University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The role of student engagement in a certified Linked Learning school

(USC Thesis Other)

The role of student engagement in a certified Linked Learning school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

1

THE ROLE OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A CERTIFIED LINKED LEARNING
SCHOOL

by

Donald Scott Wilson

____________________________________________________________________

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

May 2017

Copyright 2017 Donald Scott Wilson
Running head: STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

2

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great
teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American
system that we have that allowed you to thrive.
— President Barack Obama, 2012
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the
main.
— John Donne, 1624

All that I am, all that I have accomplished and anything I accomplish in the future, I owe
to those I have loved, come to love, and will come to love for their role in any success that is
erroneously attributed to me alone.
First and for most, I dedicate this to my parents. To my mother who instilled in me the
belief that I can accomplish anything I put my heart to and to my father who set the highest
example of anything worth doing is worth doing it right. My parents’ work ethic is unsurpassed
and an endearing reminder where much is given, much is required. A special thank you to my
mother is in order as an editor extraordinaire. For every page I wrote, my mother read it forward
and backwards ferreting out awkward phrases and hundreds of errant commas.
And to my son, Andrew, who has proved to me that heroes do exist and that adversity is
just a stepping-stone to greatness. Nothing else that I have accomplished and no accolade comes
close to the pride and joy I feel in having you call me Dad. You continually inspire me to be a
better human being and, most importantly, you taught me how to be an adult.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

3
To my partner, Leo, whose devotion and support allowed me to dedicate hundreds of
evenings and weekends to this effort and never once complained. You have taught me to enjoy
the present, have faith in the future, and keep me laughing along this journey we call life.
To Dr. Ott, whose abilities to catch errant commas even surpass my mother’s stellar skill.
However, you have been more than dissertation chair and helped me to leap into the next and
exciting path on my professional journey. Your guidance and council has proven invaluable,
more importantly, you have inspired me to work harder and reach farther to better the lives of the
students we serve.
A special thank you to Dr. Sylvia Rousseau. It only took one class and you changed my
life forever. The students, teachers, and parents I serve are in better hands because of you, and I
am forever grateful that you were my teacher in every sense of the word.
Last, I could not have accomplished this without my cohort, Dr. Catherine Real, Dr. Eric
Maxey, and Dr. Heidi Lance. You inspired me to keep working even when I didn’t think I had it
in me. You are a shining example of everything that is good in education in the 21
st
century, and
I am grateful and humbled to call you friend and colleague.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 6
Abstract 7
Chapter 1: Background, Purpose and Overview of Study 9
Introduction 9
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose of the Study 10
Research Questions 11
Significance of the Study 11
Methodology 13
Limitations of the Study 14
Delimitations of the Study 15
Assumptions 16
Definition of Key Terms and Related Concepts 16
Organization of the Dissertation 22
Chapter 2: Review of Literature 24
History of Public Education and School Reform Movements 25
Student Engagement 31
Critique of the Literature 64
Chapter 3: Methodology 66
Research Questions 67
Research Design 67
Conceptual Framework 72
Figure 1. Conceptual framework 74
Sampling 75
Data Collection 81
Data Analysis 85
Conclusion 86
Chapter 4: Research Findings 88
Initial Impression of Artistic High School 90
Findings by Research Question 91
Discussion of the Findings 150
Conclusion 153
Chapter 5: Conclusions 154
Summary 154
The Statement of the Problem 155
Purpose of the Study 156
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

5
Methodology 156
Research Questions 157
Instrumentation 158
Data Collection 158
Findings 159
Recommendations for Policy or Practice 161
Suggestions for Future Research 164
Conclusions 165
References 167
Appendices 180
Appendix A: Teacher Survey 180
Appendix B: Student Survey 186
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 193
Appendix D: Document Review Protocol 198
Appendix E: Information/Facts Sheet for Non-Medical Research 201

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. School Demographics 78
Table 2. Students Qualifying for Free or Reduced Price Meals 78
Table 3. Percentage of English Language Learners 79
Table 4. 11th Grade Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Results 80
Table 5. CAHSEE Pass Rates 80
Table 6. Percentage of Cohort Graduates 81
Table 7. Student-Reported Indicators of Learning Environments Characterized by 96
Respect for Classroom Learning and Procedures
Table 8. Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment Characterized by 96
a Respect for Classroom Learning and Procedures
Table 9. Student-Reported Indicators of Supportive Teacher/Student Relationships 99
Table 10. Teacher-Reported Indicators of Supportive Teacher/Student Relationships 99
Table 11. Student-Reported Indicators of Emotional and Physical Safety 103
Table 12. Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment That is 103
Characterized by a Perception of Emotional and Physical Safety
Table 13. Student-Reported Indicators of a School Characterized as One of Belonging 105
and Community
Table 14. Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment Characterized by 106
a Sense of Belonging and Community
Table 15. Student-Reported Indicators of Persistence 110
Table 16. Teacher-Reported Indicators of Perceptions on Student Persistence 111
Table 17. Student Indicators of a Relevant Learning Environment 113

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

7
ABSTRACT
This study applies a theoretical framework informed by Bronfenbenner’s ecological systems
theory to understand the impact of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive factors on student
achievement. The purpose of this study was to understand the role of engagement in an out-
performing Linked Learning High School and to what extent ecological factors contributed to
engagement and flow and to illuminate promising practices that may be factors of student
engagement’s role in raising achievement. The study was guided by four overarching research
questions: (1) To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional and cognitive
engagement present in a high-performing urban school? (2) What school programs, processes,
and practices are perceived to contribute to student engagement? (3) What are the unique
elements within the school structure that support student engagement? (4) To what extent do
students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day? This case study focused on
Artistic High School, an out-performing, Linked Learning school serving at risk students. The
school in the study met the criteria for an outperforming urban school, as well as the multiple
indicators for at-risk students. The study utilized the qualitative research method. Through a
series of interviews, and surveys, and observations, at Artistic High School, insight emerged
about the meaning that participants assigned to the school’s programs, processes, and practices
that showed promise for improving student achievement. Documents were analyzed for data on
former practices in regards to student emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement.
Findings from this study indicate that pedagogical or programmatic factors influencing student
engagement were part of a larger system, which fosters a culture of deep interpersonal peer and
student/teacher relationships. Contributive factors were found to include a culture that
empowered teacher autonomy and student choice. Additionally, a culture of collaboration at
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

8
community, administrative, teacher, and student levels created conditions for engagement and
belonging of all stakeholder groups. Significantly, Linked Learning was found to be a
significant factor in fostering key programs and practices perceived to increase student
engagement. One key finding was the role engagement plays beyond academic achievement of
student transformation and self-actualization.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

9
CHAPTER 1
BACKGROUND, PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW OF STUDY
Introduction
Achievement disparities between ethnic and racial groups have been a part of the
educational landscape for as long as the United States has endeavored to educate its citizens.
However, it was not until many years later that we decided that these gaps were of importance to
us as a nation. Increasingly, since the Civil Rights Movement during the mid-twentieth century,
Educators and politicians have collectively recognized that these educational gaps are tightly
aligned with a larger body of inequalities that racial minorities have endured. In 1980, with the
publication of A Nation at Risk and the Bush presidential initiative of No Child Left Behind, we
began an era of accountability that focused on closing the achievement gap between that has
endured until the present (Firestone & Shipps, 2003). For practitioners of education, it is the
application of promising theoretical research that drives much of our work. We are constantly
looking for education’s elusive Rosetta Stone, which we hope may provide a definitive
understanding of how to unlock the secrets of pedagogies and methodologies that will aid in
closing the achievement gap. This study focused on the role of engagement in outperforming
urban schools, specifically, certified Linked Learning high schools that serve at-risk youth and
attempts to unlock promising strategies that might influence instructional practice for the many
students struggling in the educational system.
Statement of the Problem
While there have been some overall improvements for students of all races, the gap has
doggedly persisted with a majority of Black and Latino students across the United States still
lagging far behind their White counterparts (Torlakson, 2013). However, there are a few urban
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

10
schools, serving at-risk black and Latino students, who are defying the national achievement gap
by outperforming their counterparts and producing students who are college and career ready
(Bell, 2001). While educational researchers and practitioners have looked at a myriad of
possible reasons for the persistence of the achievement gap, as well as promising practices to
close it, there has yet to be a definitive body of research that points to universal solutions. There
is, however, an increasing academic interest and emphasis on the role student engagement has on
providing powerful scaffolds and safety nets for at-risk students (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Building on earlier seminal work that sought to broaden the definition of school engagement, a
burgeoning body of more recent work has emerged to help coalesce a multi-faceted
understanding of what school engagement is and how it affects student outcomes, both pre- and
post-high school graduation (Furlong et al., 2003). In fact, research is comprehensively clear
that engagement is a critical factor in positive student outcomes (Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi,
Schneider, & Steele Shernoff, 2003). This is crucially important as the opposite of engagement
is disengagement and research is very clear that student disengagement is a primary factor in
poor performance, dropout rates, and even prison for black and Latino boys (Fenning & Rose,
2007). Further, in multiple studies it has been shown to be a significant correlation between
engagement and achievement (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). While a comprehensive understanding of
the many facets of student engagement is beyond the scope of this study, there are commonalities
among the research that provides a basic framework in which to look at key aspects of
engagement and how it affects achievement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of engagement in student achievement
in an outperforming and certified Linked Learning urban school. The underlying motivation for
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

11
this study was to illuminate promising practices that may be factors in engaging students and
raising achievement. Research on engagement notes that educational practitioners intuitively
understand the role engagement plays and tend to be willing to implement promising practices
(Shernoff et al., 2003). While qualitative studies are not overtly generalizable, the purpose of
this study was to see what high-achieving Linked Learning schools are doing differently and
later examined if those promising practices would make a difference at other sites. Thus, for
purposes of this study, an out-performing urban, certified Linked Learning high school was
chosen. Using the theoretical framework developed for this study, it was the researcher’s
expectation that processes, programs, and practices were identified and evaluated.
Research Questions
The study was guided by four overarching research questions:
1. To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement
present in a high-performing urban school?
2. What school programs, processes and practices are perceived to contribute to student
engagement?
3. What are the unique elements within the school structure that support student
engagement?
4. To what extent do students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day?
Significance of the Study
This study is directly related to the urgency California’s education and government
leaders have placed on reform efforts that not only link public education to college readiness, but
also to high quality workforce and economic development. State Superintendent Tom Torlakson
has focused his efforts to support career and technical education through his Career Readiness
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

