening
■ How will we encourage listening?
■ How will we discourage interrupting?
Confidentiality
■ Will the meetings be open?
■ Will what we say in the meeting be held in confidence?
■ What can be said after the meeting?
Decision Making
■ How will we make decisions?
■ Are we an advisory or a decision-making body?
■ Will we reach decisions by consensus?
■ How will we deal with conflicts?
Participation
■ How will we encourage everyone’s participation?
■ Will we have an attendance policy?
Expectations
■ What do we expect from members?
■ Are there requirements for participation?
Source: Hirsh, Delehant, and Sparks (2006, p. 49).
124
APPENDIX E
SUNSET EAST HIGH SCHOOL
Table 6
Sunset East High School
English/Language Arts
Provide the specific
grade level of the
subgroups assessed
during Spring 2008 in
the columns to the
right.
Grade
9
Grade
10
Grade
11
School-wide 21% 19% 15%
African-American
American
Indian/Alaskan Native
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic or Latino
20% 18% 15%
Pacific Islander
(Future Implications for Adequate
Yearly Progress—AYP)
Percent Proficient
Target: 44.5% for 2008—2009
Target: 55.6% for 2009—2010
Target: 66.7% for 2010—2011
ADD the percent advanced and
proficient for each of the subgroup(s)
by grade level and place the percentage
in the boxes provided.
White (not of Hispanic
origin)
Socio-economically-
disadvantaged
21% 19% 15%
English learners
I% 1% 0%
Students with
Disabilities
3% 0% 0%
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Questions Key Findings
1. Which of the subgroups DID
NOT meet the percent proficient
targets in English/Language Arts
2. Using the AYP report, what
subgroup(s) of students are at-
risk of not meeting proficient
1. No subgroup met their targets.
2. All subgroups are at risk of not meeting the
targets. Our goal is to meet SAFE HARBOUR
targets.
Sunset East High 2009- ELA- CAHSEE
Number of Grade 10 Answer Documents Processed: 456
125
Tale 6, continued
Category
Number
Tested
Number
Passed
Percent
Passed
Number
Not
Passed
Percent
Not
Passed
Mean
Scaled
Score
All Students Tested 375 202 54% 173 46% 353
Race/Ethnicity
Category
Number
Tested
Number
Passed
Percent
Passed
Number
Not
Passed
Percent
Not
Passed
Mean
Scaled
Score
American Indian or Alaska Native 0 -- --% -- --% --
Asian 10 -- --% -- --% --
Pacific Islander 0 -- --% -- --% --
Filipino 19 10 53% 9 47% 360
Hispanic or Latino 312 167 54% 145 46% 352
African-American or Black (not of
Hispanic origin) 7 -- --% -- --% --
White (not of Hispanic origin) 26 17 65% 9 35% 357
Declined to state 1 -- --% -- --% --
Unknown 0 -- --% -- --% --
Economic Status
Category
Number
Tested
Number
Passed
Percent
Passed
Number
Not
Passed
Percent
Not
Passed
Mean
Scaled
Score
Non-Economically Disadvantaged
Students 12 8 67% 4 33% 367
Economically Disadvantaged
Students 344 186 54% 158 46% 352
126
APPENDIX F
USC DISSERTATION DATA COLLECTION
SUPERINTENDENT’S BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCES IN EDUCATION
1. How many years have you been a superintendent? _____
2. How many years have you served as superintendent of your district? _____
3. What types of assignments did you have prior to becoming a superintendent?
4. What are the student demographics of your district?
5. Does your district serve Title 1 students? Yes ____ No ____
Other (please specify)
6. Are there substantial targeted student subgroups (such as EL/ESL or low
socio-demographic) in your district, whose test scores are below proficiency?
Yes _____ No _____
Other (please specify)
7. As the instructional leader of your district, what are you endorsing to close
achievement gaps at low-performing school sites?
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT- THE
SUPERINTENDENT'S PERSPECTIVE
8. Do you think that school-site professional development is necessary?
If yes, please explain.
9. Should school-site professional development be collaborative and learner-
focused?
O School-site professional development should always be collaborative
and learner-focused.
O School-site professional development should sometimes be
collaborative and learner-focused.
O School-site professional development should never be collaborative
and learner-focused.
Other (please specify)
127
10. How do you facilitate a collaborative school-site professional development?
11. How do you provide the necessary support and resources available to espouse
an interdependent system of professional development at school sites?
12. Should school administrators facilitate a campus vision that will promote
student achievement?
O School administrators should always facilitate a campus vision that will
promote student achievement.
O School administrators should sometimes facilitate a campus vision that
will promote student achievement.
O School administrators should never facilitate a campus vision that will
promote student achievement.
Other (please specify)
13. How do you facilitate a campus vision that will promote student
achievement?
14. Should instructional leadership empower his or her faculty members to
believe in their collegial abilities and endeavors?
O Instructional leadership should always empower his or her faculty
members to believe in their collegial abilities and endeavors.
O Instructional leadership should sometimes empower his or her faculty
members to believe in their collegial abilities and endeavors.
O Instructional leadership should never empower his or her faculty
members to believe in their collegial abilities and endeavors.
Other (please specify)
15. How do you motivate staff members of low-performing schools to become
empowered in their abilities and improve student learning?
16. Should professional development be focused on improved student learning
and instructional methods that are both relevant and useful for all
classrooms?
O Professional development should always be focused on improved
student learning and instructional methods that are both relevant and
useful for all classrooms.
O Professional development should sometimes be focused on improved
student learning and instructional methods that are both relevant and
useful for all classrooms.
128
O Professional development should never be focused on improved student
learning and instructional methods that are both relevant and useful for all
classrooms.
Other (please specify)
17. To ensure that groups meet their objectives, professional development
meetings should be organized by a system of norms, protocols, and a group
facilitator.
O Always true
O Sometimes true Never true
Other (please specify)
18. School leaders should endorse collective responsibility among certificated
members for their students' learning and academic achievement.
O Always true
O Sometimes true Never true
Other (please specify)
19. Many targeted students are very low-performing in their English Language
Arts reading comprehension and writing skills, alarmingly so in inner city
secondary schooling.
Which particular types of teacher training do you endorse to close
achievement gaps among EL/ESL and low socio economic students, who
are struggling in this subject?
20. Which professional development methods have you utilized before and
believe to have been successful or have produced successful outcomes?
Please explain.
ASSESSMENT OF CERTIFICATED STAFF
21. Are the majority of your certificated faculty fully credentialed or highly
qualified in their subject matter or assignments?
O Yes
O No
O Not sure
129
22. What is your general assessment of the quality of work regarding your
certificated employees?
O Excellent
O Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Other (please specify)
23. To what extent do you find the means of assessing teaching performance in
your district to be effective?
O Our evaluations of teaching are quite ineffective.
O Our evaluations of teaching are somewhat ineffective. Our evaluations
of teaching are somewhat effective. Our evaluations of teaching are quite
effective.
Other (please specify)
24. To what degree are school sites in your district aligning their curriculum with
the grade level standards of the state?
O Completely inconsistent.
O Somewhat inconsistent. Somewhat consistent. Completely consistent.
Other (please specify)
25. How would you rate the overall morale of the certificated staff in your
district?
O Morale tends to be very high.
O Morale tends to be high.
O Morale tends to be moderate.
O Morale tends to be low.
O Morale tends to be very low.
Other (please specify)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The following research utilized student performance data regarding the English Language Arts curriculum from a secondary, very low-performing school site located within the Los Angeles/Hollywood community, whereby the majority of the student population was socio-disadvantaged and served a preponderance of ESL/EL learners. For the purposes of improving student achievement at this school, as well comparable school sites with similar student populaces and learning disparities, this study ascertained endorsed collegial training methods by superintendents, whose instructional leadership had contributed to comprehensive academic progress among such demographics. Current educational studies have concluded that there are direct correlations between enhanced student and teacher efficacy in core curriculum content such as English Language Arts and from school-site developed strategies created by an empowered and engaged staff development process. For the purpose of determining the most optimal professional development plans to increase English Language Development and to close staggering achievement gaps among English Language Learners, Southern California district superintendents were interviewed, observed, and surveyed. The data of this study affirmed that educators, guided by visionary, collaborative leaders, had advanced opportunities to become mutually accountable stakeholders, to obtain school-site goals, and to build rapport with their peers and administrators throughout their professional endeavors.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The role of the superintendent in ensuring school board focus on student achievement

