Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
(USC Thesis Other)
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY i
A CAPSTONE PROJECT: CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP OF ENGLISH LEARNERS
IN LITERACY AT SUNSHINE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL USING THE GAP ANALYSIS
MODEL
by
Juan Carlos Herrera
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
August 2013
Copyright 2013 Juan Carlos Herrera
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY ii
Dedication
I dedicate this dissertation to my mother, Sonia Pineda Polanco, for doing her best while
raising me as a single mom and for always supporting me in my endeavors. Mamá, gracias por su
apoyo, sus consejos y su amor incondicional no sólo durante este programa, pero durante toda mi
vida. Ha sido un gran sistema de apoyo para mí y has sido mi mayor animador desde el primer día.
Dedico mis logros académicos y profesionales a usted y sé que estará conmigo durante mis
próximos pasos como líder en educación. Muchas gracias por ayudarme a ser el hombre que soy
hoy. I love you!
I also dedicate this dissertation to my extended family and friends. Gracias a mi abuelita,
mis tías, tíos, primos, primas y otros familiares por creer en mí, gracias por mantenerme conectado
a tierra, y por las distracciones que eran muy necesarias cuando me tenia que alejar del proceso de
escritura. To all my friends, too many to name, thank you for your kind words and actions during
this journey. Your friendship means so much to me.
Another group to whom I dedicate my dissertation are my coworkers. To my former
coworkers at Rosemont Elementary, Plaza de la Raza, and Lennox Middle School, thank you for
your dedication, hard work, and for the countless laughs we have shared. To my present coworkers
at Jefferson Elementary, thank you for accepting me into your family and for your unconditional
support as I tried to balance school and work responsibilities.
Finally, I dedicate this work to all my Salvadorean and Salvadorean-American brothers
and sisters. Estoy orgulloso de mis raíces latinas, sobre todo de ser salvadoreño. Mi pulgarcito me
proporciono las herramientas para continuar con mis estudios en este país y alcanzar las metas
que me propuse. A seguir adelante!
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY iii
Acknowledgements
My journey through the doctor of education program at USC was not easy and it is one
that I could not have completed on my own. There are so many people who I would like to thank
for experiencing this three year endeavor with me. First, I would like to thank my family and
friends for their unconditional support, advice, kind words, and for believing in me every step of the
way. More importantly, I want to thank my family and friends for providing me with the inspiration
to complete this program.
I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Robert Rueda, for his guidance, for
providing me with immediate feedback, and for his passion for education. Dr. Rueda, you are a true
leader, a great professor but an even better human being. Thank you so much for all of your help
during this process, I learned so much from you and I am proud to have worked alongside you. I
would also like to extend my gratitude to Dr. Laurie Love and Dr. Kenneth Yates for being part of
my dissertation committee. Your expertise, advice, and knowledge were essential for the
completion of this dissertation. A special thanks to the principal, teachers, and staff who welcomed
my colleagues and I into their school so that we could conduct our research.
I am forever thankful for my inquiry team members Dr. Sharon Hobbs Bennett and Dr.
Enyetta Mingo-Long. You ladies are true professionals and your dedication to education is very
inspiring. Thank you for your ideas, your commitment, the great conversations and for your
friendship during this entire experience. I know you both will continue to advocate for children and
continue to be great educators. Fight on!
I am extremely grateful for Dr. Juanita Naranjo. Amiga, you are a huge reason why I
decided to join the Ed.D program and you served as great motivation for me during this three year
journey. Thank you for the numerous writing sessions at Starbucks, for our great conversations
about school, work, and life in general. Thank you for pushing me during those times when I was
feeling unmotivated and for your true professionalism. You are a great educator and I have no
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY iv
doubt that great things are ahead of you. I am proud to be your amigo and I look forward to
growing together as leaders.
To my friends and new doctors of education: Dr. Carlos Avila, Dr. Evelyn Jimenez, Dr.
Vivian Choi, and Dr. Camille Ramos-Beal, thank you for your passion, your energy, and your
commitment to education. You guys really made this experience much easier and much more fun
for me. I know that our friendship will last long after we are through with the program. I am
extremely proud of your success and I know that the best is yet to come for all of us.
Finally, I would like to thank the guys- Ricky, Victor, Faustino, Julio, George, and
Alfredo for helping me stay sane during this entire program, for the much needed distractions, and
for reminding me to maintain a balance in life. A most sincere thanks for your friendship during the
last 15 years.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY v
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................ …viii
Preface.................................................................................................................................ix
Chapter 1 - Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2 - Background ...................................................................................................... 6
Chapter 3 – Methodology ............................................................................................... . 21
Chapter 4 – Findings…………………………………………………………………….39
Chapter 5 – Literature Review of Possible Solutions…………………………………...64
Chapter 6 – Proposed Solutions…………………………………………………………79
References ......................................................................................................................... 89
Appendices
A. Parent Survey-English………………………………………………………………..95
B. Parent Survey-Spanish……………………………………………………………….98
C. Teacher Survey………………………………………………………………………101
D. Reading Attitudes Inventory………………………………………………………...103
E. Teacher Interviews…………………………………………………………………..108
F. Principal Interview…………………………………………………………………..109
G. Assumed Causes Chart……………………………………………………………...110
H. Dissertation Proposal Presentation…………………………………………………112
I. Presentation to Sunshine Administration……………………………………………114
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY vi
List of Tables
Table 3.1 Mission statement, organizational goal, and stakeholder's goals 24
Table 3.2 Summary of teacher demographics 27
Table 3.3 Sunshine Elementary student demographics summary 28
Table 3.4 Knowledge assumed causes 32
Table 3.5 Motivation assumed causes 33
Table 3.6 Organization assumed causes 34
Table 4.1 Summary of goal alignment 47
Table 4.2 Summary of professional development 49
Table 4.3 Summary of teacher collaboration 51
Table 4.4 Caring environment parent survey responses 52
Table 4.5 Problem solving parent survey responses 53
Table 4.6 Reasons for school to home contact by teachers 55
Table 4.7 Summary of parent involvement 57
Table 4.8 Summary of culturally relevant instructional strategies 59
Table 4.9 Summary of site based leadership support 62
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY vii
List of Figures
Figure 1. A Partial List of the selection of Assumed Causes…...........................................37
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY viii
Abstract
This project was an alternative capstone dissertation conducted by a team of three
doctoral students. The project focused on systematic and long-term underachievement of the
English Language (EL) population of a single school, Sunshine Elementary, using the gap
analysis model (Clark and Estes, 2008). More specifically, the purpose of the analysis was to
examine possible causes for the literacy gap that impact student reading achievement at
Sunshine. As part of the problem-solving model, the inquiry group reviewed the school’s
mission, goals, and organizational gaps. The team investigated possible root causes for the
performance gaps noted. During this phase of the project, data were collected from Sunshine
Elementary administrators, teachers, parents and students who completed surveys regarding their
views towards literacy and the overall school environment. The principal, as well as several
teachers participated in semi-structured face-to-face interviews, discussions, and a review of the
current school adopted literacy program. This step led to a condensed list of validated root
causes: (a) goal alignment, (b) professional development, (c) teacher collaboration, (d) parent
involvement, (e) culturally relevant pedagogy, and (f) site based leadership. Finally, the inquiry
team developed recommendations about viable solutions based on a review of the literature and
research and theory on developmental perspectives on reading and literacy. The awareness of the
benefits of developmental reading instruction has implications for positive social change by
linking the multiple dimensions of reading, literacy, and comprehension development for ELs at
this school.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY ix
Preface
Some of the chapters of this dissertation were co-authored and have been identified as
such. While jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices. To meet their objective of developing
highly skilled practitioners equipped to take on real-world challenges, the USC Graduate School
and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted this inquiry team to carry out this
shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with two other doctoral candidates,
Sharon H. Bennett and Enyetta Mingo-Long. This team met with Sunshine Elementary School
with the aim of helping the school resolve a genuine problem. However, the process for
dissecting and resolving the problem was too large for a single dissertation. As a result, the three
dissertations produced by the inquiry team collectively address the needs of Sunshine
Elementary School.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1
.Authors: Juan Carlos Herrera, Sharon L. H. Bennett and Enyetta Mingo-Long
This gap analysis project focused on the differences of systematic and long-term
underachievement of the English Learner (EL) population of a single Elementary school. The goal
of this analysis was to examine possible causes and recommend solutions to the school. A picture
of this issue will be addressed from a national perspective, before describing the school at the local
level.
The Problem
The rapid growth of the United States English Learner population is one of the most
significant demographic trends in the United States. With the expeditious evolution of ELs in the
U.S. accounting for one-fifth of the current school age population, the long-term educational
underachievement patterns of these students is of considerable importance (U.S. Census Bureau,
2006). The dramatic increase of ELs in school age population has increased by 150%, and ELs
now account for one-sixth of the school-age population, and over one-fifth of the public
elementary school enrollments (Verdugo, 2006). In the U.S. school age population, the
educational outcomes of English Learner students are far behind non-ELs. For example, ELs have
lower levels of school readiness at the start of kindergarten than their English speaking
counterparts (Anderson, 2005). The high school completion rate for ELs is substantially lower
than White students, EL students are less likely to attend and graduate college (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2006). The disparity of the underachievement of ELs in education continues to be seen as
1
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While the version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 2
a formidable problem decade after decade. The purpose of this project was to investigate specific
causes for elementary EL student literacy underachievement that may be addressed by targeted
interventions. This review examined the factors found to be important to the academic progress of
EL students from the national, state, and local district level, which provided the larger context for
the current project.
Importance of the problem
This particular problem is important at the national level because student demographics
are rapidly changing in the United States even as achievement differences continue. These
changes present new challenges for teachers and administrators across the nation. By the turn of
the millennium, there were fourteen million students who spoke a language other than English at
home (August, 2007). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2004), Spanish
speakers are the largest group of language minority students, followed by Asian language
speakers, and then other European languages. Schools nationwide are struggling to reach the
demand of increasing populations of English-language learners. One specific reason for the
struggles that the schools are encountering is that there is a huge diversity of languages that
students are using all across the fifty states. In the 2000-2001 school year, over 460 languages
were reported to be spoken by ELs in the United States (Kindler, 2002). The high number of ELs
in schools, the vast number of languages spoken by ELs, and the high rate of teachers that are
unprepared to teach this particular population has led to significant performance gaps between
ELs and their non-EL counterparts.
The rapid demographic shift during the last few decades has created new changes within
our society. For instance, there is a new wave of immigrant workers who are categorized as
Limited English Proficient (LEP). According to Sum et al (2002), about 46% of immigrant
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 3
workers are considered LEP and that those of Hispanic origin have shown to be particularly
disadvantage. This is more evident now than in previous decades because the types of jobs
available to workers with limited language skills have changed. The jobs of today require
increased literacy skills that some workers are not able to meet. More entry-level jobs now
demand that workers be able to read, write, and solve problems in English. K-12 Schools are
ideal places where students can master sufficient English to be competitive in the job market
and/or to succeed in higher education settings. Sadly though, many ELs are not being adequately
prepared for such tasks. Another reason why English language proficiency matters is because it
may determine what type of life an individual will live. Work by Duval-Couetil & Mikulecky
(2010) states that there is a strong correlation between language proficiency and lifetime
earnings. In other words, the higher the language proficiency of an individual, the more money
an individual will earn throughout his or her lifetime. This reiterates the importance of EL
population mastering the English language before they graduate from high school. Society is
demanding a new type of worker, one that is more skilled and that has a mastery of the English
language. The overall low performance of ELs is a significant concern for both schools across
the country and to society as a whole. Currently, there are significant performance gaps between
ELs and their non-EL counterparts, which affect schools and the larger context. As the number
of EL students increase, so does the need to find solutions on how to effectively improve the
performance of our ELs. This is an arduous task for educators because schools are not equipped
to effectively educate ELs, who present unique challenges.
Since the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002, states are
required to report the performance of all its students including the major subgroups (Kindler,
2002). One of the largest subgroups is the EL subgroup. The scores of ELs on the California
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 4
Standardized Test (CST) are used to determine the schools’ overall Academic Performance
Index (API) and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Failure to meet one or both of these
targets may result in sanctions for the participating schools.
Moreover, schools are also required to help ELs improve their language proficiency. In
California, the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) has been implemented
since 2001. It is used to formally assess the English language proficiency of EL students (Mora
Villa, & Dávila, 2006). Students are given the delineation of EL based on their home language.
Students who are tested using the CELDT are tested in four areas: reading, writing, listening and
speaking. The purpose of the assessment is (a) to measure the students’ English proficiency
level and (b) to help measure the movement of students to the early advanced and advanced
bands, which demonstrates that students are proficient in English. During the last decade,
schools have been held accountable at the state and federal level for improving the performance
of their EL population. It is imperative that schools across the nation identify the needs or their
EL population and come up with effective strategies to help improve their performance.
The underperformance of ELs in literacy has a negative impact on the larger context that
is society. If ELs struggle in literacy related activities, they are in danger of not meeting the
academic standards. Without this foundation, they are more likely to struggle in school and less
likely to graduate from high school. Students who do not graduate from high school tend to be
less prepared for the rigors of the workforce or for the academic demands of higher education.
Because of these issues, it is essential that schools address the problem of literacy instruction and
learning, especially the at the elementary level. The problem must be acknowledged and then
root causes of the problem must be determined. It is essential to investigate this problem further
and determine some realistic and effective solutions.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 5
Specific purpose of the analysis
The purpose of the project was to examine possible causes for the reading achievement
gap at a single school, Sunshine Elementary, using the gap analysis model developed by Clark
and Estes (2008). Specifically, the inquiry group examined factors that impacted student
achievement, investigated possible causes, and developed viable solutions for Sunshine
Elementary. Specific attention was given to the educational barriers that exist within the EL
population from both a national and local perspective.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2
Authors: Juan Carlos Herrera, Sharon L. H. Bennett and Enyetta Mingo-Long
This chapter provides an overview of prominent factors that contribute to the disparity
between ELs and non-ELs academic achievement in general. Since this information provides the
general context for this problem area, it will be used as the foundation for examining EL reading
achievement in a single local setting. These factors include reading achievement on standardized
test (literacy development) of ELs, academic language, accountability, urban school reform, and
pedagogical content knowledge. Following this general overview, an analysis of how these
issues developed at Sunshine Elementary will be provided with guidance through the literature.
Literacy and English Learners
According to research presented by the Report of the National Literacy Panel on
language Minority Children and Youth (2006), “Language minority students enter U.S. schools
needing to learn oral language and literacy in a second language, and have to learn with
enormous efficiency if they are to catch up with their monolingual English classmates” (p. 53).
The ability to read defines a student’s success throughout their entire educational career (Kuhn et
al, 2010). Without concentrated attention to providing a strong, systematic literacy program for
students, and their success cannot be assured (Kuhn et al, 2010).
This section discusses the elements of literacy and how each one impacts the reading
achievement of the English Learner. Additionally, the barriers that exist for both English
2
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While the version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 7
Learner students and their teachers as it relates to literacy and reading will be discussed from
both a national and local perspective.
Language Components
Research conducted by Ramirez (2001) connects the following five language components
with student success:
• Phonemic Awareness: student ability to identify and manipulate phonemes into a spoken
language.
• Phonics: student ability to understand the relationship between letters and spoken words.
• Vocabulary & Syntax Development: student knowledge of stored information on the
meanings and pronunciations of words needed for communication.
• Reading Fluency: student ability to read words accurately and quickly while recognizing
and comprehending them simultaneously.
• Reading Comprehension Strategies: student ability to culminate all of the reading skills
and accomplish the goal of reading.
The aforementioned language components are seen as a requisite for effective instruction
of ELs as well as struggling readers (Schulman, 1986). Darling-Hammond (2000) affirms that
effective instruction must use language components. The research of Schulman, Ramirez, and
Darling-Hammond all indicate that teachers can effectively teach language components by
augmenting the language components with the students’ native language.
Why is a strong literacy program essential for academic success?