12
Initiative (Torlakson, 2015). This initiative directs the California Department of Education to
strengthen career and technical education in K-14 education and resulted in California State
Standards for Career Ready Practices (California Department of Education [CDE], 2014b).
Linked Learning is one major reform effort that is showing promising results and the State of
California has committed almost $2 billion to support expanded implementation of Linked
Learning pathways statewide (Linked Learning, 2015). This emphasis has ignited a fast growing
statewide movement. While evidence to support this movement is increasing, there remains a
serious deficit of research on what constitutes best pedagogical and organizational practices.
Currently, California’s high schools are not succeeding in preparing all students for college and
careers and failed program will not serve our most at risk students (ConnectEd, 2010). This
study sought to add to the research by examining the perceived factors that contribute to
academic engagement and success in a certified Linked Learning high school and isolate best
practices that may be useful to new programs across the state.
The extant research on Linked Learning has shown programs with a clear career pathway
and strong technical training connected to academics can have an impact on student engagement
(ConnectEd, 2010). Further, research on student engagement points to strong connections
between student engagement and academic success and this connection appears to be strongest
for at risk youth (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Bennett, 2001). Thus, the research
supports the idea that increased student engagement may lead to increased academic success and
better career readiness for the most at risk students.
Understanding the perceived factors in a certified Linked Learning pathway that
influence student success can help policy advocates, legislators, and educational practitioners
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

13
make informed decisions about best practices that deepen student engagement and increase
college and career readiness for the most at risk students across the state.
Methodology
The relationship between student engagement and academic achievement was examined
utilizing a multi-method qualitative approach through a case study to identify perceived factors
that have an effect on student learning and ultimately student achievement in an outperforming
certified Linked Learning high school. A bounded case study approach was applied to the study
of the relationship between academic achievement and student engagement. Merriam defines a
bounded case study as a study involving a particular case selected for its time, place, or activity
boundaries. A bounded case study approach involves the selection of a single entity to be
studied (Merriam, 2009). For the purposes of this paper Artistic High School served as the focus
of study. A case study approach is appropriate as the primary purpose of this study is to uncover
and illuminate the possible relational factors that may be at play between classroom practices and
student engagement and that may provide insight, discovery, and probable interpretations for this
phenomenon (Merriam, 2009).
The thematic dissertation group decided to utilize the qualitative research method. The
qualitative method creates a thick and rich narrative that you cannot get from quantitative
studies. Qualitative research uses multiple perspectives and provides the readers with depth and
complexity on the subject matter, not available from quantitative research. In addition,
qualitative methods are inductive and exploratory in nature (Maxwell, 2013). Qualitative
research allows the researcher to explore areas of interest which may have not been considered
before. Because of the exploratory nature of qualitative research, components of engagement
that were not considered in the past may now be explored and documented, which may lead to
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

14
additional research. Merriam (2009) claims, qualitative research attempts to make meaning in a
real world context.
This qualitative study utilizes methodological triangulation that included: (1) surveys;
(2) interviews; (3) document reviews; and (4) observations. Surveys, interviews, and
observations were conducted with Artistic High School’s staff and stakeholders. Documents
were analyzed for data on former practices with regards to student emotional, behavioral, and
cognitive engagement. Through a series of interviews and surveys, insight was sought about the
meaning participants assigned to the school’s programs, processes, and practices intended to
improve student engagement. The researcher directly observed the different engagement
strategies in practice with students, teachers, and stakeholders through site observations. The use
of multiple sources of data and collection methods allows the researcher to triangulate the data, a
process that increases the reliability of the study’s findings. By converging multiple sources of
data, the researcher can add, with some certainty, to the validity of the study (Creswell, 2009).
Limitations of the Study
• Recent changes in accountability measures in California have led to some gaps in
testing and metrics for student performance. Some data used to determine an
outperforming urban school is based on testing done two years ago and may not
accurately depict the current state of the school.
• The small sample size of teachers and students may not accurately reflect the
practices, viewpoints, or perspectives of the majority.
• The survey was offered to every student, teacher, and administrator. However, some
chose not to participate.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

15
• The study used a sample of convenience and is limited to one school and cannot be
generalized to other schools.
• The data captured represents limited and selective moments in time and is dependent
on conditions occurring at that time.
Delimitations of the Study
Delimitations of this study include the following:
• The study focused on one outperforming, certified Linked Learning urban high
school. The school was located in Southern California with a significant population
of Latino, English Language Learners and Socioeconomically disadvantaged
students.
• Data gathered for this study were only from teachers, students and staff at the selected
school site.
• There are multiple frameworks from which to study school and student engagement.
The theoretical framework used for this study was developed based on literature
reviewed and selected by the researcher and congruent with the ecological and
constructivist view of the researcher.
• The construct of what constitutes an outperforming urban school is based on criteria
selected by the USC research team from the literature review and on current metrics
accepted by state and federal education policy.
• This study acknowledged that family, peers, and the broader community influence
student engagement; however, these factors are beyond the scope of this research
study.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

16
• Every caution was taken to remain unbiased, however, the researcher is the lens
through which all data is analyzed and this study may contain unintentional
researcher bias.
Assumptions
In conducting this study, the researcher assumed the following:
• Student engagement is a desirable outcome and goal for educators.
• Perceived student engagement strategies observed at the school support increased
academic achievement.
• Students, teachers, and administrators have adequate understanding about the
programs, practices, activities, and processes at the school site enabling them to
provide critical information relevant to this study.
• Respondent’s answers to surveys and interviews were sincere, truthful, and accurate.
• Observations are consistent of typical, everyday classroom routines and behaviors.
• Data used for the selection of school in this study were accurate and provided a
truthful depiction of the school.
Definition of Key Terms and Related Concepts
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined:
A through G requirements: California high school requirements students must complete
to be considered for entrance in the University of California system. They consist of 15 year-
long high school courses and must be completed with a grade of C or better — at least 11 of
them prior to your senior year. A through G courses cover four years in English, Algebra 2, two
years of science, social studies, and foreign language. One year of visual/performing arts, and
one year of college preparatory elective (University of California, 2016).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

17
Academic Performance Index (API): The Academic Performance Index is the cornerstone
of California’s Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 (PSAA). The purpose of the API is to
measure the academic performance and growth of schools. It is a numeric index (or scale) that
ranges from a low of 200 to a high of 1000. A school’s score on the API is an indicator of a
school’s performance level. The statewide API performance target for all schools is 800. A
school’s growth is measured by how well it is moving toward or past that goal (CDE, 2016a).
Achievement Gap: According to the University of Southern California’s thematic
dissertation group, the achievement gap is the persistent disparity in academic performance
particularly between affluent, White and/or Asian students and minority, low socioeconomic
status, and second language learners.
Adequate Yearly Performance (AYP): The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of
2001 requires that California determine whether or not each public school and local educational
agency (LEA) is making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). An LEA is a school district or
county office of education. AYP criteria encompass four areas: participation rate, percent
proficient (also referred to as Annual Measurable Objectives or AMOs), API as an additional
indicator for AYP and graduation rate. Each of these four areas has specific requirements.
Participation rate and percent proficient criteria must be met in both English language arts (ELA)
and in mathematics (CDE, 2015).
California English Language Development Test (CELDT): allows schools to identify
students who need to improve their skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing in English.
Schools also give the test each year to students who are still learning English (California English
Language Development Test, 2001).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

18
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE): is a state exam that California public high
school students must pass in order to graduate. The exit exam is not a college entrance or honors
exam. Instead, its purpose is to test whether students have mastered the academic skills
necessary to succeed in the adult world. It is a pass-fail exam divided into two sections: English
language arts (reading and writing) and mathematics. Sophomores, juniors, and seniors can take
the test. Once students pass a section of the test, they do not take that section again (CDE,
2016e).
California Partnership Academy: A high school reform movement focused on small
learning communities with a career theme. The program components include rigorous
academics and career technical education with a career focus, a committed team of teachers, and
partnerships with active business and post-secondary entities (Partnership Academies, 1987).
California Standards Test (CST): The California Standards Tests in English-Language
Arts, mathematics, science, and history-social science are administered only to students in
California public schools. Except for a writing component that is administered as part of the
grades 4 and 7 English-Language Arts tests, all questions are multiple choice. These tests were
developed specifically to assess students’ performances on California’s Academic Content
Standards. The State Board of Education adopted these standards that specify what all California
children are expected to know and be able to do in each grade or course (CDE, 2016b).
Career Technical Education (CTE): A program of study that involves a multiyear
sequence of courses that integrates core academic knowledge with technical and occupational
knowledge to provide students with a pathway to postsecondary education and careers (CDE,
2016c).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

19
Common Core State Standards (CCSS): Educational standards describe what students
should know and be able to do in each subject in each grade. In California, the State Board of
Education decides on the standards for all students, from kindergarten through high school.
Since 2010, a number of states across the nation have adopted the same standards for English
and math. These standards are called the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Having the
same standards helps all students get a good education, even if they change schools or move to a
different state. Teachers, parents, and education experts designed the standards to prepare
students for success in college and the workplace (CDE, 2016d).
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA): The Elementary and Secondary
Education Act is federal law affecting K-12 education. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is
the most recent reauthorization of the ESEA. Originally enacted in 1965 as part of the war on
poverty, ESEA was created to support the education of the country’s poorest children and that
remains its overarching purpose. Congress must reauthorize it every six years. Each
reauthorization of ESEA has made some changes, but NCLB was the most dramatic revision of
the act since its creation. Its provisions represent a significant change in the federal government’s
influence in public schools and districts throughout the United States, particularly in terms of
assessment and teacher quality (CDE, 2016f).
English Language Learners (ELL): English language learner is defined as an English
learner or as a reclassified-fluent-English-proficient (RFEP) student who has not scored at the
proficient level or above on the CST in ELA for three years after being reclassified (CDE,
2016g).
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) is a US
law passed in December 2015 that governs the country’s K–12 public education policy. The law
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