PDF

Effective strategies superintendents utilize in building political coalitions to increase student achievement

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K–12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

The secondary school principal's role as instructional leader in teacher professional development

PDF

Superintendents' viewpoint of the role stakeholders can play in improving student achievement

PDF

Strategies employed by successful urban superintendents responding to demands for student achievement reform

PDF

The sustainability of superintendent-led reforms to improve student achievement

PDF

The critical aspects of oversight that suburban superintendents, as instructional leaders, must employ to improve instruction

PDF

Effective strategies that urban superintendents use that improve the academic achievement for African-American males

PDF

A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

An examination of traditional versus non-traditional superintendents and the strategies they employ to improve student achievement

PDF

Successful communication strategies used by urban school district superintendents to build consensus in raising student achievement

PDF

Superintendents increase student achievement by selecting effective principals

PDF

The evolution of superintendents as instructional leaders: past, present, and future

PDF

A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement

PDF

Strategies employed by middle school principals successful in increasing and sustaining the mathematics achievement of African American students

PDF

Sustainable reform: a follow-up case study on one urban superintendent’s efforts to improve student achievement

Asset Metadata

Creator Patrick, Veta Deann (author)

Core Title The role of superintendents as instructional leaders: facilitating student achievement among ESL/EL learners through school-site professional development

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/06/2012

Defense Date 02/21/2012

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

Tag ESL/EL learners,instructional leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,school site professional development,student achievement

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy Max (committee chair), García, Pedro Enrique (committee chair), Crew, Rudolph (committee member)

Creator Email veta_patrick@yahoo.com,vpatrick@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-3480

Unique identifier UC11288087

Identifier usctheses-c3-3480 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-PatrickVet-578.pdf

Dmrecord 3480

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Patrick, Veta Deann

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