Literacy development is a process that is componential and cumulative, and continues
through adulthood. (August & Shanahan, 2008). Literacy refers to students’ ability to use
language to effectively communicate with others through reading, writing, listening and speaking
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 8
activities (Yopp & Yopp, 2000). A successful reader is one that can not only decode, but can
transfer what is read across the curriculum (August & Shanahan, 2008). The ability to read is a
large predictor of student’s attitudes about school and learning (LeClair, Doll, Osborn & Jones,
2009). Because of this, teachers must make a commitment to provide students with the tools
they need to ensure that they can navigate through the educational process successfully.
The Elements of Literacy
The elements of literacy are those specific and explicit activities that support novice,
developing and experienced readers (Dooley & Matthews, 2009). While there skills are taught
primarily throughout the elementary years, they follow readers throughout their educational
careers, and have the potential to impact College and Career readiness (Jones & King, 2012).
This section discusses the specific elements of literacy that are essential to creating a successful
reader. This section will also illustrate how these skills build upon one another, and that when
one is not appropriately addressed, reading difficulty will occur.
Early Reading Activities. Clay (2005) coined the term “Emergent literacy”, or the
behaviors that babies and young children demonstrate that emulate the act of reading before the
act of conventional reading occurs (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). She believes that children
become readers through a litany of pre-reading activities that prepare them to make connections
with text and understand what is being read (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Research shows
that, from birth, parents and caregivers need to engage babies and toddlers in activities that
introduce the beginnings of oral language (Smith, 2000; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Such activities,
as being read to, being sung to and expressive movement (Smith, 2000; Yopp& Yopp, 2000)
foster emergent literacy.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 9
Phonemic awareness is the understanding that the speech stream consists of sequential
sounds than make a difference in communication (Yopp & Yopp, 2000; Griffith & Olson, 1992;
August & Shanahan, 2008). Phonemic awareness activities must be child appropriate (Yopp &
Yopp, 2000). This can occur through the use of songs and chants that manipulate phonemes by
changing the vowel or consonant sounds that provide engagement and encourage participation
(Smith, 2000; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Even if the words are nonsensical, the manipulation
demonstrates to students how the simple change of one sound in a word can also change meaning
(Smith, 2000). While these activities are highly effective, it is important to remember that such
activities, such as singing and chanting must be deliberate and part of a systematic
literacy/reading program (Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Without simple activities such as these,
learning how to decode text and comprehend what is read on a literal and figurative level will be
much more difficult (Halle, 2009). For EL students who may or may not have phonemic
awareness in their primary language, explicit activities that promote phonemic awareness will
promote success in this area (Yopp & Yopp, 2000; Halle, 2009).
Students with strong phonemic awareness skills have a much better chance of being
successful readers than students who do not (Yopp & Yopp, 2000; Olson and Griffith, 2002).
Each day, teachers at the elementary level work with students who have not had the opportunity
to participate in these early activities, which contribute to the issues that so many students have
with learning how to read (Olson and Griffith, 2002). For the English Learner, the research
suggests that, because of the differences in phonemes between languages, phonemic awareness
in English should be integrated into the reading readiness process (August & Shanahan, 2008).
When this does not occur, it makes reading and the motivation to persist in reading related
activities even more challenging (Halle, 2009). Phonological awareness is the ability to
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 10
consciously attend to the sounds of language as distinct from its meaning (August and Shanahan,
2008). This step comes after students have phonemic awareness and is an indicator of successful
reading.
Parents support for early literacy. How students progress in reading has to do with
how adults address the four following aspects of early literacy: (a) print knowledge; (b)
phonological awareness; (c) writing; and (d) oral language (Restrepo & Towle-Harmon, 2008).
Children who are between the ages of two and five need to have ample opportunities to
participate in these activities (Yopp & Yopp, 2000; Neuman, 2004). The literature suggests that
parent activities in the above areas support success in reading (Yopp & Yopp, 2000; Kissinger,
2004). To support this, parents must be the first and foremost literacy model for a child
(Kissinger, 2004). For example, parents who make the conscious decision to read are modeling
to that child that reading is important (Kissinger, 2004). A concern is that the parents whose
students need the most support do not systematically participate in such activities (Kissinger,
2004). Parents who have low literacy levels themselves may focus on the product of reading
such as the book or the words, versus the process of reading, which entails developing an
understanding of what is actually being read (Kissinger, 2004).
Phonics, Sight Words, Vocabulary, and Fluency. Once students have an
understanding of concept of print and phonological awareness, then they are prepared to transfer
these skills to phonics instruction, sight words, vocabulary, and fluency. The four elements go
together because as readers develop, the skills build upon one another in such a way that the
more comfortable students become in phonics and sight words, and the more sight words a
reader knows, the more fluent the reader will become. While these skills are focused upon from
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 11
Kindergarten through second grade, the processes continue throughout a students’ academic
career, albeit not as explicitly.
Phonics instruction involves understanding the connection with certain letters, groups of
letters, and symbols and assigning specific sound to the symbols through play as well as explicit
instruction (Scully and Roberts, 2001). Although many reading readiness activities have taken
place before students can understand and apply phonics, this is the point in a reader's
development that he or she comes to the realization that he or she is a "reader." For the EL
student, phonics can present difficulties if the sounds and alphabet in their native language
differs from English (Brice & Brice, 2009). This is especially the case if students have not
participated in the early literacy activities previously presented.
As students progress through Kindergarten and first grade, the development of sight
words and vocabulary assists students in moving quickly through text, and is the predecessor to
successful fluency and comprehension (Smith, 2000). Having a strong sight word vocabulary is
essential because there are words that may or may not have specific phonics rules, but are used
often enough that students need to look at the entire word and know what the word says (Allen,
1998; Williams, Phillips-Birdsong, Hufnagel, Hungler, & Lundstrom, 2009). Vocabulary
development instruction emphasizes the understanding of the meaning of words in and out of
context (Smith, 2000; Bauer and Arazi, 2011). For the EL student, the emphasis on sight words
and vocabulary development makes both oral and written production easier, and improves the
reading confidence as well (Bauer and Arazi, 2011).
Fluency is the ability to move through text quickly without losing meaning (Rasinski,
2000; Conderman & Strobel 2008). Without strong fluency skills, students, especially ELs, will
experience reading difficulty (August & Shanahan, 2008; Conderman & Strobel, 2008; Kuhn,
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 12
Meisinger, Levy & Rasinski, 2010). While fluency can be related to phonics, vocabulary and
sight words, it is also a stand-alone skill that must be practiced explicitly in order for students to
be successful.
Reading Comprehension. According to Bauer and Arazi (2011), reading
comprehension is “a complex cognitive process that requires simultaneous use of rapid word
recognition and semantic and syntactic cues in order to construct meaning using personal
knowledge and the content of the text” (p. 383). The ability to comprehend what is read is the
reason why schools emphasize the other literacy activities previously discussed (Bauer & Arazi,
2011). It provides access to all content area instruction (Moss, 2005). Effective comprehension
also has strong implications for college to career readiness (Jones & King, 2012). However,
having all the literacy skills discussed is not enough. Motivation also plays a large part in
reading comprehension (August and Shanahan, 2008). Ensuring that all students participate in
instructional strategies in an environment that promotes high levels of engagement fosters
motivation.
Appropriate Instructional Activities. A classroom that is literate and print-rich seeks
to engage students in instructional activities that motivate and encourage reading development
(Hawkins, 2009). According to Vygotsky (2002) learning is a highly social construct, where
students learn best when they are given opportunities to discuss what is being learned with peers.
Because of this, students need to have the opportunity to manipulate language in ways that
strengthen their early literacy skills (Hawkins, 2008). This is through appropriate instructional
practices that allow for oral interaction. Additionally, instruction must provide appropriate
scaffolding for students in need (Manyak, 2008). Research concerning student engagement
strategies suggests that the systematic application of engagement strategies (think-pair-share, use
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 13
of white boards for response) allows the support necessary for student success (Scott & Teele,
2009).
The steps to literacy are extremely complex. Access to the literacy process as a whole is
the only assurance of success for all students (Maynak, 2008; Guccione, 2011). Neglecting or
omitting even one part of the process can prove detrimental for even the brightest of students
(Maynak, 2008; Netten, Droop & Verhoeven, 2010). To compound this even further, ELs
experience more such concerns with access to the literacy process than the current dominant
group (Hawkins, 2004; Gucdone, 2011). This section will discuss the key barriers to access to
literacy as it specifically pertains to the EL student. While both national and local perspectives
have a similar look, they will be discussed separately.
Barriers to Literacy-A National Dilemma
On a national level, there are over 400 languages that are spoken by ELs who are enrolled
in US schools (Kindler, 2002). The obvious dilemma is that with so many languages with their
own unique linguistic patterns that it is a challenge for teachers to address the literacy and
reading needs of all students (Harper & DeJong, 2009). Additionally, not being prepared to
engage in the literacy process has national ramifications. Students who attend public schools in
the U.S. come with their own perceptions of school and learning (Madrid, 2011). They are
taught by teachers who lack the experience and/or desire to service the English Learner
population is earnest (Harper & DeJong, 2009). Many of these teachers may have preconceived
ideas concerning the ability of the ELs in their classroom (Harper & DeJong, 2009). Many of
the schools are majority English Learner (More than 50%) so the impact of substandard teaching
is concentrated on a very large group of students. Based on the teacher perception of EL
students and the level of instruction EL students receive, it is not surprising that there is a
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 14
population of ELs that do not have adequate access to the full advantage of the literacy process
as early as the third grade.
While there are many teachers who believe that the linguistic differences that EL students
bring to the classroom are beneficial to the overall learning process, there are too many teachers
who do not (Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). The literature suggests three issues that
impede teachers from believing that ELs can learn. First, teachers of English Learner students
do not always believe that the students have the capacity to learn (Bae, Holloway, Li &
Bempechat, 2008; Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). As students get older, and they become
more adept to examine the differential treatment of teachers, this perception greatly impacts their
effort on tasks (Bae, Holloway, Li & Bempechat, 2008; Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011).
Due to the perceived ability of EL students, coupled with the lack of effort on the part of
students as a result of these perceptions, teachers feel validated to “water down” the curriculum,
therefore not allowing access to grade level appropriate content and learning activities (Calderón,
Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). The No Child Left Behind Legislation, requires that all students,
including ELs, are to be held to the same high academic standard (Department of Education,
2002); yet full access to the curriculum is not guaranteed. Failure to focus on teaching grade
level appropriate curriculum adds to the disparity between the achievement of ELs and their non
El counterparts (Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). Second, teachers believe that, even though
there is a growing amount of ELs entering public schools who are in need of specific strategies
to ensure literacy success, their current practices in the classroom should remain the same
(Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011).
Keeping in mind the tremendous within-group variability, the perception of parental
involvement is also a concern with the English Learner. Depending on the cultural group, the
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 15
infrastructure of the school differs greatly from the culture of many parents (Madrid, 2011). For
example, in many cultures, there is a trust in teachers that compels parents to do what needs to be
done without interference from parents (Madrid, 2011). The perception of parents by teachers,
based on this trust, is that of disinterest (Madrid, 2011). Also, teaching strategies, expectations
and procedures may be so dichotomous that parents are unable to help their child (Madrid,
2011). For example, according to research by Dawson (2009), homework is an independent
activity in the eyes of many groups of parents based on how they were schooled. Much of the
homework in the primary grades in United States schools requires parent direction, participation
and feedback (Gill & Schlossman, 2003; Dawson, 2009). So, when homework is not returned or
completed to satisfaction, the assumption is that parents do not have an interest in the education
of their children. For example, according to a study by Buenning and Tolleffson (1987), EL
parents do care about their children, and they do place a high regard on education. However,
many EL parents simply have a value orientation that differs from most white parents. For
example, students whose families do not consider reading a recreational activity, but as a
survival function may not perceive reading as a viable choice outside of the constraints of the
classroom (Klauda, 2009). This is not to say that reading is not considered important; it is just to
what end should reading take place.
Another concern in regards to the instruction of ELs is that of teacher skill and
experience. Teachers are simply not prepared to teach EL students in the manner they should be
taught (Calderon, Sanchez & Slavin, 2011). There is also a limited amount of teacher education
programs that offer more than peripheral training on how to work best with ELs. In the United
States, only twenty states have specific requirements for EL instruction as part of the
credentialing requirement, and even this varies greatly. Although the need for qualified teachers
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 16
of ELs is a grave concern, the reality is that the least qualified teachers are servicing the ELs
nationwide (Hawkins, 2004; Harper & DeJong, 2009). Large urban areas where large
concentrations (30% or more) of ELs go to school are being taught by newer teachers. These
teachers do not have the seniority to choose where they teach (Gandara & Maxwell-Jolly, 2000;
Harper & DeJong, 2009). These newer teachers may not have the repertoire of skills necessary
to effectively instruct ELs. Additionally, there is a nationwide climate of teachers who have
taught for less than five years receiving non-reelect notices due to budget constraints (Harper &
DeJong, 2009). Gandara and Maxwell-Jolly (2000) also discussed the issue of pre-service
teachers participating in what they is called the “infusion approach” when preparing new
teachers for the rigors of working with culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms. This
means that pre-service teachers may be given a cursory glance of multiculturalism without the
actual tools to work with such a population. Moreover, there is an emphasis on one culture with
the incorrect assumption that this one culture will be the only one that will be taught.
Barriers to Literacy-State and Local Concerns
California has a myriad of languages. In Southern California, where Sunshine
Elementary is located, the predominant second language is Spanish (US Department of the
Census, 2010). According to the United States Census Bureau (2011) more than half of the
citizens of Centerville, CA were born outside of the Unites States. An unmistakable majority of
these immigrants were from Mexico. Also, most of the students within these groups were
concentrated in areas that are high poverty (Harper & DeJong, 2009). As discussed previously,
teachers with the least amount of teaching experience were assigned the task of teaching the
students who need the most support (Harper & DeJong, 2009).
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 17
Content Knowledge
In addition to language components, elements of literacy, and barriers to literacy the
literature states that student success is measured through teachers that have a strong command of
content knowledge (Ramirez, 2001). Haycock (1998) states that there is considerable research
that shows how important a teachers’ content knowledge contributes to student learning.
Research regarding the importance of content knowledge is also supported by Darling-Hammond
(2000) who suggests that content knowledge is vital to good teaching.
Every student and every culture constructs and develops language arts in their own way.
When a teacher fails to understand how cultural differences can yield different developments in
language arts, learners will be at a disadvantage. Haycock (1998) believes it is paramount for
teacher educators to attend to the culture of their students and use that culture as a means of
enhancing student knowledge to a diverse student population.
Contributing Factors Related to EL Achievement
There are three additional areas that merit brief discussion related to ELs’ achievement in
literacy. The areas are: urban school reform, accountability, and pedagogical content knowledge.
These three areas are important in understanding the educational context for EL students and
they also provide clues about areas to investigate in the course of this gap analysis.
Urban School Reform. Urban schools across the U.S. are faced with the challenge of
reforming literacy readiness and implementing literacy initiatives for ELs. Often the
accountability measures for urban school reform impede the ability of schools to improve the
literacy development of ELs in a meaningful way. Therefore, the purpose of urban school
reform initiatives is to define what constitutes as a viable literacy program for ELs (Guccione,
2011). Standards governing these criteria are established with curricular and instructional
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 18
measures to substantiate school reform. As future change agents of urban school reform, an
analysis of Sunshine Elementary literacy readiness and implementation of literacy initiatives for
its ELs is essential. More importantly, as educational change agents we must work towards
accomplishing the global goal of promoting institutional changes that encourage long-term
effects rather than short-term efforts (Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Urban school reform is of particular importance to closing the literacy gap at Sunshine
Elementary. Currently, the school has been unable to close the literacy achievement gap with the
current literacy strategies used to teach ELs. Darling-Hammond (2000) affirms that it is the
urban students whom educators have most frequently failed.
The gap analysis project for Sunshine Elementary is significant because more than 50%
of students of color live in urban areas (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006), and students of color are
nationally the fastest growing demographic group (National Center for Education Statistics,
2006). Darling-Hammond (2000) posits that as a nation, education systems are not experiencing
success with the current expanding student population on whom our future economic and social
well-being depends on.