20
replaced the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), and modified standardized testing
accountability provisions. ESSA is a reauthorization of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, which established the American federal government’s influence in funding public
education assessment, accountability, and teacher quality (U.S. Department of Education
[USDOE], 2015).
Institution-controlled Factors: The factors or variables internal to the institution as
primary determinants of retention, including faculty concern for student development and
teaching, academic and intellectual development, and institutional commitment (Tinto, 1987).
Linked Learning: Is a high school approach that provides rigorous academics that meet
college-ready standards with sequenced, high-quality career-technical education, work-based
learning, and supports to help students stay on track. It also organizes learning around a broad
industry sector theme, so that students get exposure to a wide array of career options, and learn
what professional and postsecondary training is needed to be successful in a career in that
industry with the goal to prepare students to graduate from high school ready for college, and
with skills needed to thrive in the workplace (Linked Learning, 2015).
National School Lunch Program (NSLP): The National School Lunch Program is a
federally assisted meal program operating in public and nonprofit private schools and residential
child care institutions. It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to children
each school day. The program was established under the National School Lunch Act, signed by
President Harry Truman in 1946 (USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 2016).
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB): The 2002 reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Originally passed in 1965, ESEA programs provide much of
the federal funding for K–12 schools. NCLB’s provisions represent a significant change in the
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

21
federal government’s influence in public schools and districts throughout the United States,
particularly in terms of assessment, accountability, and teacher quality. It increases the federal
focus on the achievement of disadvantaged pupils, including English language learners and
students who live in poverty, provides funding for “innovative programs” such as charter
schools, and supports the right of parents to transfer their children to a different school if their
school is low-performing or unsafe (No Child Left Behind Act, 2001).
School Accountability Report Card (SARC): In November 1988, California voters passed
Prop. 98, also known as The Classroom Instructional Improvement and Accountability Act. This
ballot initiative provides California’s public schools with a stable source of funding. In return, all
public schools in California are required annually to prepare SARCs and disseminate them to the
public. SARCs are intended to provide the public with important information about each public
school and to communicate a school’s progress in achieving its goals (CDE, 2017).
Similar Schools Ranking: The similar schools rank compares a school to 100 other
schools of the same type and similar demographic characteristics (CDE, 2012).
Small Learning Communities: This is also sometimes referred to as a School-Within-A-
School. It is a form of school structure that is increasingly common in American secondary
schools to subdivide large school populations into smaller, autonomous groups of students and
teachers (Messacar & Oreopoulos, 2013).
Smarter Balanced Assessment System (SBAC): The Smarter Balanced Assessment
System utilizes computer-adaptive tests and performance tasks that allow students to show what
they know and are able to do. This system is based on the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
for English language arts/literacy (ELA) and mathematics (CDE, 2014a).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

22
Social Capital: The degree and quality of middle class forms of social support inherent in
a young person’s interpersonal network. Social capital is cumulative, possesses the capacity to
produce profits or benefits in the social world, is convertible into tangible resources or other
forms of capital, and possesses the capacity to reproduce itself in identical or expanded form
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Student-controlled factors: behavioral, emotional or affective, and cognitive engagement
factors (Christenson et al., 2008)
Student engagement: is a multidimensional meta-construct made up of distinct but
integrated dimensions: cognitive, behavioral, and emotional (Shernoff, 2013).
Vocational Education: The 1990 Perkins Act defines vocational education as an
organized educational programs offering a sequence of courses which are directly related to the
preparation of individuals in paid or unpaid employment in current or emerging occupations
requiring other than a baccalaureate or advanced degree (USDOE, 2006).
Work Based Learning: Learning activities that allow students to explore and experience
real careers under the mentorship of industry experts in related industries. Work-based learning
provides students with invaluable opportunities to learn what is involved in various careers, what
kinds of skills are needed for success, and whether they are truly interested in pursuing a similar
line of work (Loera, Nakamoto, Joo Oh, & Rueda, 2013).
Organization of the Dissertation
The first chapter is meant as an overview of the study and is designed to introduce the
reader to the research project. The next chapter, Chapter 2, is a synthesis of the current literature
on the topic that is being researched. Understanding current research allows the researcher to
take the subject in another direction and add to the body of research. Chapter 3 will explicitly
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

23
focus on the methodology of the study. It will explain how the school was selected, as well as,
the process for observing, interviewing, and surveying stakeholder groups. Chapter 4 will
examine the findings of the research study as they relate to the research questions. Conclusions
and recommendations are offered to increase student academic achievement in Chapter 5.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

24
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The study of engagement as an important concept in education is relatively new and only
dates back to the early 1980s (Appleton et al., 2008). In the earliest research, the focus was
mainly on the effects of disengagement as seen in drop out and high school completion rates
(Finn, 1989). As a growing body of research has emerged, the focus of engagement has evolved
to look at ways to manage classroom behavior and, most recently, to understand the role of
cognitive awareness and pedagogical strategies that promote life-long learners (Taylor &
Parsons, 2011). What has emerged over time, however, is less of a coherent and agreed upon
framework, and something more like a multi-faceted Rubik’s cube that allows researchers to
focus on a particular area, but may miss the mark if worked on in isolation from other important
aspects of engagement (Appleton et al., 2008). Equally important in understanding current
efforts to increase student engagement is the history of public education and reform. Public
education has struggled to evolve over the last two centuries in an attempt to address the ever-
changing needs of U.S. economic development from an agrarian society to a fully industrialized
first world power. Throughout this struggle, an underlying tension, sometimes stated and
sometimes non-verbally communicated, has existed between college and career readiness that
mirrored class and racial struggles for equality in America (Goldin, 1999). The purpose of this
chapter is to explore the history of public education and reform in America as it relates to the
struggle of economically and racially disadvantaged students, as well as the existing research on
engagement and the effects it has on student achievement for high school students. For purposes
of this investigation, student achievement is defined by the most prevalent current state and
district metrics of graduation rates, performance on standardized tests, applications completed
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

25
for post-secondary study, percentages of students entering college and an overall readiness for
college or career upon graduation. This literature review covers the following topics: (1) a
concise history of public education in America and school reform movements; (2) the general
characteristics of high-performing high schools and student achievement in the 21
st
century; (3) a
theoretical background to support the conceptual framework used for this investigation; (4) high
school structures that promote student engagement; and (5) the Linked Learning approach to
student engagement and achievement.
History of Public Education and School Reform Movements
There are compelling reasons to begin this review by examining the history of education
in the United States. First, knowing and understanding education’s history helps to examine how
social, cultural, and political forces have combined to create an achievement gap for many ethnic
and low-income students in the current educational system. Second, educational history is an
evolutionary process that has endeavored, sometimes successfully and sometimes not, to
improve upon the past. This evolution has been deeply impacted by the role of government as it
has looked to hold the nation’s school systems accountable to ideals of perceived excellence,
which have almost always proven to be controversial (Groen, 2008). Often, educators,
politicians, and leaders of business have forged these ideals in an attempt to promote American
exceptionalism and at other times because of the fear of falling behind in the international
education race to be number one (Groen, 2008). To understand the history of educational
accountability is to begin to understand what a high-performing school is today and how the
criterion to be named such has come to be an accepted norm. Third, modern education history is
less than two hundred years old, and as a country educational data has only been kept from the
turn of the last century. However, it can be argued that history seems to repeat itself, even within
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

26
this short time period, and understanding its history illuminates many social, cultural, and
economic issues that shape education today and of which most educators are unaware (Goldin,
1999). Last, as this dissertation deals directly with the role of engagement in linked learning
schools with their emphasis on vocational education, it is crucial to see how this approach is both
strikingly similar to earlier reforms a century ago and how it may be different. This section will
have an emphasis on the development of vocational education and the tension that has been part
of this movement since its inception.
While Thomas Jefferson is one of the earliest proponents of public education, what he
referred to was an elitist view that favored using public schools to educate what he considered to
be a natural aristocracy of individuals who had been blessed with intelligence and wisdom
(Brick, 2005). Horace Mann, however, is generally accepted as the father of public education
and had a more egalitarian view. Horace Mann believed that human nature was much more
malleable than in Jefferson’s view, which laid the philosophical foundation for a system that was
open to all and did not attempt to pre-judge. While Mann’s biggest contributions to the
American school system may be the adoption of a system of schooling children by age groups,
the creation of the common schools, and mandatory elementary education, it is the tension
between Jefferson’s elitist and Mann’s egalitarian views that seem to still be at the center of
educational debates today and the crux of educational inequalities both perceived and real (Brick,
2005).
From the mid to late1800s, Horace Mann’s ideas spread to all states and compulsory
elementary education became the norm. However, schooling beyond the 6
th
to 8
th
grades did not
become a national issue until almost the turn of the 20
th
century (Goldin, 1999). It was John
Dewey, almost 70 years after the death of Mann, who completely rejected the idea that human
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

27
nature was innate and proposed that the environment was a crucial factor in human development
and, therefore, worked to expand education for all as a basic tenet of a democratic society (Brick,
2005). These new ideals of human nature fueled a transformative high school movement that
grew from 9% of US youth receiving diplomas in 1910 to 50% by 1940 (Goldin & Katz, 1997).
As the high-school movement grew, a growing disparity emerged with who was actually
attending high school and a concern arose among liberal reformers that a classical approach to
education was forcing a large segment of society out of school as witnessed by a 50% dropout
rate, even while those receiving diplomas grew (Grubb, 1996). There were many reasons given
for the dropout rate that resonate even one hundred years later. Almost all the studies at the time
indicated that children disliked school, poverty made their need to work a family matter, and
they found the high school curriculum to be boring and irrelevant (Kantor, 1986). Further, those
who dropped out were destined for “unskilled, poorly paid jobs with poor working conditions
and few opportunities for advancement” (Kantor, 1986, p. 419).
Vocational Education in History
One idea proposed to counteract this disparity was vocational education as part of the
public high school experience. John Dewey was one of the first proponents of vocational
education in America, which he saw as a way to “democratize the educational system and to
expand occupational opportunities for working class and immigrant youth” (Kantor, 1986,
p. 423). He and other educators saw it as a way to unify practice and cultural training that would
support a stronger democracy. However, Dewey was not alone in support for vocational
education. Many segments of society including business, labor leaders, intellectuals all joined
the vocational movement, but their motivation often differed. Again, the rational from the
various groups eerily resonates today. Some believed that it was needed due to the rise of
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

28
Germany’s economic power and the need for international competition; others saw it as a way to
indoctrinate the working class with attitudes and habits that would lend themselves to the new
manufacturing and industrial innovations of the time, and others as a way to counteract the
influence of unions. Although these groups differed on the why of vocational training, an uneasy
alliance was formed and Congress passed a landmark act in 1917 that mandated Federal aid for
vocational training (Kantor, 1986). This act solidified the belief that economic success was
based on effort and not on Jeffersonian idealism inherent in human nature and paved the way for
vocational education to be a significant part of the American educational landscape. This
continued until the late 1970s, when a growing discontent of U.S. schools brought on significant
reform and the advent of the standards movement.
However, it is significant that what the early vocational education movement tried to
address was the inequality of a white America and completely ignored educational disparities of
minorities. The original vocational movement was meant to address the inequalities between
upper class whites and working class whites. It would not be until the civil rights movement of
the 1950s and the passage of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), that educators would start to
look at the role of race and the effects of our educational system on minority students. Following
in 1965, the government addressed the economic and racial disparities with the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Based on research that indicated that low-income families
required more educational services than more affluent peers if they were to benefit from the
same educational opportunities, the act provided additional monies to level the playing field and
improve opportunities for at-risk students.
In 1983, a landmark national report, A Nation at Risk, was published that outlined the
challenges facing public schools. Much like the government reports at the time of John Dewey,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

29
A Nation at Risk purported a shocking decline in the American education system. The main
reason given for this decline was our nation lagging behind advanced foreign countries including
Germany, but also a rising Asian economy and power, and not meeting our need for a
competitive workforce. Like today, the curriculum and teaching force was reported to need
desperate attention. Similarly, A Nation at Risk outlined a series of reforms that included
changes to the curriculum, longer school days and years, a better paid, but higher quality
teaching force, and more stringent requirements to enter college. Interestingly, few of the
recommendations have ever been enacted.
Contemporary Reform Efforts in Education
However, one result was the birth of an educational reform movement that would gain
momentum and over the next two decades would see great strides in the development of
education standards, and a focus on the growing achievement gap. In 1994, the reauthorization
of the Elementary and Secondary Act ensured that schools receiving Title 1 funds would have
the same education expectations as non-Title 1 schools. Shortly following the reauthorization,
George W. Bush signed the next reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary act called The
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (No Child Left Behind Act, 2001). NCLB was one of the
most sweeping and comprehensive school reform efforts in the history of the United States with
the aim to increase academic achievement with a hyper focus on college readiness, eliminate
achievement gaps for risk student, and to hold schools and districts highly accountable for
student progress (Coeyman, 2003). Significantly, it also was an attempt to move away from any
kind of vocational education, which was seen as inferior and discriminatory. The impact of
NCLB on the American educational landscape has been clear in regards to the increased
awareness of educational disparities between white and minority students and for increasing
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

30
accountability through rigorous national tests. However, while there has been an overall rise in
student achievement across the nation, the achievement gap for minority and economically
disadvantaged students still persists and students continue to fail at disheartening rates (Noguera,
2003).
This act remained in place until recently when President Barack Obama pushed congress
to overturn it. The Elementary and Secondary Act was once again amended and renamed the
Every Child Succeeds Act on December 10, 2015.
While NCLB changed the focus of school reform to high-stakes accountability and
assessment as a way of closing the achievement gap, the vocational education movement
broadened its focus to include simultaneous college and career achievement goals. The
reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (USDOE,
2006) has fueled a movement away from vocational education as evidenced through a title
change that replaced “vocational education and training” with “career and technical education.”
This change has led to significant reforms that include a focus on the role of academics and
work-based learning and a new reform movement that aims to help all students become both
“college and career” ready. In what would seem to be a repetition of history, this movement can
be directly linked to Dewey 100 years earlier when he advocated for an approach to restoring
student engagement by using occupations to focus academic instruction and achievement, as
opposed to separating academic and vocational education that he believed led to the
undemocratic tracking of students towards either career or college aspirations (Grubb, 1996;
Goldin & Katz, 1997).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

31
Student Engagement
We use the word ‘engagement’ for a myriad of life’s experiences from the mundane to
those we consider significant. When cars on a train are hooked up, we say they are engaged. In
chess, we say we have engaged with our opponent. In war, when we come together in battle, we
say we have engaged the enemy. Even in love, we move towards a lifetime of commitment and
it all starts with engagement. In every context, we use the term to denote a strong connection that
can be physical, mental, and emotional. Engagement is an act that connects us to each other and
to the physical world. It is, therefore, understandable that we have come to describe students
who are focused, actively involved in the social and educational opportunities offered at a
school, and academically successful as engaged (Shernoff et al., 2003). It is also understandable
that researchers have looked for a connection between student engagement and achievement as
they have sought to understand the variation in student success and the gaps that exist among
different students (Christenson et al., 2008).
Achievement Gap for Underserved Populations
While there have been some overall improvements for students of all races, the gap has
persisted with a majority of black and Latino students across the United States still lagging far
behind their white counterparts (Torlakson, 2013). However, there are a small handful of urban
schools, serving at-risk black and Latino students, which are defying the national achievement
gap by outperforming their counterparts and producing students who are college and career ready
(Bell, 2001). While educational researchers and practitioners have looked at a myriad of
possible reasons for the persistence of the achievement gap, as well as promising practices to
close it, there has yet to be a definitive body of research that points to universal solutions. There
is, however, an increasing academic interest and emphasis on the role student engagement has on
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

32
providing powerful scaffolds and safety nets for at-risk students (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Building on earlier seminal work that sought to broaden the definition of school engagement
(Finn, 1989; Marks, 2000), a burgeoning body of more recent work has emerged to help coalesce
a multi-faceted understanding of what school engagement is and how it affects student outcomes,
both pre- and post-high school graduation (Furlong et al., 2003). In fact, research has become
comprehensively clear that engagement is a critical factor in positive student outcomes (Shernoff
et al., 2003). This is crucially important as many researchers regard the opposite of engagement
as disengagement (Fredricks & McColskey, 2012), and research is very clear that student
disengagement is a primary factor in poor performance, dropout rates, and even prison for black
and Latino boys (Fenning & Rose, 2007). Further, in multiple studies it has been shown a
significant correlation between engagement and achievement exists (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
With researchers suggesting that between 25% and 66% of students may be disengaged (Finn,
1989; Taylor & Parsons, 2011), the study of engagement as a probable North Star for promising
practices that address the needs of at risk students is a topic worthy of our attention.
Accessibility of Engagement for Educators
Another reason the study of engagement matters is the direct applicability of it for
teachers and school leaders. The behaviors and attributes of engagement, i.e., attendance,
participation, social relationships, etc., are readily understood by educators as being important
factors in academic success (Duffy et al., 2005). Further, educators can easily understand how
teaching practices and changes to school culture can positively affect student engagement
behaviors and thus achievement (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

33
Disengagement Begins in Kindergarten
Student engagement has primarily and historically focused upon increasing achievement,
positive behaviors, and a sense of belonging in students so they might remain in school (Taylor
& Parsons, 2011). Because the focus was also primarily on high school completion, research on
student engagement targeted students in middle school and high school, where disengagement
typically becomes a concern, and student engagement was seen as a way to re-engage or reclaim
a minority of predominantly socio-economically disadvantaged students at risk of dropping out
of high school (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). It is clear that disengagement behaviors do not start in
middle or high school and that metrics of high school success or failure can be seen as the
culmination of a lifetime process that started in a student’s earliest years (Fredricks &
McColskey, 2012). Thus, understanding the role engagement plays in student academic success
can help us target students starting in the pre-k and positively affect outcomes for at risk
students.
History of Engagement in Research
Research on engagement is still fairly nascent and there is still no definitive consensus on
a concise definition (Appleton et al., 2008). Current Student Engagement Theory is initially
attributed to the work of Alexander Astin (Astin, 1984) and his student involvement theory
(Anderson, 2014). Astin’s theory describes involvement as the physical and mental energy
students spend on academic experiences and postulates simply “the greater the student’s
involvement in college (school), the greater will be the amount of student learning and personal
development” (Astin, 1984, p. 529). Astin uses such terms as “attachment to, commit oneself to,
devote, take part in, and engage in” (Astin, 1984, p. 519) as monikers of involvement and defines
them as all behavioral. However, he also notes, as future researchers do, that one could look at
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

34
these behaviors through an interior lens by stressing value and interest. Research on engagement
started in earnest in 1985 with an academic paper by Mosher and McGowan that looked at
assessing engagement in high schools. As noted, prior to their research engagement was
primarily looked at through physical manifestations of participation and attitudes towards
different aspects of school (Mosher & MacGowan, 1985; Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Finn’s earlier
work, referred to as the Participation–Identification Model, also focused on participation as a
main construct for engagement. He created a four-level continuum of participation that starts
from a level-one basic participation of following directions or answering questions to level two
that includes student initiation of the same activities. Level three is portrayed by increased
autonomy and extension of school activities outside of academics, and peaking with level four
that includes active participation in governance and rule creation at the school site (Finn, 1989).
Although limited in their scope, these earlier views on engagement laid a foundation for future
exploration and the idea there may be society, cultural, family, and school-controlled factors that
have an impact on student achievement.
Initially, early research focused on the impact of society, culture, and family on student
engagement and hypothesized that levels of student engagement may be set so firmly by outside
influences that the school may have limited ability to transmute these effects. Thus, removing
the responsibility for schools and educators to increase engagement and making the school
setting a place to react to outside influences and reinforcing the idea that certain students may be
candidates for vocational pathways and tracking (Mosher & MacGowan, 1985). Jeremy Finn’s
seminal research on engagement strongly echoes this sentiment when he states, “The data
suggest that parents, not school, are the major institutional sources of delinquency control” (Finn,
1989, p. 126). However, these earlier works also set the stage for future researchers to look at
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

35
engagement with a broader lens. Mosher and MacGowan admonished further longitudinal
studies, and Finn states that schools can become a source of influence given the appropriate
conditions (Finn, 1989). These early theoretical frameworks are reminiscent of Bronfenbrenner’s
social ecological model being developed during the same period (Marks, 2000), in that the role
of ecological influences are paramount, but their models also show that student engagement
leads to positive student outcomes. Much like Bronfenbrenner, the early work of
Csikszentmihalyi capitalizes on the role of engagement as an active response to the environment
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Marks, 2000). Together these models form an early foundation for
looking at multiple factors that have social justice implications in that schools may be able to
address school controlled factors that could have a positive impact for at-risk students and form
the foundation of the theoretical framework used in this study.
Theoretical Models of Engagement
As researchers have grappled with the many possible subcomponents of engagement,
diverse theoretical conceptualizations have emerged over time. Some scholars have proposed,
starting with Finn in 1989, a model that categorizes engagement through the binary of “behavior
(e.g., participation, effort, and positive conduct) and emotion (e.g., interest, belonging, value, and
positive emotions)” (Fredricks & McColskey, 2012, p. 764). This binary is useful when
considering how school-controlled factors and student-controlled factors may be examined for
their efficacy in creating conditions of learning for at-risk students. In another model,
researchers settled upon a four-component model that included behavior, emotion, cognitive, and
psychological (Appleton et al., 2008). And yet in another, academic, social, cognitive, and
affective domains were used (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). To further complicate matters, some
researchers have separated emotion into two areas with an additional category of affective
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