Accountability. As articulated by Rueda (2011), increased accountability is best
exemplified by the federal education law, No Child Left Behind, which holds states, districts, and
schools accountable for student achievement based on standardized test scores (Linn, 2003),
although individual states have implemented their own parallel systems.
Accountability is what students should know represented by what is reflected on formal
assessments and how students compare to others in a specified reference group (Rueda, 2011, p.
26). Rueda (2011) asserts that the accountability approach has been a highly salient feature of
the educational landscape in recent years, and has been used as an essential tool in educational
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 19
reform. School accountability is crucial to the success of Sunshine’s Elementary English Learner
population. Currently, Sunshine is not a program improvement school. However, if the school
continues to show significant EL underachievement, failure to show consistent improvement
may lead to reconstitution. Therefore, the gap analysis project for Sunshine Elementary will
assist the school with being accountable for the literacy achievement of its EL students.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). The literature suggests the significance of a
teacher possessing strong subject matter competency as well as being culturally relevant in the
classroom as necessary requirements for student success (Schulman, 1986). Pedagogical content
knowledge is best defined by Schulman (1986) as the knowledge of how to teach effectively in a
discipline, as opposed to knowledge of the discipline itself.
The ability to possess strong cultural competence and teach effectively in a discipline, as
opposed to knowledge of the discipline itself is often a challenge that exists for today’s teachers.
Moule (2012) defines cultural competence as the ability to interact effectively with people of
different cultural/ethnic backgrounds. In the context of teaching, cultural competence enables
the teacher to educate students whose cultures differ from their own. Teachers must understand
that the students’ cultures have a considerable influence on learning (Mayer 2008). Wilson,
Konopak, and Readence (1993) conclude that “teacher educators should attempt to understand
the cultural uniqueness of the individual and make concerted efforts to assist students with
making personal connections between the theories presented in the teacher education program
and classroom practice”(p. 230). Another concept significant to PCK is the Zone of Proximal
Development (ZPD), first introduced in the work of Vygotsky (1978). The ZPD is the difference
between what a learner can do without help and what he or she can do with the help of a more
competent other. Kozulin (1990) believes that the ZPD is the essential element in the formation
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 20
of higher mental functions and the process of internalization. Kozulin (1990) asserts once
children have gone through their ZPD they have learned to use their language as tools allowing
them to navigate through their culture and environment. The ZPD theory is consistent with
cultural competence as both enable the teacher to educate students effectively.
This chapter explored the research that pertains to the progress of EL students in relation
to literacy. The main points discussed were as follows: Literacy and ELs; language
components; elements of literacy; the complexities of learning for EL students; specific barriers
to literacy and learning that EL students face from a National and local level; and contributing
factors of EL achievement. The next chapter creates an overall picture of the Sunshine
Elementary School, Centerville Unified School District, and community in which the city of
Centerville is part. Methodology that will be used to analyze the current levels of achievement
will be provided.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 21
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3
Authors: Juan Carlos Herrera, Sharon L. H. Bennett and Enyetta Mingo-Long
Introduction
This is a case study of Sunshine Elementary School, which is part of California Unified
School district, a large urban district in Southern California. This analysis explored the possible
factors that contributed to closing the literacy gap of low performing Hispanic students at
Sunshine Elementary School along with research-based solutions. At the time of the inquiry
process, Sunshine Elementary School experienced a 54% performance gap as measured by the
California Standards Test (CST).
The purpose of this chapter was to provide a context for the problem at Sunshine through
the clear articulation of the school's mission, organizational goal, and goals of the stakeholders.
Second, the school demographics were discussed in order to provide a context for the problem.
The inquiry team used a modified Gap Analysis process to determine the reasons for the
performance gap based on examining possible causes that were formulated through the research
gleamed form the literature review as well as the experiences of the members of the inquiry
team. The literature provided a foundation for exploring possible causes for this performance
gap at this specific school. The inquiry team used this information as a basis of its analysis of
Sunshine.
3
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While the version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 22
Mission Statement
The mission of a school is designed to convey an idea concerning how a school should
function. It should specifically direct the school on how to serve their stakeholders and how to
support learning improvement. Most importantly, the mission statement is a basis on which
school improvement should be measured. An effective school clearly communicates the mission
to all stakeholders, and it is understood that all stakeholders assume the responsibility of working
toward this end. Examining the mission statement of Sunshine Elementary School provided the
team an understanding of what the school believed and what the school strived to accomplish.
Mission. Sunshine, like most schools, had a mission statement that was established by the
school and district. Table 1 states the mission of the school. The mission focuses on
collaboration between the staff and the community (which may include parents), dedication to
high standards for all students, and engaging curriculum, and creating motivated students.
Organizational Goal. The organization goal for Sunshine was established by the
mandates of NCLB, which states "By 2014, 100% of students and significant student subgroups
will perform at the proficient or advanced level." The organizational goal addresses the desired
academic outcomes for all students, and specifically for the EL students.
Stakeholders. Students, teachers, administration and parents were the four stakeholder
groups at Sunshine Elementary School. It was clear through the mission statement and the
organizational goals that there was an emphasis on what students need to accomplish. The
mission statement also discussed collaboration and engaging curriculum. These precepts clearly
influenced the goals of the teachers, administration, and parents.
Table 3.1 presents the mission statement of Sunshine Elementary school. It also shows
how the mission statement related to the organizational goal of all students, specifically EL
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 23
students, being proficient readers as measured by the California Standards test. Finally, the
mission and the organizational goal influenced the expectations of stakeholders that were
necessary in the improvement of literacy development and achievement at Sunshine Elementary
School.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 24
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 25
The next section will specifically address the demographics of Sunshine Elementary and
its surrounding community. The purpose of considering the demographics was to provide
context for the inquiry team so that the team was able to further investigate possible causes for
the performance gap at Sunshine.
Demographics
Community. Centerville, California is an urban city located approximately ten miles
from Downtown Los Angeles. Currently, Centerville has a total population of approximately
69,800, with the largest percent of residents between the ages of 25-34. Centerville has a very
high Spanish speaking population, with 76% of residents speaking Spanish, compared to 23% for
the state of California, and 67% nationwide. 34% of Centerville residents are white. 14% are
Black and less than 1% are Native American or Asian. 82% of Centerville’s residents are
Hispanic. 39% of Centerville residents have completed high school, compared to 80% statewide.
4.5% have earned a Bachelor’s degree, compared to 30% statewide. Less than 2% of Centerville
residents have earned Master’s Degrees versus 10% statewide.
District. In 2010, California School District had nineteen schools. There were twelve
elementary, three intermediate, four high schools, and one continuation school. Fourteen of the
schools were Program Improvement (PI) schools and received Title I, Title III, Economic Impact
Aid/Limited English Proficiency, and Economic Impact Aid/State Compensatory Education
funding. For 2010, Centerville School District did not meet AYP standards. Only 13 of the 26
criteria were met. Of the 19 schools, only five schools in the district were not in PI status.
The Centerville school district served 11,927 students in grades Pre-K through twelfth.
The district student demographics are as follows: 11,149 Hispanic, 643 African American, 34
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 26
Caucasian, 14 Asian, 8 Filipino, 2 American Indian, and 40 Multiple Response. The district has
7,628 ELs (EL), 898 Special Education students, and 11,914 Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
students.
School. In 2010, Sunshine Elementary was a traditional PreK-5 school. At the time of
the inquiry project, Sunshine received both Title I and Title III funds from the federal
government. Additionally, Sunshine was not a Program Improvement (PI) school, and was the
only elementary school at that time in the district that was not PI. The student enrollment for
Sunshine Elementary was 629 students. There was one principal, a teacher on special
assignment and a teaching staff of nineteen teachers. The average class size at Sunshine was
twenty-four students per teacher.
Sunshine Elementary participated in many activities that enhanced the educational
process. Parent visitations, curricular focus days and awards assemblies connected the parents
and the community to the school. Math nights and multicultural activities provided value to
students and their talents. Active parent groups worked tirelessly for the good of the school and
the students. The strong tradition of Sunshine continued through the academic achievement of
the students.
Staff Demographics. The staff at Sunshine was very diverse in their years of experience,
ethnicities, and cultural backgrounds. In 2010, there were nineteen teachers at Sunshine. More
than half of the teachers on campus have been at the school for ten or more years. There are two
male teachers on campus. Table 3.2 summarizes this demographic information.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 27
Student Demographics. At the time of the inquiry project, Sunshine Elementary school was
predominately Hispanic/Latino with a 97.9%. The rest of the school population was
Black/African American (0.9%) and Asian (0.2%). 74.5% of students were designated as
English Learners. 94.3% were Socioeconomically Disadvantaged. Table 3.3 is a summary of
this demographic information.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 28
The Gap. In 2010, Sunshine’s API rank was 808, which was 8 points above the
statewide target of 800. Schools are ranked based on two measures: One is the state rank and
the other is a ranking that compares schools with similar demographics. In 2010, the state
ranking for Sunshine Elementary was 6 out of 10, and the similar schools ranking was a 10 out
of 10. According to the CDE, the 2011 Academic Performance Index (API) is 765, so
Sunshine’s API fell 43 points from 2010. According to the California Standards Test results for
spring 2011, 46% of students were proficient on the Reading Language Arts test.
The next section discusses the modified Gap Analysis process the inquiry team used to
determine the reasons for the 54% performance gap at Sunshine Elementary School.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 29
Overview of the Modified Gap Analysis Process
The purpose of the project was to use a modified version of the Gap Analysis Model
developed by Clark and Estes (2008) to examine the performance of Sunshine Elementary
School as it relates to the literacy development and reading proficiency for the EL population.
Specifically, the objective was to look at the three reasons for performance gaps presented by
Clark and Estes that impede organizations from achieving both internal and external goals. The
performance gaps discussed in greater detail throughout the study are as follows:
• Knowledge Gaps-Do all stakeholders (teachers, students, parents, etc) have the
information, training and support necessary to achieve their goals?
• Motivational Gaps- Are there reasons that stakeholders are unable to choose to start a
task, to persist at that task, and to exude the mental effort to complete said task?
• Organizational- Are there issues within the organization (procedures, policies, etc) that
may prevent stakeholders from achieving their goals?
There are five steps that were implemented for the gap analysis process. First, goals were
written. Performance goals developed must be concrete, challenging, and current, also known as
C3 goals (Clark and Estes, 2008, p. 26). Second, the specific gaps were identified based on how
the goals compare to the actual performance. Once a hypothesis was made, the goals were
determined so that the root causes of the gaps could be identified. When the root causes were
identified, they were thoroughly analyzed to determine whether knowledge and skill, motivation,
or organizational barriers existed. Often, organizations have more than one barrier that creates
the gap, when this occurs the causes of the barrier must be investigated. The investigation
helped determine the root cause for substandard performance. Fourth, solutions were developed
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 30
based on what the target learning area was. Lastly, outcomes were assessed once the solutions
were implemented.
The Modified Gap Analysis. The modified Gap Analysis was used as the model for this
dissertation project. A thematic group approach was used modifying the Gap Analysis model of
Clark & Estes (2008). As articulated by Rueda (2011) the modified gap analysis format is meant
to emulate the collaborative problem-solving that the group will be expected to engage in within
their professional work (p.107).
This gap analysis approach differs from the Clark & Estes approach because it examines the
long-standing and systematic differences in literacy outcomes at Sunshine Elementary.
Specifically, the outcomes related to ethnicity, race, language, and socioeconomic status, which
form the backdrop for the current educational landscape (Rueda, 2011). The systematic
differences continue to characterize the educational outcomes that are justified by the model’s
ability to assist in closing the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary.
Inquiry Team Process
On November 7, 2011, the inquiry team met with the principal at Sunshine Elementary
School. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the gap analysis process to the principal
and to determine the specific needs of Sunshine Elementary School's English Learners in terms
of literacy participation and improvement. While Sunshine was not currently in Program
Improvement, the principal was concerned about the literacy performance of third grade EL
students who had been classified as "Intermediate" on the CELDT for more than two years. This
is the information that the team used to move forward with the research.
On November 30, 2011, the inquiry team met with the entire Sunshine Elementary
teaching staff. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the team to the staff and to explain
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 31
the gap analysis process. The teachers at Sunshine were given the opportunity to ask the inquiry
team questions about the entire process.
From November 2011 through March 2012, the inquiry team completed a comprehensive
literature review concerning aspects of literacy on a national, state and local levels. There was
an emphasis on barriers to literacy. During this time, the inquiry team also compiled a list of
assumed causes for literacy concerns in general. These assumed causes were based on the
literature studies as well as the professional experiences of the members of the inquiry team.
Tables 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 are a compilation of the assumed causes. They were categorized by
stakeholders (students, parents, teachers, administrators) and type of barrier (knowledge,
motivation and organization).
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 32
Table 3.4
Knowledge Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
• Delayed reading
due to holes in
literacy
processes
• May not
understand
importance of
what is being
learned
• Possess literacy
skills to be
effective
readers?
• Possibly not
provided
appropriate
literacy
instruction
• Education level
possibly similar
to their child’s
• May not
understand
importance of
what is being
learned
• May not have
knowledge to
access resources
• May not have
skills to support
students
• PD at beginning
of school
(centralized)
curriculum
aligned for
teachers consisted
of common
assessment,
coding for student
achievement,
benchmarked,
LEA plan, data
analysis protocol.
This is a data
driven program.
Is the data
process giving the
right data?
• May not have
tools necessary to
work effectively
with students
• Lack of teaching
strategies
• Know the goals
of the school?
• Goals effectively
communicated?
• Knowledge of
reading and using
data to improve
instruction?
• Knowledge of
school mission?
• First principal
position
• New to district,
new to school
• Mastery of
elements of job
• May not
understand
nuances of school
climate
• District not fully
aware of myriad
tasks principal
must complete
• School mission
articulated to all
teachers, parents,
and students?
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 33
Table 3.5
Motivation Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
• Self-efficacy
based on teacher
attitudes
• Work not
presented in way
that fosters
grasping of
material
• Distracted by
language barriers
• Value
• Self-regulation
• Self-efficacy
• Not holding child
accountable due to
perceived ability
issues (Pobrecito)
• Meaning of
education
• Trust teachers to
do what they need
to do for child
• May feel
intimidated by
teachers
• May think school
has no
appreciation for
families
• Participate in PD out
of obligation vs.
desire to be a lifelong
learner
• Stereotyping of
students
• Learning of new
techniques
• Self-efficacy
• Do not care about EL
students
• Do not believe EL
student can succeed
• May believe what
they are doing is
effective and should
not be changed
• Principal appears
highly motivated, and
wants students and
teachers to succeed
• Principal involved in
several campus
programs
• CUSD possibly
unwilling to make
administrative
additions since school
showing growth and
running effectively
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 34
Validating Assumed Causes
From March 2012 through June 2012, the inquiry team conducted data collection
activities. The activities in which the inquiry team provided leadership were as follows: (a)
teacher surveys; (b) principal interview; (c) parent surveys; (d) Teacher interviews and (e)
student reading inventory. The parent survey and the student reading inventory were
administered by the school, and the school provided the data to the inquiry team with no
identifying information that could be linked to individuals. District and school site state and
Table 3.6
Organization Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
• Heavily focused
on language arts
and math; other
subjects may not
be pushed,
especially those
subjects where
literacy skills
(reading, writing,
listening, and
speaking) can be
practiced
• Teachers may not
have the
appropriate
materials to
provide effective
instruction
• Lack of resources
to support system
• Outside of PTA,
few opportunities
for parent
engagement
• Family dynamics
may impact parent
participation
• Administrative
support
• Limited time and
space for
collaboration
• Limited
accountability among
colleagues
• May think they are
collaborating
effectively
• May be reluctant to
collaborate unless
directed
• May not appreciate
value of effective and
ongoing collaboration
• Lack of
administrative team
• Isolation
• Little support from
district office
• New to district,
outsider
• District funding
unavailable
additional school
site administrative
personnel
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 35
federal accountability reports as well as the School Accountability Report Card (SARC), and the
California Standards Test (CST) reports were also reviewed. Further examination was made into
the schools literacy instructional program, and the instructional or academic alignment between
Sunshine Elementary school and the district.
The teacher surveys were created by the inquiry team and they consisted of statements in
which the teachers could either agree or disagree regarding school safety, school leadership and
teacher information such as teaching experience and race. The teacher surveys were distributed
by the principal during a staff meeting and were collected at various times when teachers had
completed them. Similarly, the questions created for the principal interview was a joint effort by
the inquiry team. A total of 14 questions were created for the interview and the intention for the
principal interview was to have a better insight at how the principal viewed herself as a school
leader. To continue, teacher questions and interviews also took place. Due to a lack of time, only
nine of the teachers at Sunshine were interviewed. The teachers varied in terms of grade levels
they taught. This was done on purpose in order to gain a school wide perspective on the teachers
perceived literacy, goals, and student achievement. Finally, a student reading inventory was
adapted from an existing measure and distributed by the school. The inventory helped the inquiry
team by painting a picture on how the students at the school felt about reading at home and at
school. The inventory was modified by having less questions and it was very student friendly
because it contained illustrations and the students simply had to circle a drawing based on how
they felt with regards to that specific questions.
The purpose of these activities was to obtain additional information concerning how the
school functioned and how they perceive literacy. Specifically, the assumed causes examined
Sunshine Elementary organizational goals against the schools current literacy performance gap.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 36
The inquiry team sought to validate the assumed causes in pursuit of obtaining the schools global
goal and performance achievement of closing the literacy gap. As illustrated in Tables 3.4, 3.5
and 3.6, the assumed causes were grouped into the three categories: knowledge, motivation, and
organization. The inquiry team analyzed the possible factors that may have attributed to the EL
literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary. The inquiry team discussed all of the assumed causes and
were able to place most of the causes into the following categories: students, parents, teachers
and administration. Those causes that were not validated or were determined to be
inconsequential were eliminated. Figure 1 shows the causes that remained after the elimination
process.
Human Subjects
Based upon the description of this project as a problem solving effort intended primarily
for the setting examined, and not to produce generalizable knowledge, the USC University Park
Institutional Review Board (IRB) concluded that this project did not qualify as Human Subjects
Research and was not subject to further review. The names of the school, district, and all
stakeholders have been withheld to maintain confidentiality.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY
Figure 1
A Partial list of the Selection of Assumed Causes
In examining Figure 1, the inquiry team was able to determine the six causes that
contributed to the organizational gap at Sunshine. The summary of these causes and the specific
data that were used to validate each of these causes will be discussed in Chapter 4.
Conclusion
This chapter provided a context for the problem at Sunshine Elementary School.
the chapter examined the mission statement, organizational goals, and the various stakeholders at
Sunshine Elementary School. Next, the chapter addressed the demographi
Students
Students
may not have
fullydevelope
d language
proficiency.
Students
may need to
be taught
more
literacy
activities
that support
learning
Students do
not know the
mission
statement
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY
of the Selection of Assumed Causes
, the inquiry team was able to determine the six causes that
contributed to the organizational gap at Sunshine. The summary of these causes and the specific
data that were used to validate each of these causes will be discussed in Chapter 4.
This chapter provided a context for the problem at Sunshine Elementary School.
the chapter examined the mission statement, organizational goals, and the various stakeholders at
Next, the chapter addressed the demographics of Sunshine at the
Parents
Parents do
not have a
lot of
opportunities
to come on
campus
There is no
parent
training
opportunities
at Sunshine
Parents need
to feel that
the school
appreciates
their
contribution
s
Teachers
Teachers may
need further
training in
instructional
practices that
support EL
students
Teachers may
need to learn
how to
collaborate with
each other
effectively
Teachers need to
make sure they
know how to
guide students
through the
literacy process
Teachers are
not aware of
the mission
statement
Teachers may
need to support
parent training
activities
Administr
ators
Principal may
need to support
teachers in
collaboration
activities
Principal is
isolated and
needs
support
Teachers were not
aware of the mission
statement
The district may not
have articulated the
mission statement to
the school
Administration
may need to
provide parent
training
opportunities
37
, the inquiry team was able to determine the six causes that
contributed to the organizational gap at Sunshine. The summary of these causes and the specific
data that were used to validate each of these causes will be discussed in Chapter 4.
This chapter provided a context for the problem at Sunshine Elementary School. First,
the chapter examined the mission statement, organizational goals, and the various stakeholders at
cs of Sunshine at the
aware of the mission
The district may not
have articulated the
mission statement to
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 38
community, district, and school level. Next, the chapter examined the differences between the
Gap Analysis model and the modified Gap Analysis model used for this dissertation project.
Additionally, the inquiry team process was discussed to provide the reader with the steps the
inquiry team took throughout. The next chapter will examine the findings from the data
collected.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 39
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
4
Authors: Juan Carlos Herrera, Sharon L.H. Bennett and Enyetta Mingo-Long
The purpose of this chapter was to report the findings from data collected related to the
literacy gap that exists between ELs and non-ELs at Sunshine Elementary School. The goal of
the data collection was to examine the possible causes and validate the root causes of the literacy
gap. The inquiry team took on the role of consultants and used the gap analysis framework to
study the root causes behind the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary School.
Overview of Possible Causes for English Learner Literacy Gap at Sunshine Elementary
Based upon an initial review of the literature, the inquiry team was able create a list of
possible causes for the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary School. A total of thirty-three
possible causes were listed. Once the list of possible causes was developed, the inquiry team
categorized the possible causes into the following three categories: knowledge, motivation and
organization. Within each of these three groups, the inquiry team further separated the list of
possible causes by the following four stakeholder groups: parents, students, teachers, and
administration. This table can be found in Appendix G. Out of the validation process by the
inquiry team, it was determined that both assets and causes for the literacy gap were discovered.
The following section provides details for both, and provided the team information concerning
possible solutions for Sunshine. These solutions are discussed in Chapters 5 and Chapter 6.
4
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While the version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 40
Assets of Sunshine Elementary School
Based on in-depth interviews and parent, student, and teacher surveys, it was determined
that Sunshine Elementary School had a plethora of assets that benefit the students and families
they serve. This section will briefly discuss these assets.
Leadership Commitment. At the time of the inquiry project, the principal had been
assigned to Sunshine elementary for approximately two years. The principal was fairly new to
the district but was highly motivated to be an effective instructional leader for the students and
teachers at Sunshine. From the interview, the principal stated many hats must be worn to be an
effective leader. Some of the roles as principal included but were not limited to: instructional
leader, plant manager, coach, collaborator, and advocate for students and parents. During
informal conversations, the principal mentioned that arriving to school early in the morning and
leaving long after everyone is gone was a daily norm. This was done to ensure that all tasks
were completed in a timely manner.
During the principal interview, it quickly became clear that the principal really cared
about the students and their families and felt responsible for student success. This was
demonstrated by the ongoing involvement in student activities, the intent to start a counseling
group for mothers who have been abused, and the determination on the part of the principal to
close the achievement gap at Sunshine
The principal at Sunshine was very passionate about ensuring that all students have equal
access to the curriculum so that they can be successful in school. This was done so that all
students had the opportunity to be college and career ready upon high school graduation. The
principal ensured that students are had access to the curriculum through monitoring the use of
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 41
SDAIE strategies in order to make content comprehensible. A forty-five minute daily
instructional block dedicated to English Language Development instruction was part of the daily
schedule as well.
Staff Respect for Principal. Another major asset at Sunshine elementary was that the
staff respected the principal’s leadership. During the scanning interview, the principal described
the social atmosphere at Sunshine as a “non-toxic environment.” The principal went on to say
that although the teachers did not always agree with the school districts’ demands all of the time,
the teachers at Sunshine were generally comfortable at the school. Based on the twenty-one
teacher surveys that were distributed and returned, it is clear that the teachers had a favorable
view of their principal. For example, the Sunshine Elementary School teacher survey asked
teachers if they felt supported by the administrator at their site and every single teacher marked
that they agreed with that statement. Similarly, teachers unanimously agreed that the
administrator respected all races and cultures and that she also valued what the students have to
say. This positive organizational climate shifted the focus away from the teachers and
administrators and it allowed the maximum amount of attention to be placed on the students and
their needs.
A majority of the teachers believed that Sunshine elementary was a safe environment for
everyone. The teacher survey also showed that the teachers felt their school promotes a
curriculum that meets the needs of all students. Although the principal was not solely
responsible for these great feats, it was a positive reflection of the type of leadership that she has
provided and the school culture she created.
Caring teachers. The teacher interviews provided great insights as to the mentality of
the teachers at Sunshine elementary. A total of nine teachers were interviewed and all grade
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 42
levels (K-5) were represented. The teachers were asked a total of ten questions regarding the
background of the school, the goals they set for their students and their views on reading and
learning.
One consistent pattern quickly began to emerge from the interviews. The teachers at
Sunshine demonstrated caring towards their students and their families. When asked who the
main stakeholders at the school were, one teacher said “For me, I hope that the stakeholders are
the children. They are the purpose and the reason we are here. We are accountable to the
administrators but honestly I am more accountable to the parents and the students than any of the
administrators." When asked about the relationship between the community and the school,
another teacher said that “It's pretty amazing. It's a real sense of home, of togetherness.
Everyone takes care of everyone. For example, kids come back and I have taught parents of
students."
Throughout every interview, the teachers aligned themselves with the students and their
families. The expressions and gestures demonstrated a great admiration of the children in their
classes. Several teachers raved about Sunshine’s Parent Teacher Association (PTA). In fact five
of the interviewees discussed the excellence service the PTA has provided over the past year.
Teachers Actively Seek to Improve Student Achievement. The teachers at Sunshine
were very interested in improving student achievement. Several teachers expressed an interest to
develop a better instructional program for their ELs. Despite not having all the resources to
develop an instructional plan for EL literacy achievement, the teachers continued to actively
search for methods and strategies to improve the achievement of their EL students.
School Environment. The gap analysis approach helps address the literacy achievement
gap at Sunshine Elementary School through the systematic examination and validation of
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 43
presumed causes from the perspectives of parents, teachers and administration. One perspective
that was examined was the school environment. The information obtained from the teacher
interviews provided evidence that Sunshine Elementary teachers were interested in learning how
to understand subject matter deeply and flexibly in order to provide support for both EL and non-
EL students. More specifically, Sunshine teachers expressed a desire to learn how to help their
students connect their current background knowledge in the classroom and to everyday life. The
principal and the teachers at Sunshine were committed to provide a strong foundation for
culturally relevant pedagogical content knowledge that is accessible to all learners. The school
environment at Sunshine had the capacity to create the linkage between theory and practice by
developing professional roles for teachers that allow them the flexibility to create culturally
relevant literacy strategies for the schools English Language Learners.
Active PTA. According to the parent surveys and the teacher interviews, the PTA at
Sunshine Elementary had a strong presence on campus. The PTA was an asset to the school
because the participants were interested in working to make positive changes in the school and
the community. At the time of the inquiry project, this was the only parent organization
sanctioned by the school. The individuals that participated in the group were very conscious
about the direction of the group; the members possessed a strong feeling of community
representation. The PTA meetings were conducted from the parents’ point of view. According
to the information obtained from the teacher interviews, the level of participation of the Sunshine
Elementary School's PTA demonstrated that the parents who chose to participate shared a
willingness to contribute their best to school activities. Their tireless work showed that they
were concerned with the welfare of all students.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 44
Culturally Rich School Community. Sunshine Elementary School was very proud of
its traditions and cultural awareness. Parents and teachers reported that the school had
participated in events and activities that demonstrated their appreciation for diversity and that
celebrated high academic achievement. The teacher interviews revealed that students had many
opportunities to demonstrate pride in themselves and their accomplishments. Through
assemblies, a strong Parent Teacher Association, and participation in academic activities
sponsored by the district (Math-A-Thon, Spelling Bee, Science Fair, etc.), students were
successful in demonstrating their abilities to the schools as well as the larger community. The
parents were a consistent presence on the campus, and, according to the parent survey, most of
them felt welcomed on campus. For example, many of the teachers reported in the interviews
that parents enjoyed working in the school garden, and maintained the garden on weekends and
holidays. Parents cared about the activities at school, and wanted to be on campus. When
provided with the opportunities to serve the school, they did.
Community Stability. Families have sent their children to Sunshine Elementary School
for several generations. According to the data from teacher interviews, there were teachers on
campus that have had several generation of students in their classes. Students and families saw
Sunshine as a place of support even after they matriculated from the school. Teachers took this
opportunity to support and nurture the students, families, and the Sunshine community years
after the students moved to middle school, high school and college. There was a sense of pride
with the teachers as they discussed their relationship with students and their families.
Additionally, there were teachers at Sunshine who were previous Sunshine students or attended
other schools within the Centerville Unified School District. This further supports the strong
community ties to the school.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 45
Well Behaved Students. The students at Sunshine had pride in their school, according
to the teacher interviews, and from anecdotal observations. It was reported by parents and
teachers that there was significant gang activity in the Sunshine neighborhood; in fact, there were
two rival gangs that lived on either side of the school. In spite of this, the students clearly
exhibited positive conduct. This conduct was supported by the teachers, administration and the
parents. Teachers reported that the students have excellent behavior. Moreover, based on
information extrapolated from the parent surveys, students respected the learning that took place
in the classroom. Students believed that teachers were there to help them learn and they
responded appropriately to the instruction given.
This section has detailed some of the considerable strengths of Sunshine Elementary
School. In the next section, the focus shifts to the six primary causes for the gap in literacy.
The Six Primary Causes for English Learner Literacy Gap at Sunshine Elementary
Through the review of the literature, surveys that were provided to the inquiry team from
Sunshine from parents and students, as well as site visits in which conversations with the
principal and teachers took place, the inquiry team began to compile a list of assumed causes for
the literacy gap among ELs at Sunshine Elementary School. Once the team conducted the
teacher interviews and made sense of the data from the parent and student surveys, the process of
eliminating some causes and validating others occurred. The following six causes were selected
as areas of focus: Goal alignment, professional development, teacher collaboration, parent
engagement, culturally relevant instructional strategies, and site based leadership. Each of these
causes will be discussed in detail and will include a table that summarizes the details of each
cause in terms of knowledge, motivation and organization.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 46
Goal Alignment. From the interview with the principal it came to the team's attention
that Sunshine elementary had not formulated its own school mission and that they followed the
mission the district provided to the school. This was true for most of the other schools in the
Centerville district. The problem was twofold: First, the staff had an inconsistent perception of
the school mission. Second, there was no clear goal alignment; therefore teachers created their
own goals for the students. This was problematic because the teacher goals were not always
consistent with the mission provided by the district. For example, during the teacher interviews,
one teacher stated that, “The goals are to have a safe environment, where every student will be
challenged, and a clean and safe learning environment, and the goal is for each student to be in
challenge level for reading and math." Another teacher stated that having “Students on grade
level and to master grade level standards” are the goals of Sunshine elementary. Yet another
teacher felt that “Academically, the goals are for the students to succeed in Language Arts."
Although all of these goals were created with good intentions, they were radically different.
None of these goals provided immediate direction for action. Since the teachers did not have a
consistent understanding of the goals, they created their own. Unfortunately, this allowed
teachers to move in various instructional directions and thus collective results could not be
reached. It is not that these were not admirable goals, but they did not reflect an overall
agreement about, or knowledge of, the goals of the school and district and how they translated to
individual teachers’ day-to-day work.
A summary of the findings under Goal Alignment can be found in Table 4.1. The items
are categorized based on knowledge, motivation and organization as outlined in Clark and Estes'
work.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 47
Professional Development. During the teacher interviews it was expressed that the
professional development in which Sunshine’s teachers participated concerning how to
effectively teach English Language Learners was limited due to budget constraints. The lack of
adequate professional development that addressed the specific academic needs of ELs was a
cause for the literacy gap at the school. The teacher interviews revealed that teachers generally
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 48
preferred professional development activities that provided the following benefits: (a) encompass
learning experiences they help to design; (b) that are learner centered; (c) involve them in the
community; and (d) strengthen the professional development support system by eliminating
barriers. Information from the inquiry team’s analysis supported the issue that Sunshine’s
teachers were not participating in professional development activities that are specific to the
needs of ELs. This was an issue because the teachers were not provided consistent access to
culturally relevant strategies that specifically supported the EL student. Table 4.2 summarizes
the professional development concerns categorized by knowledge, motivation and organization.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 49
Teacher Collaboration. Teacher collaboration is an essential part of any school system.