36
engagement, and others have collapsed psychological into the emotional domain (Fredricks,
Blumenfeld, Friedel, & Paris, 2005). What is clear is researchers are still grappling with how to
explicate the complex nature of engagement into a workable model with application for
educational practices that promote student achievement. Many researchers have explored the
idea of engagement as a meta-construct that would combine the research of many into a more
cohesive structure that would look at how subsets of engagement might interact with each other
(Appleton et al., 2008; Fredricks et al., 2005). This approach seems to make sense, but finding
consensus may prove daunting. However, the need for an agreed-upon conceptual framework is
critical if researchers are to find common ground and compare findings across studies (Fredricks
& McColskey, 2012).
While the literature reviewed used different theoretical models and definitions of
engagement, there is some general agreement on different types of engagement. The areas with
most agreement were social engagement that included both affective and cognitive definitions
which were defined as a sense of belonging, attachment, group identification and membership
(Furlong et al., 2003) and behavioral engagement that looked keenly at issues of participation
(Finn & Zimmer, 2012). A third emerging area of agreement was academic or cognitive
involvement that affects competency, efficacy, and the prospect of life-long learners (Appleton et
al., 2008). For purposes of this review and an emerging theoretical conceptualization,
engagement is perceived to be a multifaceted construct that can be categorized into behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive dimensions (Appleton et al., 2008).
Behavioral engagement. Behavioral engagement was historically and still generally
defined quantitatively through attendance rates, office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions
(Finn, 1989; Fredricks & McColskey, 2012). Further studies have included participation under
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

37
behavioral engagement, which can be measured qualitatively and includes paying attention,
responding to teacher’s questions, asking for help, and discipline issues such as following rules
and acting respectfully towards teachers and classmates (Finn, 1989; Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Most importantly, the research is clear that behavioral engagement has a significant effect on
achievement (Taylor & Parsons, 2011; Furlong et al., 2003; Finn & Zimmer, 2012). This strong
correlation to achievement is promising and gives hope to the idea that learning how to
manipulate engagement behaviors may provide important pathways to narrowing or closing the
achievement gap.
Emotional engagement. There is also a strong correlation between behavior and more
effective student engagement, herein referred to as emotional engagement, which is commonly
defined as identification and feeling a part of school or class community (Appleton et al., 2008).
This idea was reiterated in multiple studies that surveyed for student attitudes about school
identification and participation rates, which overwhelmingly found that students rated their
engagement higher in schools and classrooms where mutual respect was fostered, strong
discipline policies guided cultural norms, and teachers actively sought to build strong
relationships with students (Shernoff et al., 2003; Appleton et al., 2008; Taylor & Parsons, 2011;
Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Cognitive engagement. Cognitive engagement is generally seen as a student’s
investment in learning (Fredricks & McColskey, 2012) and is denoted by students’ psychological
investment and the quality of their engagement, in contrast to their physical (behavioral) efforts
(Pintrich, 2003). In this way, teachers may perceive students to be engaged due to their
behavior, but still not achieving due to an overall lack of cognitive engagement in the work.
Cognitive engagement is perceived through student behaviors that may include persistence,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

38
going the extra mile, extending the learning on their own, and using self-regulation strategies to
accomplish tasks and guide learning (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
The role of motivation in engagement. One area of research that is often
synonymously interchanged with the term engagement is the role of motivation. There is robust
research on the role and impact of motivation on student achievement (Rueda, 2011; Clark &
Estes, 2008). In one recent theoretical model of engagement, motivation is linked to intrinsically
motivated behavior, autonomous learning, and considered a “key factor in students’ level of
interaction with their studies and perceptions of self-efficacy” (Russell & Slater, 2011, p. 2).
While there is no doubt the role motivation plays in learning, these attributes of motivation are
the very same ones assigned to engagement in much of the recent research on engagement
(Appleton et al., 2008; Furlong et al., 2003; Finn & Zimmer, 2012) and points again for the need
of a common language and framework if the research is to be assessable for school based
practitioners. In much research, motivation and engagement are understood as symbiotic
partners where motivation answers the question of why someone is doing a task, while
engagement is the connection between a person and the activity.
The idea of engagement as an action through participation in an activity is at the center of
Csikszentmihalyi’s work with engagement and flow theory where the moment of engagement is
characterized by a loss of time and great interest and even joy (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).
However, Appleton et al. describe the dichotomy succinctly when they state that
motivation and engagement are separate but not orthogonal — one could be motivated
but not actively engaged in a task. One example would be a student motivated to
complete high school AP courses, as a means to enter the university system, but not
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

39
engaged in the subject matter or content. Motivation is thus necessary, but not sufficient
for engagement. (Skinner, Furrer, Marchand, & Kindermann, 2008)
For purposes of this review, generally the attributes of motivation will be categorized under
cognitive engagement, but a deeper study of how these two areas of research are similar or
distinct would be a worthy endeavor.
Theory of Flow and engagement. There are multiple frameworks for looking at student
engagement that share many common components (Appleton et al., 2008; Finn & Zimmer, 2012;
Fredricks et al., 2005; Mosher & MacGowan, 1985). However, one distinct branch of student
engagement research focuses on the emotional state of the learner when physically engaged in a
task and seeks to understand what conditions should be present to produce this state. This
research is based on Flow Theory and will be a critical component of the theoretical framework
for this study. Flow Theory was first proposed y Csikszentmihalyi in Flow: The Psychology of
Optimal Experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). A state of flow can best be described as total
absorption and immersion into an activity. A student in flow will exhibit intense concentration,
interest, and enjoyment (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). When a person is in flow, they can stay
engaged in the activity and disregard time, food, and other interests or needs. When in flow, a
student would feel not only pleasure in the activity, but more importantly for educational
implications, successful and competent (Shernoff et al., 2003).
One of the main factors in Flow Theory is that students feel a deep sense of success in
relationship to a challenging activity that forces them to stretch themselves just beyond their
limit (Shernoff et al., 2003). This state of optimal engagement can be traced to the work of Lev
Vygotsky, the Soviet psychologist who introduced the concept of the Zone of Proximal
Development (Vygotsky, 1987), which is described as the bridge between what a student cannot
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

40
do and what they could do with a little help. This theory is reflected in almost all of the research
used in this review. Self-efficacy was shown to have a positive effect on engagement, which in
turn affected overall achievement. The factors proposed to help students achieve this state were
providing them with mastery experiences that scaffold key information needed to be successful
and modeling by those that have already been successful in a task (Furlong et al., 2003). This
concept of mastery learning as a vehicle to self-efficacy and engagement was central to how the
methodology was developed in answering the research questions for this dissertation. Further, it
was crucial in understanding what instructional practices show the strongest promise in helping
students achieve a state flow in their learning.
High School Structures that Promote Student Engagement
A strong theoretical understanding of engagement is important for academics that
dedicate their careers to traditional research and an understanding of the complexities of the
subject may aid practitioners as well. Still, while engagement is “easily understood by
practitioners as being essential to learning” (Finn & Zimmer, 2012, p. 99), the bridge from
theory to application is often difficult. It is, however, where the extant research can make the
biggest impact for educators’ practice and ultimately on student achievement. One of the basic
premises of the research on engagement is that engagement is “responsive to the school and
classroom practices” (Finn & Zimmer, 2012, p. 105). Much of the research chosen for this
review strives to understand the structures and strategies that promote behavioral, cognitive, and
emotional engagement in schools. These structures and strategies are often labeled differently by
researchers and can lead to confusion by practitioners, but generally fall into common themes
and categories. Most often the difference is semantic. For instance, what Shernoff and Parsons
refer to as cooperative learning is called collaborative by Zepke and Leach (Shernoff, 2013;
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

41
Taylor & Parsons, 2011; Zepke & Leach, 2010). Other times it’s more complex as when
research refers to the same general condition of learning, but describe it distinctly as mastery,
experiential, problem based, exploratory, or constructivist learning (Finn & Zimmer, 2012;
Furlong et al., 2003; Shernoff et al., 2003; Taylor & Parsons, 2011; Zepke & Leach, 2010).
While the literature reviewed used different labels and categories to explain these concepts, there
is great consistency on the overall findings and clear best practices emerged and were routinely
repeated. The areas with most agreement will be categorized for purposes of this research under
quality of student-teacher relationship, instructional practices, organizational features, student
identity and sense of belonging.
Quality of student-teacher relationship. There is little disagreement among researchers
that the role of the teacher is key for student engagement (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). George Kuh
(2001) puts it at the center for all engagement, and Furlong describes it as being central to a
learning environment that promotes engagement (Furlong et al., 2003). This is significant in that
it has direct application to environmental factors that are within the control of the teacher. A
warm and supportive effect is also linked to engagement and is demonstrated through listening to
students’ points of view, believing in their abilities, showing respect, holding the class to high
standards of behaviors, and helping students when they do not understand something (Finn &
Zimmer, 2012; Fredricks et al., 2005). Not surprisingly, the role of teacher engagement seems to
have a contagious effect in that teachers who are perceived to be engaged in the subject and
excited about teaching are also perceived to be caring by students with the effect of raising
student engagement and a deep sense of belonging (Shernoff et al., 2003). A sense of belonging
emerges throughout much of the literature as a key factor in increasing student motivation, effort,
and ultimately engagement.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

42
Creating a safe space. One key area of the teacher-student relationship is the role of a
teacher creating a safe atmosphere that allows students to take academic risks and reach beyond
their current ability (Samson, 2015). A supportive environment that pushes students not only
fosters motivation, but helps students feel competent, take ownership of their learning, and is a
positive predictor of interest in classes and even pursuing academic goals (Furlong et al., 2003;
Shernoff et al., 2003).
Rigorous standards. While counterintuitive to perceived stereotypical adolescent and
teenage attitudes, teachers who push students academically and demand high standards, not only
raise engagement, but also increase student feelings of being cared for and ultimately raise
student achievement (Zepke & Leach, 2010). One key factor was successful teachers who
maintained high standards and academically rigorous expectations balanced it with constant
availability for help and academic guidance. On the contrary, in another study, teachers who
were determined to be ineffective in engaging students were reluctant to praise, did not scaffold
difficult information, and rarely gave feedback (Dolezal, Welsh, Pressley, & Vincent, 2003).
Social media. For most, the idea of warm and supportive teacher-student relationships is
centered within the context of the classroom. Yet with the current generation growing up with
multiple forms of instant communication there is a generational gap in what constitutes a
nurturing relationship. Recent research has shown that virtual relationships and interactions that
are respectful, warm, and supportive also increase student engagement (Taylor & Parsons, 2011).
The use of texting, protected on-line environments, Twitter, and Instagram may be key strategies
for teachers to reach a larger circle of influence in the lives of their students. Further, it can give
teachers the ability to help students connect with a larger circle of adult support and expertise
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