However, it is important to note that collaboration for the sake of collaboration is a waste of
time. This section will discuss the teacher collaboration system at Sunshine Elementary School.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 50
First, findings will be presented based on the data collected. Then, the inquiry team will draw
some general conclusions about the data. For the purpose of this section, we will look at the
teacher interviews and the teacher surveys. The two areas of focus that were prevalent in the
research are the current culture of teacher collaboration at Sunshine and the collaboration needs
at Sunshine.
According to the results of the teacher interviews, it was clear that there has always been
some type of teacher collaboration activities at Sunshine. The three major reasons that Sunshine
teachers chose to collaborate were: to discuss classroom issues; to discuss items that the grade
level leadership could present to the administration for consideration; and to place students in
groups. The principal supported teachers collaborating regularly. However, it was not indicated
by any of the teachers that there was dedicated collaboration time that took place at the school.
Additionally, a system for effective and consistent collaboration was not in place at Sunshine.
The teacher interviews also indicated that teachers desired more time for collaboration.
For example, several of the interviewees discussed an addendum that was developed by
Centerville Unified School District to supplement the Open Court Reading Program. However,
they expressed concern that there were instructional inconsistencies in the program between
classrooms and grade levels. Having opportunities to discuss these curriculum concerns would
have assisted the school in this curriculum alignment issue. Additionally, each teacher
participated in English Language Development activities for forty-five minutes each day. The
interviews suggested that the teachers were solely responsible for the planning and
implementation of their own ELD instruction. Opportunities for planning instruction as a grade
level team would be a more efficient use of planning time. While all teachers interviewed
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 51
clearly cared about the students at Sunshine and were concerned about their academic growth,
there was no systematic way for teacher to be accountable to one another.
Table 4.3 summarizes the finding in teacher collaboration as they relate to knowledge,
motivation and organization.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 52
Parent Involvement. It is important that schools promote the full participation of parents in
order to ensure the well being of the school. For the purpose of this section, the teacher interviews
and the parent surveys will be examined. Three areas of emphasis stood out as a result of looking at
the data presented: (a) parents and the relationship with the school; (b) parents and access to school
resources; and (c) parent needs for their children.
Table 4.4
Caring Environment Parent Climate Survey Responses
QUESTIONS
RESPONSES
Always
Almost
Always
Sometime
s
Rarely Never
No
Response
When I walk into
this school I feel
welcome
60
(50%)
33
(27.5%)
25
(20.83%)
2
(1.67%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
I am treated with
respect at this school
68
(56.66%)
36
(30%)
12
(10%)
3
(2.5%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
The school respects
my cultural heritage.
79
(65.8%)
27
(22.5%)
13
(10.83%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
Students at my
child’s school are
treated fairly no
matter what their race
or cultural
background.
80
(66.67%)
31
(25.83%)
7
(5.83%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
1
(<1%)
I feel welcome at
PTA/parent group
meetings.
70
(58.33%)
26
(21.66%)
10
(8.33%)
1
(<1%)
2
(1.66%)
11
(9.16%)
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 53
The information from the parent survey as presented in Table 4.4 indicated that
approximately 27% of parents did not feel welcomed at the school regularly. Because parent
connection to the school was an essential part of their child's success, having more than 1/4 of
the parents who respond feeling this way was problematic. While there were a large amount of
parents who felt that they were treated with respect, nearly 12% did not feel this happened on a
regular basis.
Table 4.5
Problem Solving Parent Climate Survey Responses
QUESTIONS
RESPONSES
Always
Almost
Always
Someti
mes
Rarely Never No Response
I have a good
working
relationship
with my child’s
teacher
93
(77.5%)
17
(14.17%)
6
(5%)
3
(2.5%)
1
(0.83%)
0
(0.0%)
I can talk to the
school principal
when I need to
62
(51.66%)
31
(25.83%)
18
(15%)
6
(5%)
1
(0.83%)
2
(1.67%)
The school has
a clear process
for addressing
concerns about
my child(ren)
69
(57.5%)
29
(21.17%)
17
(14.17
%)
5
(4.17%
)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
If the school
can't help me, I
know they will
refer me to
someone who
can
66
(55%)
34
(28.33%)
13
(10.83
%)
6
(5%)
1
(0.83%)
0
(0.0%)
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 54
In the category “Problem Solving" the data summarized in Table 4.5 indicated that a
majority of the parents surveyed believed their cultural backgrounds were appreciated. Parents
also indicated that that their children were treated fairly. Most parents believe they were treated
fairly "always" or "almost always." While a majority of parents felt welcome at Sunshine
Elementary, the data indicate that twenty percent of parents who did not consistently feel
welcome at the school. This suggests that there might have been some discord concerns that had
the potential to influence the other parents if not addressed.
Parent communication with teachers is another topic that the parent survey illustrated.
What teachers report to parents on a regular basis informs parents of what is valued by the
teacher and the school. This information allowed parents to design their own thought about what
concerns the school values. The reasons for communication that the questionnaire addressed
were as follows: (a) behavior; (b) reading progress and achievement; (c) class work; (d)
homework; and (e) tests. Since parents were allowed to choose more than one reason for
response, the total adds up to more than 100%.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 55
The data in Table 4.6 shows that the most common reason for the school communicating
with parents was behavior. Class work and homework ranked second and third, respectively.
Topics specific to reading achievement and concerns placed fourth out of five categories. About
fifteen participants did not respond to the question.
Next, a teacher interview session was conducted. Nine Sunshine teachers were
interviewed which represented fifty percent of the staff. The interview questions in relation to
parents and their contribution to the literacy process of students were as follows:
• Who are the stakeholders of the school?
• What is the relationship between the school and community?
• What is your perception of the school neighborhood?
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 56
Out of the nine interviewees, four of the interviewees stated that parents belonged to the
stakeholder group. The belief that the role of the parent as an entity that needs to be included as
part of the decision making force at Sunshine is a crucial one for the success of the school.
While most interviewers believed that parental support was an essential part of learning, and that
parents were a strong force on the Sunshine campus, and that there is a PTA that provides
services to the school, no one indicated that there was a systematic, school wide parental support
or involvement process at Sunshine.
Table 4.7 is a summary of the parent involvement concerns at Sunshine in terms of
knowledge, motivation and organization.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 57
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 58
Culturally Relevant Instructional Strategies. Several Sunshine Elementary teachers
and staff expressed that the district has not created culturally relevant instructional strategies for
its English Language Learners. The teachers of Sunshine Elementary School feel that they are
underprepared to effectively teach their EL students. Several teachers felt that culturally relevant
pedagogical instructional strategies were needed at Sunshine. However, the teachers did not
believe their pedagogical content knowledge was strong enough to help their EL students meet
the state mandated requirement of proficiency in reading. Sunshine teachers felt that the district
did not want to further develop the instructional strategies for English Language Learners,
because the district did not offer enough culturally relevant instructional strategies to assist the
teachers and the schools.
At Sunshine Elementary, there was an absence of culturally relevant instructional
strategies targeted specifically towards the home language and cultural differences of their
English Language Learner population. The lack of culturally relevant instructional support has
led to teachers not being able to fully deliver culturally relevant instruction that is specific to the
language development of the ELs. Sunshine did not clearly communicate the skills needed and
adequate preparation in understanding and applying the knowledge base of culturally relevant
instruction that is rich in language input and has multiple forms of literacy for all students.
Sunshine Elementary teachers believed that an organizational issue existed where the school and
the district did not effectively communicate the instructional plan specific to the individual needs
of English Language Learners.
Table 4.8 is a summary of the Culturally relevant instructional strategies based on
knowledge, motivation and organization:
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 59
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 60
Site Based Leadership Support. At the time of the inquiry project, Sunshine Elementary
School was home to nineteen teachers and approximately 500 students. Many would consider
this was a small school compared to others in the surrounding districts. However, another
validated cause was the lack of site-based leadership support. From informal conversations with
the principal, it was determined that the principal had minimal support at the school site. There
was no assistant principal, no counselor, or staff development specialist to help the principal.
While there was a teacher on special assignment who did an excellent job supporting the
principal concerning both management and curriculum tasks, there was no one for the principal
to communicate with on a daily basis concerning confidential information concerning staff and
parents. The administrator was in isolation and had many responsibilities. For instance, the
principal is in charge of leading the professional developments every Wednesday. During the
interview, the principal mentioned that sometimes “teacher leaders do help based on proven
ability to handle responsibility."
Other principal responsibilities included creating the master schedule, evaluating
teachers, counseling both students and parents, yard duty, attending district-level meetings and
taking on the day to day tasks. Handling too many tasks with little to no support had the
potential to lead to stress, becoming overwhelmed and potential burnout. The effect of these
ongoing situations can potentially lead to job ineffectiveness. However, the principal had an
opportunity to meet with other principals in the district twice a month and participates in a
principal exchange program about once a month. During the interview, the principal mentioned
that the principal exchange program was adopted by the district to “assist them with getting out
of program improvement.” The focus of the program was on guided reading, the national
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 61
vocabulary list, making words, working with small group, working with whole group and
input/modeling.
These professional development activities alleviated some of the burden on the principal,
but it was uncertain how much the professional development activities helped the school narrow
the literacy gap at Sunshine. The inquiry team felt that surrounding the principal with additional
support can greatly benefit her and consequently the school.
Table 4.9 is a summary of the findings based on knowledge, motivation and organization
concerning site based leadership.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 62
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 63
Conclusion
This chapter presented the findings that validated the primary six root causes for the
literacy gap that exists between ELs and non-ELs at Sunshine Elementary School. First, a brief
description of how the inquiry team reached the possible causes was described. Next, the inquiry
team reported the assets found at Sunshine. In addition, a detailed account of the six primary
root causes were discussed, as well as cautions and limitations of this inquiry. The next chapter
will provide a second review of the literature for solutions for two of the six primary root causes,
goal alignment and site based leadership support respectively.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 64
5
CHAPTER 5
A REVIEW OF RESEARCH-BASED SOLUTIONS
The gap analysis was a joint team effort. The inquiry team focused on and validated six
root causes, including: (a) goal alignment, (b) professional development, (c) teacher
collaboration, (d) parent involvement, (e) culturally relevant instructional strategies, and (f) site
based leadership support. The inquiry team divided the solutions aspect of the work based on
areas of interest and/or specialization of the team members. While it is imperative that the gap
analysis examine all of the root causes jointly, this chapter and the following chapter will focus
specifically on: (a) goal alignment, and (f) site based leadership support. The latter will focus on
resources and types of support that leaders need to be effective. The purpose of this chapter is to
review the literature, theory, and studies on the two areas of focus in order to provide guidance to
Sunshine Elementary in helping them solve the literacy gap that currently exists between
English learners (ELs) and their non-EL counterparts. The chapter is outlined as follows: A
review of the literature based on the importance of organizations setting goals and how to
properly align those goals, followed by a review of the literature on the importance of site based
leadership support in schools, especially in schools with large English-learner populations. The
chapter concludes with a list of potential pitfalls for organizations implementing goals and/or
setting up a system for site based leadership support.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a foundation of empirical research and theory to
develop a plan of action concerning goal alignment and site based leadership support. The
literature review will focus on the aforementioned root causes. Finally, an action plan for
Sunshine Elementary will be presented in Chapter 6.
5
I, Juan Carlos Herrera, am the single author of this chapter on the review of research-based
solutions.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 65
Goal Alignment
As mentioned in the previous chapter, Sunshine Elementary School (SES) uses a mission
statement created for them by the district. Although the mission statement is in place, it is
evident that personnel at the school either: (a) are not aware of the schools’ overarching goal,
and/or (b) created their own set of goals that inadvertently deviate from the overarching goal.
Although practitioners in the field of education are aware of the importance of setting
goals in their organizations, it is imperative for practitioners to have a better insight on how to
establish goals that will help members of their organizations be as productive and motivated as
they can be. Goals that are clear, specific, and properly communicated with all of the
stakeholders tend to lead to greater success for an organization. Establishing specific goals in the
workplace is essential because it reduces ambiguity about what is to be attained (Locke &
Latham, 2002). With the establishment of specific goals, members know exactly what is
expected of them in order to attain those goals. Moreover, Clark & Estes (2008) believe that
without clear and specific goals, people will tend to focus on their own goals rather than on the
goals of the organization. Personal goals, even those created with the best of intentions, may
hinder the overarching goal set forth by the organization.
The process of setting organizational goals and selecting the content of those goals can be
a very complicated and delicate process because the way the goals are structured will determine:
the acceptance of those goals by the members of the organization, and the overall impact of those
goals on the organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). An effective way to set goals is to follow the
gap analysis model created by Clark & Estes (2008). This model emphasizes the establishment
of clearly understood work goals in an organization that will result in effective performance
improvement. The work goals that have the biggest impact on an organization are those goals
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 66
that are concrete, challenging, and current, commonly known as C3 goals. Concrete goals are
clear, easily understandable and can be measured. Concrete goals eliminate any vagueness and
let everyone in the organization know exactly what they have to do in order to meet the goals.
This is important because vague goals or “do your best” goals, tend to lead to people setting
lower goals than they are capable of achieving. Without a doubt, this hinders the organizational
goals. Challenging goals are difficult but are still attainable. It is important to set the goals at an
appropriate level of difficulty because if goals are set at an easy level, motivation may decrease
but if they are set too difficult, the individuals may find it too challenging and either not attempt
or not persist on reaching that goal. According to Locke & Latham (1991), people tend to adjust
their level of effort to the difficulty of the task undertaken. Winters & Latham (1996) sought to
examine the effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Their
study included 114 undergraduate business students (68 male and 46 female), all between 20-27
years of age. Each student received extra credit for participating in the experiment and they were
randomly assigned to a group. The task, developed by Earley (1985), consisted of creating
unique schedules for five non-redundant classes. The group in the easy condition had much
flexibility and every schedule could be composed of the same classes with slight variations. The
participants in the learning goal condition had less flexibility and were assigned a more complex
task. The results from the study demonstrate that when attempting to set new complex processes,
organizations should set specific and difficult learning goals. In sum, individuals will try harder
for difficult goals as oppose to easy goals. Lastly, current goals are short-term goals that can be
reached within a few weeks or on a monthly basis. It is crucial that these lower goals are
measurable and that they feed into the intermediate and global goals of an organization (Rueda,
2011).
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 67
Allscheid & Cellar (1996) conducted a study in which they sought to test the premise that
goal difficulty correlated with task performance and goal commitment. The researchers selected
128 undergraduate students from an introduction to psychology class. The students received one
credit hour for their participation in the study. The participants were asked to provide solutions
for a computerized anagram task. The participants were randomly selected to complete either
moderately difficult anagrams or to complete more difficult anagrams. Those students in the
difficult condition group needed to solve more complicated anagrams and had many more
problems to complete. The results of the study demonstrate that goal difficulty led to an
enhanced performance in the anagram task. Moreover, goal difficulty also led to a higher level of
commitment. Although the study is limited by not providing a low-goal condition nor a no goal
condition for the students, the results clearly demonstrate that goal difficulty does correlate with
task performance and goal commitment.
Research conducted by Gomez & Cremades (2007) investigated the goal commitment
and satisfaction of participants from two different cultures. The participants consisted of 104
individuals from Mexico and the U.S (51 Mexican and 53 American). More than half of the
participants were women and all of the participants were citizens of their respective countries. At
the time, the participants from Mexico all attended a very large private university in Mexico
while the Americans attended a mid-size state university. The participants were divided into two
groups, the compliance goal group and the no goal group. Since all of the students had a business
background, the participants were asked to complete a task in which they had to predict and
select stocks for a fabricated company. In the compliance goal condition, the students had to
make 30 stock predictions within $10 of the actual stock value. On the other hand, students in the
control condition were not given any specific goals and were asked to make predictions on the
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 68
stock value for 10 minutes. Following the task, all participants completed a questionnaire that
assessed their intrinsic motivation, goal satisfaction, and uncertainty avoidance. The results of
the study reveal that American participants were more committed and marginally more satisfied
with a compliance goal than no goal than their Mexican counterparts.