43
across multiple areas of study and personal interest, thus increasing student perception that they
are personally cared for as an individual (Taylor & Parsons, 2011).
Instructional practices. Communication and relationships that extend beyond the
classroom and incorporate a widening circle of adult influence and interaction will necessitate a
major shift from the current instructional practice of stand and deliver that dominates classrooms
across America. In studies conducted by Csikszentmihalyi, the creator of Flow Theory and his
team, it was found that students spent approximately 86% in passive lecture style or independent
activities (Shernoff et al., 2003). That finding closely mirrors an informal study done by leaders
in the Los Angeles Unified School District (2009). In that study, a group leading administrators
spent time in classrooms observing and tracking how much time students actively participated in
academic conversations. The administrators reported that on average students had less than two
minutes each day for engaging academic dialogue and discussion. With this hyper focus on
lecture style instruction, students have fewer opportunities to become engaged through self-
discovery and intrinsically motivated learning (Shernoff et al., 2003).
The needed shift in instructional practice is commonly referred to as a move away from
the “sage on the stage” model, where the teacher directly delivers instruction through lecturing,
to the “guide on the side,” where teachers act as a coach and facilitate a more personalized
learning experience. This shift from a vertical to horizontal classrooms, dominantly supported in
the research, is based on a constructivist view where, optimally, the classroom provides a series
of experiences where students actively construct their own knowledge and learning (Taylor &
Parsons, 2011; Vygotsky, 1987; Zepke & Leach, 2010).
Problem based pedagogy. In one model, this kind of learning is called experiential and
described as “an atmosphere where there is a dialectic tension and conflict that can promote a
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

44
learning environment through a process of inquiry and understanding (that) includes concrete
experiences, opportunities for reflection, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation”
(Samson, 2015, p. 158). This is also often referred to as problem-based or problem-solving
pedagogy, which provides students the opportunity for active exploration of issues based on real
life scenarios and problems.
Project-based learning. Another approach that incorporates problem solving strategies
is project-based learning that strives to increase relevancy through applying real life problems
and issues to a final project outcome that functions as an authentic assessment of student
learning. The idea of relevancy has been linked to deeper engagement (Taylor & Parsons, 2011).
By providing students with opportunities to explore issues that are relevant to their
circumstances and lives, they are motivated to learn and show more willingness to work through
difficult ideas and learning (Samson, 2015).
Cooperative learning. One key component found in experiential or problem-based
learning that repeatedly stands out in the literature as a for factor in engagement is the use of
cooperative learning strategies. Although some research has indicated teacher-student
relationships as more important for increased student engagement (Furlong et al., 2003), another
study that examined the difference in impact from student-teacher relationships, quality of
student effort, and peer-to-peer interaction found “peer interaction had the strongest predictive
capacity for engagement and outcomes” (Zepke & Leach, 2010, p. 171). Clearly both are
important and should be considered when designing classroom interventions. By requiring
student interaction, collaborative learning promotes dialectic practices that support student
viewpoints and interests. Cooperative learning has also been found to increase motivation,
positive classroom behaviors, social networks, and academic improvements (Finn & Zimmer,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

45
2012; Shernoff et al., 2003). Cooperative learning is clearly a solid approach to increase
engagement, but not always necessary for deep engagement. The research done with Flow
Theory has shown that individuals working alone can be equally engaged (Shernoff et al., 2003).
Good examples of this are when students are working at learning a musical instrument or using
technology, but it is well reported among researchers that cooperative learning when combined
with higher-order thinking skills of analyses, synthesis and evaluation produces students who are
the most deeply engaged (Zepke & Leach, 2010).
Mastery learning. Another important aspect of engaging instruction that represents a
major shift from current practices is using a combination of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal
Development (ZPD) with a mastery learning approach in creating educational experiences that
are academically challenging and engaging. The role of ZPD in relationship to mastery learning
is also a key element for engagement. As stated earlier in this review, ZPD is described as the
bridge between what a student cannot do and what they could do with a little help (Vygotsky,
1987). The research shows that tasks that are either too easy or to hard do not promote
engagement. Rather, engagement is highest when difficult challenges are matched with a
moderate difference in skill level (Shernoff et al., 2003). In other words, students are most
engaged and are in a natural state of learning when the skill is just one or two steps ahead of the
current skill level and understanding.
Mastery experiences develop self-efficacy by allowing students to reflect on where their
skill level is at any given time and by using success, partial success, and even failure to point the
way towards mastery of a subject or skill (Furlong & Christenson, 2008). Currently, most
classrooms see failure as an end in itself and results in a failing grade. By allowing students to
fail on a task and reflect on it as a stepping-stone to a learning goal creates a growth mindset and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

46
increases resiliency and life long learners (Bempechat & Shernoff, 2012; Finn, 1989; Pintrich,
2003).
Organizational Features that Promote Student Engagement
Thus far, this review has focused on the interpersonal relationships and factors of
engagement that fall within the locus of control of students and teachers. However, there are
school-controlled factors that affect student identification with their school and overall
satisfaction within the students’ daily routines. Some research has found the effects of
school/organizational factors to be minimal in relationship to instructional and teacher-controlled
factors (Marks, 2000; Shernoff et al., 2003). However, most research is clear that school-
controlled factors do play a role. One study found a strong connection between school
engagement and school climate and identified two distinct elements: Physical environment,
which they describe in terms of size and racial/ethnic populations, and regulatory environment,
which consists of school discipline policies (Furlong & Christenson, 2008, p. 107). This
distinction is useful and will be used as an organizational structure for this literature review.
School size. Within the physical environment, school size is noted in the majority of the
literature used in this review (Finn & Zimmer, 2012; Furlong et al., 2003; Marks, 2000). Some
research, counter intuitively suggests small schools may only have a limited impact on student
engagement and that large schools may have benefits that outweigh the perceived benefits of
small schools by being able to provide services such as counseling, AP and elective course
offerings, and Special Education (Battistich, Solomon, Watson, & Schaps, 1997). However,
most research suggests that small to medium-size schools provide greater opportunities for
deeper interpersonal relationships between students and teachers and among peers, increased
student participation, and increased attendance, which are all leading factors in student
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

47
engagement (Darling-Hammond & Plank, 2015; Finn, 1989; Furlong & Christenson, 2008). So,
while size itself may not be an active factor in engagement, it can be a facilitator of engagement
in that it does not directly effect engagement, but promotes the conditions for it.
Small learning communities. Within the research, a particular focus on Small Learning
Communities (SLC) is noted as providing the conditions for student engagement (Finn &
Zimmer, 2012; Furlong et al., 2003). SLCs are small learning communities found within larger
comprehensive high schools and have been found to be successful in in creating the conditions
and dynamics of small schools (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Further, recent research is emerging on
an SLC model that combines SLCs with a career focus that is showing increased engagement
and higher student achievement (Kemple, 2008; Saunders, Rogers, & Terriquez, 2013). These
studies point out students self-reported very positive scholastic experiences and very strong
relationships with teachers and faculty.
After-school programs and clubs. Another organizational factor regularly noted in
research as a key indicator for student engagement in school is ample opportunities for after-
school programs and clubs. Students who participated regularly in after-school clubs were found
to have a heightened sense of belonging and were overall more engaged in school. Interestingly,
clubs that had an academic focus were found to raise engagement, but athletic and social clubs
had a negligible effect unless students participated in both simultaneously (Finn & Zimmer,
2012). Even then, the role of non-academic clubs did not show to have a big impact. This is not
surprising given the correlation of academically intense activities to engagement found in the
research (Shernoff et al., 2003). This is not to say that students cannot become deeply engaged
in non-academic activities, but that there seems to be no connections to increased engagement in
school through these activities. Thus, a student may find herself deeply engrossed in learning a
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

48
musical instrument or how to play a sport, but this will not necessarily translate to a deeper
connection at the school level.
Bell schedules. Although there is limited research on the effect of the bell schedule on
engagement, one study notably found that the traditional method of breaking up the high school
day into rigid and short time periods makes it more difficult to keep students engaged and that
longer block periods aided increased engagement (Stern, 2009). Once again, here as in other
organizational changes, the role of this change seems to function as a vehicle for longer periods
of interactions with adults and peers that leads to stronger interpersonal relationships. One
probable conclusion for practitioners is that any organizational structure that promotes more time
and opportunities to develop stronger relationships at the school site is worthy of consideration.
School discipline and safety. As noted, the physical environment seems to play an
important role in creating conditions that promote deeper relationships and engagement, in much
the same way, the regulatory environment emerges as a facilitator of engagement when the
conditions are set for positive school culture. Significantly, even the perceptions of unsafe
school environments can lead to student dissatisfaction and disengagement (Finn & Zimmer,
2012). Marks notes that “a positive school environment is favorable to learning by being normed
for respect, fairness, safety, and positive communications” (Marks, 2000, p. 174) and points this
out as a positive influence of Bonfenbrenner’s mesosystem on student engagement. In another
study, strong school discipline was found to have a significant impact on school engagement, but
that arbitrary or overly strict policies like our current trend towards zero tolerance actually have a
negative overall effect on engagement and achievement (Furlong et al., 2003). These policies
are perceived as unfair and can lead to even higher dropout rates.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

49
While school culture and discipline have strong regulatory functions as facilitators of
engagement, they can also be an indicator of engagement when observed in student behaviors of
disrespect, poor attendance, fighting, and other disruptive and problem behaviors. This is an
important distinction as facilitators of engagement point towards services, interventions, and
program development, while indicators of engagement help in identifying at-risk students who
would benefit from those programs.
The Role of Student Identity and Belonging in Engagement
Belonging as a powerful indicator of engagement. The role of student identity, racial,
ethnic, and socio economics on student achievement has been greatly researched for many years
(Bennett, 2001; Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999; Freire, 1970; Noguera, 2003). However, the
role of identity and identity politics on student engagement is less robust with most of the
research looking at how school and classroom culture contribute to or distract from a sense of
belonging (Furlong et al., 2003). What does emerge from the research on engagement is that a
sense of belonging is a crucial factor in engagement. Emotional engagement has been deemed
fundamental to human motivation (Appleton et al., 2008) and is described as a sense of
belonging, relatedness, and identification with school. This state of belonging seems to need
“frequent, affectively pleasant or positive interactions with the same individuals, and they need
these interactions to occur in a framework of long-term, stable caring, and concern” (Baumeister
& Leary, 1995). As noted earlier, emotional engagement is an indicator of engagement, and thus
a sense of belonging plays a role in engagement, but does not directly affect achievement.
However, it does play a role in academic and cognitive engagement, which has a direct link to
learning (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). In one study, students who reported high levels of belonging
outperformed their peers, while those who reported low levels of belonging often displayed
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

50
negative and anti-social behaviors, including cheating, drug and alcohol use on school grounds,
and even suicidal feelings (Resnick et al., 1997; Christenson et al., 2008). It has also been shown
that identification with school develops over time and is affected, positively or negatively, by a
lifetime of academic successes or failures (Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Impact of cultural interactions on engagement. Promisingly, the research around
issues of culture and race are an area of study that could have a significant effect on
understanding how the external factors come together to create conflicts in identity that, in turn,
affect engagement and student achievement (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999; Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2010). A fundamental idea from research is that teaching and learning is occurring
simultaneously as students and teachers negotiate complex social and cultural interactions.
Often these cultural differences not only deter clear communication, but also detrimentally affect
academic achievement (Nasir & Hand, 2006).
Multicultural education. Some of the most promising ideas to emerge from this
research may come out of the theories of multicultural education and not just engagement
frameworks. One significant study looked at how minorities had to manage multiple social
identities, which could be perceived as either compatible or in conflict with each other. The
degree to which students were successful in integrating their multiple identities could be used to
predict cognitive, behavioral, and social/affective outcomes (Cheng, 2009). This study pointed
out that multiculturalism could increase the positive effects of identity integration and thus
achievement. This study is significant in light of the multiple identities at-risk students must
grapple with of minority, student, language learner, immigrant, poor, and others. Research on
multicultural education further points to this area of research as promising for addressing the root
issues of the learning gaps found between white and minority students (Bennett, 2001). Bennett’s
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

51
work also has implications for understanding what constitutes meaningful learning
environments. She points out that we must address issues of what she calls equity pedagogy as
seen in classroom climate, teacher skills and practices, cultural styles of teaching and
multicultural competence described as ethnic-identity development (Bennett, 2001). One way to
promote a deep sense of respect and gratitude for the cultural identity the student brings to the
classroom is by honoring the use of the diverse backgrounds the students come from, even
honoring the use of first languages. However, due to the stigma often associated with being a
minority, they often prefer to remain invisible and find ways to avoid having to show their
language or academic deficiencies and thus prevent themselves from getting the skills they need
to be college and career ready (Monzo & Rueda, 2009).
Teacher positioning. The ability to change beliefs or develop positive attitudes towards
minority and at-risk students seems to be fundamental in developing academically effective and
culturally appropriate instructional strategies that promote a sense of belonging and relatedness
(Diego, 2013). In a recent study, it was found that the impact of a teacher who positioned
her/himself as a teacher of all children not only used appropriate and cultural relevant strategies,
but also positively changed the way students thought about themselves as learners, thus
increasing student achievement (Yoon, 2008). This is consistent with other researchers who
found that racial and ethnic compositions of a school community may also affect engagement
where students internalize stereotypes of their group status, if not mitigated by culturally
sensitive pedagogies (Bennett, 2001; Furlong et al., 2003).
This finding is echoed in the work of Estela Bensimon, who found that teachers often
place blame on factors outside of their own control like students’ parents and transiency and do
not look at their own attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors, and fail to see how personal changes in
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

52
these areas could affect the external forces at play (Bensimon, 2005). So, while teachers
generally acknowledge the need for a deeper understanding of best practices, they do not
participate in the kind of training that could make an impact on the lives of at-risk students.
Racial power disparities. Another area of major concern is the dynamics of social
power disparities inherent in the minority student interactions in U.S. schools. Studies suggest
that learning may actually change as a function of these imbalanced interrelationships, and when
students see themselves as outsiders their affective filter increases and inhibits their participation
in learning (Krashen, 1991; Yoon, 2008). Other studies have shown that when students behave
and interact in ways that differ from the norms and expectations of their schooling institutions,
both learning and school achievement suffer (Nasir & Hand, 2006, p. 452). Although this
research begins to address the socio-emotional state and needs of at-risk and minority students, it
barely scratches the surface of this important area of concern. Much research has focused on the
external causal factors such as poor program placement or transiency and on the negative
outcomes seen in low academic achievement, dropout rates, etc. (Reeves, 2006). There needs to
be further study on the social-emotional impact on the additive effects of being designated low
performer from the early grades on, as it is clear that negative self-image and identity can lead to
lower academic achievement, higher dropout rates, and higher retention rates and thus point to an
impact on self-image, identity, and measures of resiliency (Olsen, 2010).
Another promising study by Falout (2012) that echoes Bennett’s research points out that,
even though the effects of stress over time produces de-motivated students who continue in a
cycle of failure, there are many things that a teacher can do to re-motivate the student and
increase student achievement. Accordingly, teachers should strive to build relationships with
students, create socially supportive learning environments rich in social interaction. Even though
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

53
much research supports the use of a cultural framework model in addressing root causes of the
achievement gap for minority and language minority students, there is little crossover into
educational policy and practice (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2010). Thus the results stay the same.
The narrative of at-risk students parallel each other regardless of their particular risk factor, and
these are the students who continue to demonstrate that instruction in America’s schools is not
meeting their needs. This is a good example of the influence the macrosystem in
Brofenbrenner’s Ecosystems theory is having on the microsystems that directly affect students’
lives. One possible reason for this is that cultural models do not immediately and explicitly
address the needs of the classroom teacher who is under pressure to produce immediate results
due to the ever-increasing burden of high-stakes accountability.
Institutional segregation. Another important area of concern is the institutional
segregation that happens, often with the best intentions, when putting at-risk students in
homogeneous groupings for targeted language, Special Ed, or remedial instruction. Researchers,
both in sociology and education, agree that segregation limits a student’s ability to succeed in the
immediate environment and later in life (Chavez & Guido-DiBrito, 1999; Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2010; Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Stanton-Salazar’s work points to these homogeneous
groupings limiting a student’s access to what he refers to as social capital or the broader
knowledge and social networks that students would need to fully realize their capacity (Stanton-
Salazar, 1997). Regarding at-risk students, this segregation also results in fewer opportunities
for exposure to models of proficiency and expertise in language or skills sets (a critical factor) in
high academic achievement, and teachers who are fully trained in their subject (Gandara,
Rumberger, Maxwell-Jolly, & Callahan, 2003).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

54
The importance of a school culture is key to student engagement. Students experience
belonging by feeling full acceptance and affirmation for who they are and the culture they bring
with them to school. If schools are to engage students, they need to adapt their spoken and
unspoken cultures to the needs of the students and not leave it to at-risk or minority students to
adapt to the school culture (Zepke & Leach, 2010). The strategies and structures suggested in
the research as working successfully with at-risk and minority students mirror the same strategies
suggested in the research on engagement: hold to high standards, provide clear role models,
strive for a school culture that promotes safety, build trusting relationships, and believe in
students’ abilities to achieve (Appleton et al., 2008; Marks, 2000). Unfortunately, while these
corroborated strategies are intuitively appropriate, research shows, as does the continuing
achievement gap, these strategies are anything but easy to implement in large-scale application in
the classrooms across America (Shernoff et al., 2003).
Characteristics of High Performing High Schools
There are many examples of high-performing high schools in predominantly white,
Asian, and wealthy neighborhoods (Torlakson, 2013). However, the research suggests the
underlying reasons for this success may have more to do with high levels of social capital and
cultural pressures and not with deep engagement (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2010). Students
from these schools have developed, through exposure to family, peer, and community values,
high levels of extrinsic motivation (Appleton et al., 2008) with the end goal of acceptance to
college. In other words, social and cultural pressures to achieve can motivate through
compliance, rewards, guilt, anxiety, and by passive acceptance of cultural standards, but do not
necessitate deep engagement or intrinsic motivation to succeed (Appleton et al., 2008). On the
other hand, the role of engagement has been established as an important factor for college and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

55
career readiness for at-risk students. Given the current research on what promotes school
engagement for students, it is not surprising high-performing urban high schools that serve large
populations of at-risk students have both organizational structures and cultural practices in place
that both engage students and provide the social capital needed for college and career readiness.
Successful urban schools typically share the common components of strong leadership, and
qualified teaching staff with a culture of collaboration, a focus on instruction and coherent
curriculum, professional development grounded in coaching and feedback cycles, strong parent
and community outreach programs, a culture of service, and integrated supports for students
(Ikpeze, 2013).
School leadership. The importance of school leadership on the impact of student
success at high-performing schools is discussed in all the literature reviewed for this chapter.
However, the literature on what constitutes effective educational leadership is extensive and
exhaustive and beyond the scope of this review. Within the area of effective school leadership,
however, certain themes emerge as significant. The role of leadership seems to be most effective
when creating the conditions of a school culture that promotes engagement (Cooper, Ponder,
Merritt, & Matthews, 2005). One area of seeming agreement is the effective use of the
distributive leadership model. In one study of multiple high schools, distributive leadership was
found at all sites (Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009). Marzano also recommends providing
opportunities for staff to be involved in developing school policies, having input on important
decisions, and using leadership teams in decision-making processes (Marzano, Waters, &
McNulty, 2005).
Additionally, leadership at high-performing urban schools was consistent in maintaining
a keen focus on instruction, standards, and expectations (Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

56
The importance of a guaranteed and viable curriculum in one study was cited as the single most
important factor in determining how many students in a school would learn (Marzano, 2003). In
another study of 12 high performing schools similar findings were echoed where all 12 schools
had leadership that kept a laser-like focus on rigorous standards, delivery of high quality teacher
and learning, and an overall emphasis on hard work, high expectations, and persistence (Bell,
2001).
School leadership at high-performing schools was found to promote an expansive view of
education and had multiple formal and informal school-community connections. These
connections ranged from enlisting support from outside agencies for college and other services
(Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009), to connections to industry that promoted deeper relevancy in
the curriculum (Stern, 2009), and mentorship programs (Bell, 2001).
Teacher quality and values. The importance of highly qualified teachers clearly
emerges in the research on high performing schools. However, in addition to holding the proper
credentials and education, teachers at high-performing high schools put great value on
collaboration in curriculum design and implementation (Ikpeze, 2013; Marzano et al., 2005;
Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009).
High-performing high schools share common attributes and characteristics that create the
conditions for learning, engagement, and student achievement. Strong leadership that supports
shared governance, teachers that work collaboratively, a focused curriculum grounded in high
expectations, parent outreach, and strong community ties are the common thread that run through
high-performing schools (Ikpeze, 2013; Marzano et al., 2005; Masumoto & Brown-Welty,
2009). However, there is still much to understand and more research is needed. The question of
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