While establishing clear and specific goals is vital, how an organization communicates
those goals to its members is what really determines success. Too often organizations fail to
effectively communicate goals to the rest of members and consequently fail to reach the goals
they had set. According to Clark & Estes (2008), clear and honest communication creates trust
and helps people adjust their performance. With a higher level of trust, the commitment of all
members rises and it helps reaching those goals more attainable. It is imperative for every
member of the organization to know what the goals of the organization are. The goals should be
visible at every level within the organization. For instance, certain organizations have the goals
written on charts inside the lounge while others include the goals at the end of E-mails. While
communicating goals is highly recommended, modeling how those goals are accomplished is
ideal. Bandura (2001) asserts that human capacity for observational learning has sufficiently
increased to a point where we are able to expand our knowledge and skills solely on observing
the actions of others. It is imperative for organizational leaders to model proper work ethic that
allows for the attainment of goals. Symbolic modeling as Bandura (2001) states, is powerful in
the sense that “a single model can transmit new ways of thinking and behaving simultaneously to
countless people in widely dispersed locales” (p. 271). This is particularly true in the 21
st
century
with the advancement of technology and social media.
Razinkova (2008) conducted a study in which she examined goal communication
between managers and workers at three different sites from the Ontario Heritage Trust, which is
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 69
a government agency in Canada whose goal is to protect Canada’s national heritage. The study
used three different research methods to collect data: semi-structured interviews, analysis of
documentation, and participant observation. In order to provide a fair comparison, each site was
visited the same number of times, the same number of respondents were interviewed for
approximately the same duration, and the same interview questions were used (Razinkova,
2008). The researcher visited each site three times in a four-month span and each interview she
conducted lasted 30-50 minutes, depending on the participant. The results of the study suggests
that although each site had a vision statement and provided an objective handbook, which
includes goals of the organization, to its employees, not all employees were fully aware of the
organizations’ goals. Furthermore, the researcher goes on to provide recommendations to the
managers of each site on how to best communicate their organizational goals. The following
recommendations were provided: Managers need to provide constant feedback on the
interpretation and implementation of the organizational goals to the employees. Employees need
to actively participate in the planning and development of organizational goals and they need to
receive continuous training for employees in order to refresh information provided earlier,
extend their knowledge on goals, and reflect on their shortcomings. Similarly, she recommends
that organizations find creative ways of goal reminders such as projects, newsletters, and
websites to remind everyone about the organizational goals. Finally, the researcher states that it
is vital for organizations to evaluate the effectiveness of goal communication on a frequent basis.
Another important element in establishing goals in any organization is to have buy-in
from all of the stakeholders. In no way does this mean that stakeholders make the ultimate
decision on goals but they should be involved in the discussions that lead to that decision. By
doing so, organizational leaders learn what goals their members value most. Participation in the
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 70
decision-making process is also crucial because it is a way of obtaining employees commitment
while reducing any resistance to change (Bandura &Locke, 2003). This approach distances itself
from the traditional top-down decision-making mentality and moves towards a bottom-up frame
of mind by allowing its members to have a voice within their organization. Moreover, when
employees feel invested in the process, they are more likely to put forth a stronger effort to attain
those goals. There are a few studies that focus on assigned goals versus participatory goals and
the effects on goal commitment. To begin, goal commitment is an individuals’ determination to
reach a goal (Locke, Latham & Erez, 1988). Erez & Earley (1987) conducted a study examining
goal-setting strategies across various cultures. 120 students volunteered for the study as part of a
classroom exercise. The students consisted of sixty American students from Midwestern
University, sixty students from the University of Israel, and sixty students from urban regions of
Israel. Each of the subject groups were placed into one of the following three goal-setting
conditions: (a) assigned, (b) representative, and (c) participative. Then each subject group had to
participate in two performance phases each lasting twenty minutes. The subjects were asked to
complete a simulated University schedule in which the classes offered were non-conflicting and
non-redundant. The results demonstrate that “the highest commitment level was obtained in the
participative condition and the lowest in the assigned goal condition” (Erez & Earley, 1987, p.
664). Moreover, acceptance in the participative condition did not drop during extremely difficult
goals as it did in the assigned and representative conditions. The study concludes by suggesting
that further research on cultural values and managerial practices needs to be conducted when it
comes to assigned and participatory goals.
A common mistake repeatedly made by organizations is that they tend to focus
specifically on long-term goals rather than on other type of goals. Rueda (2011) lists three types
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 71
of goals in the gap analysis process: (a) global goals, which are long-term goals that can range
from 1-5 years, (b) intermediate goals, which can be reached in a matter of weeks or months and
ultimately help you achieve the global goal and, (c) performance goals, which are short-term
day-to-day goals. All of these goals need to align in order to reach the organization’s global goal.
Although all three types of goals are necessary within an organization, lower level goals are vital
because they help break down larger tasks into more convenient chunks (Rueda, 2011).
Consequently, this helps the members of an organization by keeping them focused and
motivated. According to Clark & Estes (2008), establishing these daily or weekly goals are more
motivating to members of an organization than long-term monthly or annual goals. This is due to
immediate results and feedback being readily available with short-term goals.
Feedback is another important component in the goal setting theory. “Corrective
feedback components of communication help people adjust the knowledge and skills they are
using to accomplish goals” (Clark & Estes, 2008, P. 118). Feedback allows people the time to
reflect on their previous performance and it also helps individuals plan accordingly in order to
improve on past performances, especially if they fell short of reaching the organizational goals.
Furthermore, Feedback also allows someone the opportunity to set a goal if they previously did
not have one (Locke & Latham, 2006). In order to demonstrate the importance of feedback on
goal-setting theory, Locke & Latham (1990) reviewed the results of thirty-three studies on
feedback and they concluded that “goals and feedback together are more effective in motivating
high performance or performance improvement than either one separately” (p.225-226). With
regards to positive feedback, Locke & Latham (1991), state that positive feedback normally
raises the self-efficacy of an individual but that such feedback does not automatically lead to
higher performance. The authors go on to say that the key to performance improvement is for the
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 72
individual to be dissatisfied with his or her performance, have the confidence in themselves that
they can improve, thus leading that individual to set higher goals than the previous level of
performance (Locke & Latham, 1991).
Goal Setting Concerns
Establishing and maintaining goals should be at the forefront of every organization.
However, with goal setting comes several concerns. For instance, organizations tend to set too
many goals at a given time. Another concern is that organizations create vague goals that can not
be measured. Yet other organizations establish goals but do not effectively communicate their
goals with the rest of the members from the organization.
Goals are absolutely necessary in an organization in order to lead its members in the
same direction. One common pitfall for organizations is that they set too many goals at the same
time. When too many goals have been set, people within the organization don’t know which
goals to focus on and thus the members of the organization begin to move in various directions.
Regardless of how bright and motivated individuals are, we all have a limited attention and
mental capacity that limits the number of directives we can follow at one specific time (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Setting too many goals places members in a tough situation because it stretches
their abilities greater than their capable of being stretched and consequently they don’t place
their best efforts on each goal.
A common setback from organizations is that once they have established their goals, they
fail to coordinate how to effectively communicate those goals. Vision statements, school mottos,
and handbooks are not enough to ensure that every member of the organization understands what
the overarching goals of an organizational are and what role they must play in helping the
organization reach those goals (Razinkova, 2008). In order for organizations to reach their
desired goals, everyone needs to be on board otherwise the organizations will move in various
directions.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 73
While setting goals is a very important and extremely necessary task for any organization
to thrive, often times, organizations get caught up with certain issues and create barriers for
themselves. Some of the barriers may consist of: (a) setting too many goals, and (b) not
effectively communicating the organizational goal with their members. With careful planning
and analyzing, these barriers can be prevented.
In sum, the research on goals related to organizational and individual performance
suggests the following generalizations: goals must be difficult but yet attainable, goal
communication is vital for goals to be attained, and constant feedback is an important component
in goal setting. In the next section, a distinct but related topic is discussed- leadership support.
Site Based Leadership Support
The findings from the previous chapter suggest that another validated root cause for the
literacy gap at SES is the lack of site-based leadership organizational support. It was determined
that the principal at SES has minimal administrative support at her school site. There is no
assistant principal, no counselor, nor staff development specialist to assist the principal.
Therefore, this section will focus on the types of resources and support that leaders need to be
effective.
According to Northouse (2010), leadership is defined as a process where an individual,
such as a principal, influences a group of people to achieve common goals. Leadership has the
capacity to foster cooperation, to influence the culture, and enrich the climate of an organization
(Guzzo & Salas, 1995). The role of principal has changed dramatically ever since the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB) was established. These new roles have led to an increase in overall
workload and higher stress levels for principals (Whitaker, 2002). This is why it essential that
leaders be equipped with the proper resources and support system to complete their job
effectively.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 74
Fink & Resnick (2001) describe an urban school district in New York distinguished for
its effective support of principals via professional development. District Two uses a series of
monthly conferences and Summer institutes to support its principals. During these one-day
conferences and week-long institutes, the principals get to meet with their colleagues and
share their success stories, share their frustrations and seek guidance on the challenges they
are currently facing. Moreover, with these conferences, the district “ensures that its school
leaders share a common view of the kind of learning environments and opportunities its
schools should be providing to their diverse student body” (Fink & Resnick, 2001). The
overwhelming majority of the time, the principals discuss issues concerning instruction and
learning but if a pressing issue arises, that will take precedence over anything else.
Since monthly meetings alone are not sufficient to offer adequate support for its
principals, District Two also expects its principals to attend a number of specialized
institutes through the school year. Fink & Resnick (2001) assert that the district takes the lead in
planning these institutes by partnering with educational organizations, hiring consultants to lead
the institutes, and providing release time for all of their principals. Each principal is expected to
attend at least one institute per year but according to Fink & Resnick (2001), the majority of the
principals look forward to the institutes and they attend several of them during the year.
A related approach was described by Weingartner (2001). During the 1990’s, a group of
elementary, middle, and high school principals from the Albuquerque public schools joined
forces to form a support system for principals in order to combat frustration, stress, and burnout.
The group, named Extra Support for Principals (ESP), specifically reached out to principals who
had been in their position for three years or less. The newer principals were interviewed and
strategically matched with other more experienced and well respected principals from within the
district. The experienced principals became mentors to the newer principals. According to
Weingartner (2001), the ESP program is a voluntary support program in which the teams are free
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 75
to set their own program routine. The program consists of inter-visitations in which the mentee
has the opportunity to shadow his/her mentor several times throughout the school year.
Similarly, the mentor spends several days at the mentees’ school site visiting and observing their
progress. In addition, the participants of the ESP receive an annually revised handbook and
monthly newsletters offering tips for principals in need of support. The main goal of the program
is twofold: (a) to provide a strong support program that encourages qualified candidates to
consider the principalship, and (b) to fully support principals who find themselves with lack of
administrative support at their school site (Weingartner, 2001).
Principal centers provide another type of support for principals. The concept of principal
centers began at Harvard University during the 1980’s. The central goal of principal centers is to
provide professional development and collegial support to school administrators. A study
conducted by Campbell, LaForge & Taylor (2007) examined the effects of principal centers on
professional isolation of school principals. For this qualitative study, 12 principals were selected
from the School Leadership Center of Greater New Orleans which provides fellowship programs
for incoming principals. The 12 participants were former fellows themselves and ranged in
gender, ethnicity, and cohort. Each principal was interviewed, field notes were taken and an audit
trail was maintained for each of their school sites. The two research questions addressed were: 1)
Do principals perceived themselves to be isolated in their position and, 2) In what ways did the
School Leadership Center affect principals’ perceptions of professional isolation? The results of
the study suggests that principals felt less isolated in their positions due to professional
networking experiences and the professional development opportunities they experienced while
at the School Leadership Center (Campbell et. al, 2007).
Yet another method of assistance for principals has come in the form of teachers taking
on more leadership roles at the school sites. Harris (2004) examined a study that sought to find if
a relationship existed between distributed leadership and school improvement. The study focused
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 76
on the leadership practice of 10 schools that contained large populations of students receiving
free or reduced lunch and who had large populations of minority students. In the past, the schools
had experience challenges such as low test scores, poor student attendance, and high teacher
turnover rates. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the principals, teachers, and
other school personnel and documents from each school were collected. The results reveal that
although the degree to which distributed leadership was being used varied among the schools, all
10 school were using some form of distributed leadership within the second year of the study.
The principals from the schools distributed leadership by involving lead teachers in the decision-
making process, by allocating important tasks to teachers, and by rotating leadership
responsibilities within the school (Harris, 2004). By the third year, eight out of the 10 schools
had shown an increase in student achievement. A limitation from this study is that other factors
surrounding the school were not taken into consideration. Therefore, the study does not confirm
a direct correlation between distributive leadership and school improvement but the study may
be useful in generating ideas for Sunshine Elementary School.
Schools that have adopted a distributive leadership model, have seen teachers lead the
staff in professional development trainings, have seen teachers become coaches for beginning
teachers, and have also benefited from better representation during important school decisions. In
addition, Hart (1995) asserts that implementing teacher leadership structures will benefit the
organization in the following ways: (a) by promoting participation and inclusion to teachers, (b)
by drawing on teacher’s expertise and experience as a school resource, (c) by promoting
autonomy and career growth opportunities to teachers, (d) by encouraging instructional and
curriculum reform in schools, and (e) by alleviating the workload of principals at the school site.
Moreover, participation in leadership roles help “bring teachers out of their classrooms and into
the arena of visible work, problem solving, and resource allocation” (Hart, 1995, p. 16).
Supporters of this type of model strongly believe that student and school outcomes will increase
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 77
due to the greater buy in from the stakeholders, in particular the teachers of that school.
Site Based Leadership Concerns
Establishing a strong leadership system is a priority for any organization in order to make
sure that the organization is heading in the right direction. Due to recent budget cuts and the
implementation of stricter accountability systems, many principals have been bombarded with
more responsibilities while having less resources and support at their sites (Friedman, 2002).
Consequently, administrators are left searching for resources and types of support that can
alleviate some of their load. One form of support that has gain much popularity in recent years is
the teacher leader approach (Harris, 2004). Within this system, certain teachers are selected to
help with the decision-making process at their school. Although the administrator is the one who
has the final decision, teacher leaders play an essential role in what transpires at their school site.
Establishing such a style of leadership is not an easy task and if not done correctly, it can lead to
much turmoil within the school. Stress, work overload, and feelings of being isolated from
colleagues are just some of the problems that may arise if the process of creating such a support
system is not done properly (Lieberman et al, 2000).
To continue, teacher leaders would be faced with additional duties that can’t be ignored.
If teacher leaders are not prepared to handle the stress that may come with such additional duties,
their job performance is sure to suffer. Hart (1995) asserts that a potential pitfall for teacher
leaders is that they may stretch themselves too thin and not put forth their greatest effort in either
their role as teacher or their role as leader.
Due to an assortment of reasons, particularly budget cuts, many school districts across the
U.S do not offer mentorship programs for their principals (Fink & Resnick, 2001). Similarly,
the principal centers are very costly and if there are no partnerships established with universities,
local businesses, and community leaders, it is very difficult to find funding for such programs
(Campbell et al, 2007). Ultimately, these types of support for principals can only flourish when
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 78
there is buy-in from the district level and when there are sufficient funds available.
Conclusion
This chapter has examined the literature, theories, and studies of two root causes that
have contributed to the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary school. The two root causes
examined here are goal alignment, and site based leadership support. First, a review of the
literature on the importance of goal alignment was provided. This section was followed by a
brief discussion on the resources and types of support available to principals who have little or
no leadership organizational support at their school site. Each section contains a list of potential
concerns for an organization implementing goals and/or setting up a system for site based
leadership support. The following chapter will provide specific recommendations for Sunshine
Elementary school on steps they can take to narrow the literacy gap that currently exists. Those
recommendations will be made through careful consideration of the literature and an effective
evaluation system for such recommendations will also be provided.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 79
6
CHAPTER 6
IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS
The purpose of this gap analysis was to investigate the possible causes for the literacy
gap that currently exists between English learners (ELs) and non-English learners at Sunshine
Elementary School (SES). This chapter examined two root causes of the literacy gap: (a) goal
alignment and (b) site based leadership in the form of resources and support for the principal.
The recommendations for SES are based on the aforementioned root causes. Goal alignment at
SES is essential because it allows the members from within the organization to pull in the same
direction in order to reach the goals they’ve established. Resources and support for the principal
will help alleviate some of the day-to-day managerial tasks and allow the principal to focus on
more important issues such as closing the literacy gap.
Goal Alignment
Aligning cascading goals to the overarching goals, establishing effective ways of
communicating goals to the entire staff and parents, and developing an evaluation system that
measures how effective the goals are being communicated at SES are three research-based
solutions that were emphasized in the previous chapter. One of the primary concerns at SES is
that the vision statement, which was created at the district level, may not be well known by all of
the staff members. Consequently, many teachers have created their own goals for their students
that are not aligned to the school’s overarching goal. In a similar fashion, it is more difficult to
measure long-term goals and they do not lead to high motivation as much as short-term goals.
Recommendation 1- Aligning Cascading Goals to Overarching Goals
In order for goals to have both motivational and positive effects, they should include
shorter term goals that are understood in the context of the long-term goals (Leithwood et al.,
6
I, Juan Carlos Herrera, am the sole author of this chapter on the implementation on
recommended solutions.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 80
2002). Moreover, when the process of creating goals directly involves those who will be striving
to reach those goals, intrinsic motivation rises dramatically (Pittman, 1998).
Taking Ownership. It is evident by the collaboration between the principal and grade-
level representatives that shared responsibility is highly valued at SES. It would be beneficial for
SES to utilize that strength and have their grade-level representatives take the lead on analyzing
the overarching school goals and begin to tie in cascading goals that fall under the main goals.
Moreover, the cascading goals formed by the grade-level representatives will be highly credible
to the rest of the staff since they were created by their own colleagues rather than an outside
member of the school
Alignment. Once the team is established, it is recommended that the next step for SES is
to begin aligning their goals. Currently, SES does not have existing performance goals nor
intermediate goals that support their global goals. Instead of starting from scratch and creating
new performance goals and intermediate goals that fit into the school’s global goal, the team
would benefit from tying in performance goals and intermediate goals to current department or
grade-level goals. By doing so, it would remove the very difficult and stressful process of
establishing and agreeing on new goals.
Proper Data for Decision Making. The next step for SES should be to determine which
performance data will be used to measure whether improvement in literacy is taking place.
Initially, the literacy gap for ELs was discovered using data from the California Standardized
Test (CST). The one downfall of using such an assessment is that results take long to arrive at
the school and it does not benefit the current students because when the results arrive, the
students have moved on to the next grade. Nonetheless, research shows that the CSTs are the
most common form of summative test used. One of the reasons for the preference of the CST is
because the test is the same everywhere and it makes it easy for schools to compare themselves
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 81
with schools on both a local level and statewide level.
Time. Analyzing data from assessments takes lots of time and the teachers at SES
already have a full schedule with planning, teaching, and grading. Therefore, it is imperative that
teachers at SES are provided with an adequate amount of time to reflect, collaborate, and plan for
the next steps. Ideally, these meetings should be held a minimum of once or twice per month and
during the school day. Since paying for substitute teachers can be costly for the school district,
the other option is to provide early dismissal days for the students so that teachers can meet
freely and focus on the task at hand. During this time, grade-level representatives will meet with
their grade-level colleagues to go over the literacy data, review the performance and intermediate
goals they’ve set for that time period, and decide whether to re-teach or move on to the next set
of performance and intermediate goals.
Recommendation 2- Establishing Effective Ways of Communicating Goals.
While most organizations have a mission statement, very few of them are accompanied
with additional measurable goals (Rueda, 2011). Even fewer organizations have established
effective means of communicating goals to all of their stakeholders. It is vital that all members of
SES know and understand what the goals are so that they can do their part to ensure that those
goals are attained. Finding creative ways to remind their workers about organizational goals will
benefit organizations in the long run (Razinkova, 2008).
Starting off right. The principal and grade-level representatives should present the
organizational goals to the entire staff during the first staff meeting of the new school year.
Stating and communicating the goals so early in the year serves two purposes: First, the teachers
will recognize how committed the principal and leadership team are when it comes to focusing
on the goals for SES. Second, it will set the stage for the upcoming staff meetings where the
goals will be at the forefront of every meeting. Moreover, the beginning of the school year
symbolizes a fresh start and it’s typically the best time to introduce something new to the staff.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 82
Creativity. Razinkova (2008), asserts that finding creative ways to communicate
organizational goals will help the members of that organization remember what the goals are.
One creative and inexpensive method that SES could use is to have one grade level per month be
in charge of a set of goals and create a bulletin board in the main hallway of the school. This
bulletin board will contain the performance and intermediate goals for that specific time frame
and it will serve as a constant reminder for the students, parents, teachers, and principal at SES of
the goals that need to be attained. To be fair with all six grade levels, the selection process for the
grade in charge of the bulletin should be random and once all the grade levels have participated,
the selection process can begin again.
Another recommendation for SES is to have the goals incorporated into their e-
mail system so that they appear at the end of every e-mail that is sent out. All members of the
SES family have access to e-mail and it is a popular way of communicating with others. This
will ensure that the goals are seen on a daily basis by various stakeholders and hopefully the
goals are learned as time goes on. Similarly, if possible, all flyers that are sent home with the
students should also contain the goals printed on them so that the parents are regularly informed.
Lastly, communicating goals during big school events can definitely help raise
awareness. Back to School night and Open House are two events that serve as great opportunities
for LES to do just that. During these events, SES can provide workshops for parents informing
them about the literacy gap that exists, ways that parents can help at home, and how parents can
keep track of their child’s progress. During such events, students will also learn how important it
is to improve in their literacy skills. In sum, Back to School Night and Open House are two
events that can be used to promote SES’s organizational goals.
Constant Feedback. An important component in the communication of goals is
providing feedback (Razinkova, 2008). The principal at SES should provide constant feedback to
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 83
the teachers on their progress of acquiring the goals. Feedback should be provided at every staff
meeting if possible to ensure that teachers are focused on reaching the goals and to know
whether or not they are reaching those said goals. In order for feedback to be effective, it needs
to be provided in a timely manner and it should help motivate the individual reach the desired
goals.
Recommendation 3- Developing an Evaluation System for Goal Communication
Surveys. Developing an evaluation system for goal communication is just as important
as the actual communication of goals within an organization. Both are necessary steps in order to
attain the desired goals. The principal and the grade-level representatives can benefit from
evaluating their goal communication methods every semester. The leadership team can make and
distribute surveys to parents and teachers to learn how effective their communication methods
have been. Examples of items that can be included in the survey are as follows:
1. On a scale from 1-5, how well do you feel the leadership team communicates the goals
at LES?
2. Which do you feel is the best method used by the leadership team to effectively
communicate the organizational goals?
3. Have you seen improvement in your child’s literacy level during the last semester?
4. What suggestions do you have for the leadership team related to the communication of
goals?
The results from the surveys need to be taken into consideration after each semester and any
necessary upgrades to goal communication should be made at that point.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 84
Site Based Leadership Support
Resources and support for principals are of great priority during the high accountability
era that we currently find ourselves in. The research-based solutions emphasized in the previous
chapter include mentorship/peer-coaching programs for the principal and having teachers take
on more leadership roles at their school site.
Recommendation 4- Mentorship for principals
During this era of high accountability, there is greater pressure on schools to
achieve all of their goals and objectives. As a result, school districts have placed a greater
emphasis on assisting school leaders to ensure that schools are made more effective (Daresh,
2004). Such assistance has come in the form of professional development, mentorship
programs, shared leadership and other support systems for administrators.
Providing consistent professional development for administrators and
hiring outside support systems can be extremely costly for school districts, especially
during the recent budget cuts in the state of California. Consequently, many districts have
shifted their focus to internal support systems such as mentoring and peer coaching for their
administrators (Daresh, 2004).
Reaching Out. The first step the principal at SES should take in seeking support
for the heavy workload she is currently facing is to reach out and find a mentor to help provide
some time management strategies. Ideally, this mentor would be a current school principal, a
former school principal, or other member of the California School District because they are
familiar with the culture within the district. Moreover, the ideal candidate would be an individual
who is facing or has faced a similar literacy gap with their EL population. Another possibility
would be to search for a mentor in a neighboring school district that contains similar
demographics and challenges as SES. Regardless of where the mentor is from, it is important to
consider such variables as professional goals, interpersonal styles, and learning needs when
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 85
matching a principal with a mentor (Daresh, 2004).
Scheduling. If the mentor is a retired principal hired by the district, then
most likely scheduling time to meet won’t be an issue. However, if a peer is going to
provide the coaching, then a conflict of interest may arise due to both individuals having
busy schedules. It is important to set up a consistent schedule in which the principal and
mentor have ample time to meet, communicate, and debrief. Planning meetings for the for the
entire school year is ideal because setting dates will hold both parties accountable.
Shadowing. An integral part of any mentorship program is for the participants to
have an opportunity to shadow their mentor in an actual school setting. During this time, the
principal will have an opportunity to see how the mentor interacts with their staff, how the
mentor takes on the day to day tasks, and how they handle being in stressful situations. In a
similar fashion, the principal at SES should also invite her mentor/peer-coach to observe her
on a consistent basis during regular school days and hours. This will allow the mentor to
observe and thus gain a clear picture of the type and amount of work the principal must
complete throughout the course of a day and then be able to offer suggestions on the best
methods to complete the tasks.
Reflection. Much like teachers, there should be a lot of reflection on the part of
school leaders. It will benefit the principal at SES to partake in a mid-year self- reflection
and an end of the year self-reflection inventory to measure the progress that she has made
with the help of the mentor, to assess the tasks that still present a challenge, and to
determine her next steps.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 86
Recommendation 5- More Leadership Roles for Teachers.
Wahlstrom & Louis (2008) assert that increased teacher influence in schools has the
potential for significant positive effects on school improvement. Keeping that in mind, having
SES provide more leadership roles for their teachers not only would alleviate the principal from
having to deal with the day to day managerial tasks but it will also provide the principal with
more time to focus on important issues such as the literacy gap at her school.
Recruiting. Teacher leaders will be responsible for many tasks and important duties
therefore it is essential to select teachers that have plenty of experience and are already seen as
school leaders by their peers. Teachers who have served as department chairs and members of
School Site Council (SSC) would be great candidates. Ideally, a teacher leader per grade level
will be selected since the decisions made at SES affect all grades. The teachers should not be
mandated to participate but rather nominated by their peers and then interviewed by the principal
if there are many candidates. The recruitment process should take place during the Summer or
during the first month of school so that the team is assembled no later than October.
Developing Trust. Since teachers will be treading unfamiliar territory it’s important that
the principal provides ample guidance and that each side does truly trust each other.
According to Wahlstrom & Louis (2008), principals can build trust indirectly through supportive
behavior. Moreover, principal respect and personal regard for teachers, personal integrity, and
competence in core role responsibilities are all associated with relational trust towards the
principal by other members of the school (Bryk & Schneider, 2003). Since teachers at SES have
a great appreciation for the principal, developing trust should not be a difficult of a task.
Duties. Once trust begins to develop, the next step is for the leadership team to take on
some important duties. For instance, the leadership team can take turns leading the professional
developments (PDs) which normally falls under the responsibility of the principal. The
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 87
leadership team can take turns leading the PDs based on their areas of interests and expertise.
Additionally, the leadership team can also take the lead when it comes to making presentations
and holding workshops for parents during big events such as Back to School night and Open
House. Finally, the leadership team can help play a big role when it comes to decision making,
especially when it relates to ideas on how to help close the literacy gap. They are the ones who
directly work with ELs and can offer new ideas and solutions for the principal to consider.
Evaluation of Solutions
In order to make certain that the solutions suggested for SES are efficient once they are
implemented, it is suggested that the Kirkpatrick model (2002) of program evaluation will be used.
The four levels of evaluation consist of: (a) level 1- reactions, (b) level 2- learning, (c) level 3-
behaviors, and (d) level 4- results. Each evaluation level is built on information provided by the
lower level (Winfrey, 1999).
Level 1 attempts to answer questions regarding the participants perception about the
program, training, or model (Winfrey, 1999). For instance, for goal alignment, do teachers like
having performance and intermediate goals at LES? Does the principal enjoy having a mentor
shadow her around campus?
Level 2 assesses the amount of learning that has occurred due to the program, training or
model (Winfrey, 1999). For goal alignment, do parents know LES’ mission statement? Do the
teachers know what performance goal they are trying to attain for that particular month? Do the
teacher leaders know how to properly lead a professional development?
Level 3 measures the transfer that has occurred in the participants’ behavior based on the
training programs. According to Winfrey (1999), for many people, this level represents the truest
assessment of a programs’ effectiveness. At this level, certain questions that might be asked are
as followed: Can the rest of the teachers create their own performance and intermediate goals?
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 88
Are certain parents ready to lead workshops for parents informing them about the importance of
cascading goals? Can the principal serve as a mentor for incoming administrators?
Finally, level 4 addresses results and whether the global goal was met. In the business
world, this level measures results on increased production, increased quality, increased sales, and
higher profits (Winfrey, 1999). In terms of the questions asked at this level, possible questions
include: Have ELs raised their literacy score from the beginning of the school year? What
percentage of ELs are proficient and above by the end of the semester? What percentage of ELs
are proficient and above by mid-year?
Conclusion
This chapter provides recommendations that Sunshine Elementary School (SES) should
take to close the literacy achievement gap that currently exists among ELs and their non-EL
peers. These recommendations are based on the research-based solutions presented in the
previous chapter. This chapter provides recommendations for implementing short-term and
intermediate goals at SES that align with the overarching goals, using effective and creative
methods to communicate those said goals, and evaluating the methods of goal communication at
SES. In addition, the chapter provides recommendations on the types of resources and support
available for the principal at SES in order to help alleviate some of the heavy workload and help
close the literacy gap.
It is noteworthy to mention that the solutions and recommendations discussed in Chapters
5 and 6 only focus on two of the six causes that have contributed to the literacy achievement gap
at SES. It is necessary for SES to look at the research-based solutions and recommendations
from the other two members of the inquiry team in order to address the literacy gap at the school
as a whole. Sunshine Elementary School may choose to proceed with the implementation of the
recommendations or may choose to make the necessary modifications along the way.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 89
References
Allison, B. N., & Rehm, M. L. (2011). English language learners: Effective teaching strategies,
practices for FCS teachers. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 103(1), 22-27.
Anderson, J. (2005) Historical Context for Understanding the Test Score Gap (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press).
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, teaching and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York. Addison Wesley.
Association. New York, NY
August, D, & Shanahan, T., Eds. (2008). Developing Reading and writing in second-language
learners: Lessons from the Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority
Children and Youth. New York: Routledge, co-published by the Center for Applied
Linguistics and the International Reading Association.
August, D. & Shanahan, T (Eds.), (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners:
Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
August, D. (2007). Developing reading and writing in second language learners: Demographic
overview. Center for Applied Linguistics and The International Reading Association,
New York, New York.
Bae, S., Holloway, S. D., Li, J., & Bempechat, J. (2008). Mexican-American students’
perceptions of teachers’ expectations: Do perceptions differ depending on student
achievement levels? The Urban Review, 40(2), 210-225.
Bandura, A. (2001): Social Cognitive Theory of Mass Communication, Media
Psychology, (3)3, 265-299.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 90
Bandura, A., & Locke, E. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of
applied psychology, 88(1), 87.
Bauer, E. B., & Arazi, J. (2011). Promoting literacy development for beginning english learners.
The Reading Teacher, 64(5), 383-386.
Bartlett, L. (2008). Literacy's verb: Exploring what literacy is and what literacy does.
International Journal of Educational Development, 28(6), 737-753.
Buenning, M., & Tollefson, N. (1987). The cultural gap hypothesis as an explanation for the
achievement patterns of Mexican-American students. Psychology in the Schools, 24(3),
264-269
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform.
Educational Leadership. 60(6), 40-44.
Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English
learners. The Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127.
Campbell, K., LaForge, E., & Taylor, L. (2007). The Effect of Pincipal
Centers on Professional Isolation of School Principals.
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-44.
Dawson, P. (2009). Homework: A guide for parents. National Association of School
Psychologists. Communique, 38(1), 26.
Duval-Couetil, N. & Mikulecky L. (2011) Immigrants, English, and the Workplace: Evaluating
Employer Demand for Language Education in Manufacturing Companies. Journal of
Workplace Learning. 23, 209-223.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 91
Erez, M., & Earley, P. (1987). Comparative Analysis of Goal-Setting Strategies Across
Cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 658.
Fink, E., & Resnick, L. B. (2001). Developing principals as instructional leaders. Phi
Delta Kappan, 82(8), 598-610.
Friedman, I. A. (2002). Burnout in school principals: Role related antecedents. Social
Psychology of Education, 5(3), 229-251.
Guzzo, R. & Salas, E. (1995). Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing.
Harper, C., & de Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching english-language learners.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(2), 152-162.
Harris, A. (2004). Distributed Leadership and School Improvement Leading or
Misleading? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1),
11-24.
Kindler, A. L. (2002). Survey of the states’ limited English proficient students and available
educational programs and services: 2000–2001 summary report. Washington, DC:
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction
Educational Programs.
Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). The four-level evaluation process. In L. L. Ukens (Ed.), What smart
trainers know: The secrets of success from the world’s foremost experts (pp.122-132).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B., Levy, B. A., & Rasinski, T. V. (2010).
Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and
definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230-251.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 92
Latham, G., & Locke, E. (1991). Self-Regulation Through Goal Setting. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 212-247.
Lieberman, A., Saxl, E., & Miles, M. (2000). Teacher Leadership: Ideology and
Practice, in The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership, pp. 339–345.
Chicago: Jossey-Bass.
Locke, E., & Latham, G. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Locke, E., & Latham, G. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task
motivation. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.
Mayer, R. E. (2008) Chapter 6-Teaching by Priming Students’ Motivation to Learn. In Learning
and instruction (pp. 209-223) Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Northhouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice (5
th
ed.). Western Michigan University:
Sage Publication, Inc.
Ramírez, J. D. (2001). Bilingualism and literacy: Problem or opportunity? A synthesis of
reading research on bilingual students. A Research Symposium on High Standards in
Reading for Students in Diverse Language Groups: Research, Policy, and Practice.
Washington, D.C.: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs, U.S.
Department of Education.
Razinkova, I. (2008). Goal Communication at Ontario Heritage Sites. University of
Waterloo. Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York: Teachers College Press.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 93
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006) School enrollment—social and economic characteristics of students:
October 2005. Table 1, Current population survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Commerce.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006, January). Population profile of the United States. Race and Hispanic
origin in 2004. Washington, DC: U.S Department of Commerce.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). State and county quick facts: Centerville, CA. Retrieved March 5,
2012, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0644574.html
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. National Assessment of
Educational Progress. (2003). NCES Plan for NAEP Background Variable Development.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). High school and
beyond; 1990 high school transcript study; National education longitudinal study of
1988; 1994 high school transcript study; and 1998 high school transcript study. NAEP
Data. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
Verdugo, R. (2006). A Report on the status of Hispanics in education: Overcoming a history of
neglect. Washington, DC: National Education Association, Human and Civil Rights.
Vygotsky, L. (2002). Mind in society and the ZPD. Readings for reflective teaching, 112-114.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wahlstrom, K., & Louis, K. (2008). How Teachers Experience Principal Leadership: The
Roles of Professional Communities, Trust, Efficacy, and Shared Responsibility.
Educational Administration Quarterly. 44(4). 458-495.
Weingartner, C. J. (2001). Albuquerque Principals Have ESP. Principal, 80(4), 40-42.
Winfrey, E. (1999). Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation. In B. Hoffman (Ed.),
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 94
Encyclopedia of Educational Technology.
Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000). Sharing informational text with young children. The
Reading Teacher, 53(5), 410-423.
Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000). Supporting phonemic awareness development in the
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 130-143.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 95
Appendix A-Parent Survey-English
Sunshine Elementary School Climate Survey
Dear Families,
We want Sunshine Elementary School to be the best that it can be. Please fill out this survey and
tell us what you think our school’s strong points are and what you think could be better. We
welcome your comments and ideas.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Caring Environment at Sunshine Elementary
1. When I walk into this school I feel welcome.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I am treated with respect at this school.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. The school respects my cultural heritage.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. Students at my child’s school are treated fairly no matter what their race or cultural
background.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
5. I feel welcome at PTA/parent group meetings.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………
Problem Solving at Sunshine Elementary
1. I have a good working relationship with my child’s teacher.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I can talk to the school principal when I need to.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. The school has a clear process for addressing concerns about my child(ren).
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. If the school can’t help me, I know they will refer me to someone who can.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 96
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Communication at Sunshine Elementary
1. My child’s teacher notifies me if my child is having a problem with (circle all that apply):
Behavior Reading Classwork Homework
Tests
2. It is easy to get all school information written in Spanish and English.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. The school consults me before making important decisions about my child.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. Every year the school informs me of what grade level standards are expected of my child.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Student Progress at Sunshine Elementary
1. My child’s teacher keeps me well informed about how my child is doing in school.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I understand the grade level standards that my child is supposed to meet.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. Sunshine Elementary gives useful information on how to improve my child’s progress.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. At Sunshine Elementary students feel challenged to do their best.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
5. At this school students enjoy reading
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Satisfaction of Sunshine Elementary
1. I am very satisfied with the quality of this school
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I would recommend this school to family and friends with children.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 97
3. What grade is your child in? List all if you have more than
one.________________________
4. I identify my child’s race as: ________________________
5. What is the school doing that is most helpful to you as a parent?
_______________________________________________________________________
6. Write one thing you would like the school to do to improve your child’s learning
experience?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 98
Appendix B-Parent Climate Survey-Spanish
Encuesta de clima en la escuela primaria Sunshine
Queridas familias,
Nosotros queremos que la escuela primaria Sunshine sea la major escuela posible. Por favor
tome unos minutos y llene esta encuesta y diganos cuales son las areas fuertes de la escuela y que
areas pueden ser mejor. Sus comentarios e ideas son bienvenidas.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Un medio ambiente de carino en la primaria Sunshine
6. Cuando entro en la escuela me siento bienvenido/a
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
7. Me tratan con repeto en esta escuela
Siempre Casi Siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. La escuela respeta mi herencia cultural
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
9. Los estudiantes de la escuela de mi hijo(a) reciben un trato justo sin importar su raza u
origen cultural.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
10. Me siento a gusto en las reuniones de padres/grupo PTA
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Resolucion de problemas en la primaria Sunshine
5. Tengo una buena relación de trabajo con el maestro(a) de mi hijo(a).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
6. Puedo hablar con la directora de la escuela cuando lo necesito hacer.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 99
7. La escuela cuenta con un proceso claro para abordar las preocupaciones acerca de mi
hijo(a).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. Si la escuela no me puede ayudar, sé que me va a referir a alguien que pueda hacerlo.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Comunicacion en la primaria Sunshine
5. La maestra/El maestro de mi hija(o) me notifica si mi hija(o) tiene un problema con
(marque lo que corresponda):
Comportamiento Lectura Trabajo de clase Tarea
Examenes
6. Es fácil de obtener toda la información de la escuela por escrito en Español e Inglés.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
3. La escuela me consulta antes de tomar decisiones importantes acerca de mi hija(o)
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
4. Cada año la escuela me informa de los estándares de nivel de grado que se espera de mi
hija(o).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Progreso del estudiante en la escuela primaria Sunshine
6. La maestra/el maestro de mi hija(o) me mantiene bien informado acerca de cómo mi
hija(o) está haciendo en la escuela.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
7. Entiendo las normas de nivel de grado que mi hija(o) se supone que debe cumplir.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. La primaria Sunshine ofrece información útil sobre cómo mejorar el progreso de mi
hija(o).
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 100
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
9. En Sunshine, los estudiantes de primaria se sienten desafiados a hacer lo mejor.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
10. En esta escuela, los estudiantes disfrutan de la lectura
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Satisfaccion de primaria Sunshine
7. Estoy muy satisfecho con la calidad de esta escuela.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. Yo recomendaría esta escuela a mi familia y amigos con niños.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
9. ¿En qué grado está su hija/o? liste todos si usted tiene más de
uno________________________
10. identifico la raza de mi hija/o, como: ________________________
11. ¿Qué está haciendo la escuela que es más útil para usted como padre?
________________________________________________________________________
12. Escriba una cosa que le gustaría que la escuela haga para mejorar la experiencia de
aprendizaje de su hija/o?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 101
Appendix C-Teacher Survey
Gender:
Male_____ Female_____
Race:
Years teaching at Sunshine:
Circle Years of Teaching:
0-3 4-6 7-10 11-13 14-16 17-20
1. Sunshine Elementary School Agree Disagree
The administrators at Sunshine Elementary support its teachers.
Sunshine Elementary School is safe.
Sunshine has a curriculum that meets the needs of all students.
Sunshine Elementary School’s student discipline policy is fair.
At Sunshine, the teachers develop lesson that are culturally relevant to
all races.
At Sunshine, teachers value what students have to say.
At Sunshine, administrators respect all races and cultures.
At Sunshine, administrators value what students have to say.
2. Please mark how well you think Sunshine Elementary is preparing
students for the following
Not Well Very
Well
Proficiency in reading by the close of 2nd grade.
Developing students critical thinking skills.
To meet State Standards.
Close the literacy gap for disadvantaged youth.
Prepare students for the next grade.
Prepare students for standardized test
3. Which of the following are the most important qualities for teaching? (Circle 3)
Explaining material well to students. Working with all students' styles of learning &
culture.
Using fun and creative techniques. Building trust and respect with students.
Having control of the classroom. Subject matter expertise
Believing in all students' abilities to learn. Giving students individualized help with their
work.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 102
4. Thinking about the students at Sunshine (overall), please mark if you
agree or disagree:
Agree Disagree
Students at Sunshine care about learning and getting a good education.
Students at Sunshine get to be creative and use their abilities in school.
I know about what's going on in my students' lives outside of school.
I am able to teach to my students' individual strengths and weaknesses.
At Sunshine students should take responsibility for their learning.
Student-teacher relationships affect overall school success.
Students at Sunshine care about learning and getting a good education.
Students at Sunshine get to be creative and use their abilities in school.
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 103
Appendix D-Student Reading Attitudes Survey
(Administered by the school)
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 104
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 105
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 106
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 107
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 108
Appendix E- Teacher Interview Questions
Background
1) Who are the stakeholders?
2) Who is influential in the decision-making? Tell me more about the EL population?
3) What is the committee structure of the school? Informal? Formal?
4) What is the relationship of the school and community?
5) What is your perception of the school neighborhood?
6) How long has the current structure been in place at this school?
7) How do policies get made?
8) How receptive is the school to teacher input?
Goals
1) What are the goals of the school? Are the goals practical? How do the goals impact your
teaching?
Problem
1) What are your views on reading and learning?
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 109
Appendix F-Principal Interview Questions
1. How do you perceive your role as principal? What level of support do you receive?
2. What is your school mission? How aligned is the mission to the reality of your school?
3. Who are the stakeholders at your site/district? What is your level of interaction with
these stakeholders?
4. How are decisions made at your site?
5. Discuss the climate at Sunshine. What are some strengths? What are areas of possible
growth?
6. How are your teacher leaders selected? What are their duties?
7. Who are your “unofficial” teacher leaders? How do they impact school policy
decisions?
8. What is your perception concerning teacher collaboration at Sunshine?
9. How would you describe the students at Sunshine?
10. How involved is the community (parents, families, others) in the area surrounding
Sunshine? What are some outreach/education activities that you offer? What are your
plans for future opportunities?
11. What programs and systems currently exist that serve EL students, both directly and
indirectly?
12. How are your EL programs structured? How have these programs changed since your
arrival at Sunshine?
13. In What professional development activities has your staff participated? In relation to
these activities, how is student progress monitored?
14. What are some things you would like to see changed that you believe would assist with
EL student achievement? Ate these things feasible
110
Causes Students Parents Teachers Admin
Knowledge • Delayed
reading due to
holes in
literacy
processes
• Students may
not understand
the importance
of what is
being learned
• Education Level
may be similar
to where their
students are.
• Parents may
not understand
the importance
of what is being
learned
• Parents may not
have the
knowledge to
access resources
• PD at beginning of school
(centralized) curriculum
aligned for teachers which
consisted of Common
Assessment, Coding for
student achievement,
benchmarked, LEA plan,
Data Analysis Protocol.
This is a data driven
program. Is the data
process giving the right
data?
• Teachers may not have the
tools necessary to work
effectively with students
• Lack of teaching strategies
• Do teachers know the goals
of the school?
• Are the goals effectively
communicated?
• New to
district, new
to school.
• Appears to
know the
elements of
the job
• May not
understand
the nuances of
the school
climate
Motivation • Student self-
efficacy based
on teacher
attitudes
• Student work
is not
presented in a
way that
makes them
want to
understand the
material.
• Distracted by
the language
barriers
• Value
• Self-
Regulation
• Self-Efficacy
• (Pobrecito)
• Meaning of
Education
• Parents trust the
teachers to
teach
• Participate in PD out of
obligation vs. desire to be a
lifelong learner
• Stereotyping of students
• Learning of new techniques
• Self-Efficacy
• She appears highly
motivated and
wants her students
and teachers to
perform well
• She is involved in
several programs at
school
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 111
Organizatio
n
• Heavily
focused on LA
and Math, and
some of the
other subjects
may not be
pushed,
especially
those subjects
where literacy
skills (reading,
writing,
listening and
speaking) can
be practiced
• Lack of
resources to
support system
• Outside of PTA,
there are few
opportunities
for parent
involvement
• Support from
Administrator
• Opportunities for
collaboration
• There is no
administrative
team. Isolation
• Little support from
District office
• New to district,
outsider
• Disaggregating
data based on EL
achievement
112
Appendix H. Dissertation Proposal Presentation
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 113
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 114
Appendix I-Presentation to Sunshine Administration
CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT GAP IN LITERACY 115
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English language learners at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of english language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model
PDF
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on school support and school counseling resources
PDF
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on college affordability and student grades
PDF
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readinesss gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on goals and parent involvement
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the Hispanic English learners achievement gap in a high performing district
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high school: a focus on teaching strategies and placement options
PDF
An alternative capstone project: closing the achievement gap for Latino English language learners in elementary school
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the achievement gap for Hispanic English language learners using the gap analysis model
PDF
An alternative capstone project: bridging the Latino English language learner academic achievement gap in elementary school
PDF
Addressing the challenges for teachers of English learners in a California elementary school using the gap analysis approach
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: School site leadership factors
PDF
Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis
PDF
An alternative capstone project: A gap analysis inquiry project on the district reform efforts and its impact in narrowing the Hispanic EL achievement gap in Rowland Unified School District
PDF
The impact of elementary school leadership on student achievement: a gap analysis
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: central office leadership factors
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high schol: a focus on teacher collaboration and cultural competence
PDF
Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Evaluating the academic achievement gap for Latino English language learners in a high achieving school district
PDF
Examining the implementation of district reforms through gap analysis: addressing the performance gap at two high schools
Asset Metadata
Creator
Herrera, Juan Carlos
(author)
Core Title
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
08/12/2013
Defense Date
08/09/2013
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
achievement,elementary,gap analysis,Knowledge,Literacy,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Rueda, Robert (
committee chair
), Love, Laurie (
committee member
), Yates, Kenneth A. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
herrerajc25@yahoo.com,jcherrer@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-323680
Unique identifier
UC11287988
Identifier
etd-HerreraJua-1998.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-323680 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-HerreraJua-1998.pdf
Dmrecord
323680
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Herrera, Juan Carlos
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
Tags
achievement
elementary
gap analysis
organization