57
what constitutes a high-performing urban school and what led to its success is of urgent concern
for all committed to closing the achievement for at-risk youth across the country.
Linked Learning Approach to Student Engagement and Achievement
The importance of transferring research to state and district policy cannot be understated
for its role in creating the conditions for evidenced-based instructional reform and change, which
are the intermediary steps towards raising student achievement and closing the gap for at-risk
students (Nasir & Hand, 2006). However, putting research into policy and practice is often
difficult, even when there is a will to do so (Shernoff et al., 2003). Linked Learning is a
promising practice that has gained popularity as a high school reform effort that purports to raise
student achievement, mitigate the dropout rate and increase college and career readiness for at-
risk youth. Linked Learning has grown from nine original participating districts in 2008, to over
65 California districts in 2016 (ConnectEd, 2010). Underscoring this interest is growing
evidence that this approach will improve student outcomes. The recently released report in
December 2015 from Stanford Research Institute International (SRI) is an evaluation of Linked
Learning across California. The reports findings show that, when compared with their peers,
Linked Learning students in certified pathways:
• Earn more credits in the first three years of high school
• Report greater confidence in their life and career skills
• Say they are experiencing more rigorous, integrated, and relevant instructions
• Are more likely to stay in their school district through high school (Warner et al.,
2015)
Linked Learning schools endeavor to transform the high school experience through a
combination of rigorous academics, challenging theme-based or career-based curriculum, in-
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

58
depth technical education, relevant real world experiences, and integrated student services like
counseling and timely support and intervention (ConnectEd, 2010; Saunders et al., 2013).
Linked Learning pathways strive to create the conditions in which deep engagement occurs
through relevancy, high standards, rigorous academics, small learning communities that support
deep connections between students and staff, and among peers (Fredricks et al., 2005; Furlong et
al., 2003; Kuh, 2001).
Linked Learning key components and guiding principles.
Four core components and four guiding principles guide the Linked Learning approach.
The components of a high quality linked learning pathway include:
Rigorous academics. The academic component of Linked Learning includes college
preparatory English language arts, mathematics, science, history, and foreign language courses.
Real-world technical skills. A challenging technical component of three or more courses
that help students gain the knowledge and skills that can give them a head start on a successful
career.
Work-based learning. A series of work-based learning opportunities that begin with
mentoring and job shadowing and evolve into intensive internships, school-based enterprises, or
virtual apprenticeships.
Personalized supports. Support services including counseling and supplemental
instruction in reading, writing, and mathematics that help students master the academic and
technical learning (ConnectEd, 2010).
The four guiding principles include:
• Linked Learning prepares students to succeed in college, career, and life. Linked
Learning is always about both college and career; it’s never a choice between one and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

59
the other. Here’s why: The probability of making a living wage in today’s economy
without some form of postsecondary education is already low and will only diminish.
Increasingly, career success depends on a postsecondary degree or credential—
whether that’s a certificate, apprenticeship, associate’s degree, bachelor’s degree, or
higher level of achievement.
• Linked Learning prepares high school students for a full range of post-graduation
opportunities. In addition to rigorous academics, each pathway centers on increased
student proficiency in vital areas such as critical thinking, problem solving, media and
information literacy, and collaboration—essential skills in the workplace. Linked
Learning pathways make an immediate difference, helping young people earn more
right after high school and giving them an advantage in the labor market while they
pursue postsecondary education.
• Linked Learning connects academics to real-world applications. Linked Learning
students understand how their high school education leads to their next academic or
career steps. Linked Learning programs integrate core academics with a career focus
and raise expectations for students. Core subjects are mastered through the power of
applying knowledge in a real-world context. Students learn by addressing authentic
challenges and situations customary to the modern workplace.
• Linked Learning improves student engagement. Linked Learning provides a more
integrated and equitable approach to high school equity for California students by
eliminating practices that limit their options after high school. It inspires students by
exposing them to previously unimagined college and career opportunities
(ConnectEd, 2010).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

60
Pathway Quality Review (PQR). One key component of Linked Learning is the Pathway
Quality Review (PQR) and certification process. The Linked Learning PQR and certification act
as a mechanism to ensure quality control as Linked Learning continues to grow across the state
and to ensure sustainability of high-quality pathways. The certification process is guided by
seven essential elements:
• Student Outcomes-Driven Practice. The progress of every student toward achieving
measurable and consequential learning outcomes is the driving purpose for the
pathway community of practice. The pathway team regularly reviews several kinds of
evidence including: (1) performance-based measures of pathway-specific student
learning outcomes; (2) information on students’ level of performance, available from
student information systems; (3) individual student growth in performance, both on
pathway-specific learning outcomes and on transcript-based measures; (4) students’
success after high school in postsecondary education and employment, if available;
and (5) trends over time in all these measures for the pathway students as a group.
The team uses data on a monthly basis to inform and improve professional practice,
and on an annual basis to revise the pathway improvement plan.
• Equity, Access and Achievement. A Linked Learning pathway pursues both
excellence and equity as mutual goals. A pathway establishes high achievement
expectations for all students and practices non-discriminatory and inclusive policies,
practices, and pedagogy. The pathway is equitably accessible to and serves well any
interested student, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation,
socioeconomic status, special needs, or prior academic achievement. An equity-
focused pathway intentionally reflects the diversity and strengths of its school,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

61
community, and district, and the grouping of its students is heterogeneous, flexible,
and equitable.
• Program of Study. An industry-themed pathway program of study brings coherence
to the four core components of Linked Learning: rigorous academics, real-world
technical skills, work-based learning, and personalized supports. It intentionally
coordinates and sequences student-learning experiences in a way that integrates
rigorous academic and technical core curricula. The pathway theme is broad enough
to appeal to and engage all students. The program of study maximizes cohort
scheduling to ensure that all pathway students are offered the opportunity to earn
postsecondary credit and are prepared for success in the full range of postsecondary
options.
• Learning and Teaching. Pathway students engage in inquiry- and project-based
learning that is outcome-focused, rigorous, relevant, and collaborative. Members of
the pathway community of practice plan such learning experiences for students: they
regularly collaborate to develop and articulate standards-aligned grade-level, course,
and project outcomes to organize the pathway’s program of study and guide
assessment, curricular, and instructional planning. They also use performance
assessment tasks with common rubrics to assess, monitor, and support every student’s
progress toward mastery of college and career ready pathway learning outcomes. The
community of practice regularly engages in professional learning, evidence-based
inquiry, and reflection to continuously improve their practice.
• Work-Based Learning. All students participate in a personalized and coordinated
continuum of work-based-learning (WBL) experiences designed to help them master
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

62
and demonstrate academic, technical, and 21st century skills, as identified in the
pathway student learning outcomes. WBL builds on and extends every pathway’s
program of study. WBL occurs in-person and online: in the work place, the
community, and at school. Students acquire academic, technical, and 21st century
knowledge and skills through WBL, all of which enhance their preparedness for the
demands of college and careers.
• Personalized Student Support. Every pathway student is supported by pathway staff,
partners, and families. The pathway community of practice tailors learning
experiences to students’ individual developmental needs, skills, strengths, interests,
and aspirations. Pathway staff, in consultation with families and service providers,
identify and address the academic, personal, and social-emotional needs of every
student so that she or he makes progress toward achieving personalized college and
career goals and pathway student learning outcomes.
• Pathway Leadership and Partnerships. The pathway staff, school and district leaders,
and partners share responsibility for program effectiveness and accountability for
student outcomes. These stakeholders assure that conditions are in place to establish
and sustain pathway quality. The pathway engages a formal advisory board that
serves as an organizing structure to effectively engage a core of stakeholders,
including business, postsecondary, and community partners (ConnectEd, 2010).
For this investigation, the quality review and certification serve, along with other criteria
discussed earlier, as essential criteria for what has been determined to be a high-performing high
school. Further, they serve as a framework to examine the institution-controlled factors that may
influence student engagement for this investigation. The criteria for meeting certification serve
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

63
as guidelines for the pathways and are not intended to be a legalistic standard of accountability,
but a mechanism for pathway reflection and a growth mindset.
Linked Learning and engagement. The Linked Learning approach is appropriate for an
investigation of the role of engagement in a high achieving urban school in that it attempts to
create the organizational structures and conditions that have been shown to increase engagement.
First, Linked Learning pathways are designed as Small Learning Communities, which have been
shown to be essential in creating a sense of belonging and fostering strong interpersonal
relationships, allow flexibility with scheduling, and promote shared collaborative vision
(Samson, 2015). Second, Linked Learning has focused on high standards and rigorous academic
with integrated student supports, which have been shown to be an essential element in student
concentration, interest, and attention (Shernoff et al., 2003). Third, Linked Learning provides
relevancy through career-based themes and multiple opportunities to experience real world
application (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). Fourth, inherent in Linked Learning are strong
community partners that take an active role in providing mentorships, apprenticeships,
internships, and a variety of other opportunities enabling students to be active citizens and
develop their social and cultural capital (Zepke & Leach, 2010). Further, the Linked Learning
approach has shown consistent data that points to Linked Learning students passing the
California Academic High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) and graduating at higher rates than
their peers, but more importantly having the confidence and social capital to succeed in both
college and career (ConnectEd, 2010). Understanding the role engagement plays in Linked
Learning pathways will add important new research that could have significant impact for state
and district policy as they strive to close the achievement gap for all students.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

64
Critique of the Literature
The literature on engagement has provided substantive evidence in making a strong
connection between student engagement and academic success; however, there are limitations to
the body of research. Research on engagement is relatively recent with the earliest research only
dating back to 1981 (Finn, 1989; Mosher & MacGowan, 1985). However, there has been within
the last few years an increasing awareness of the role engagement plays on student achievement
and a growing body of research is emerging (Christenson et al., 2008). Another limitation of the
research on student engagement is the numerous definitions and disagreements of what
constitutes engagement (Appleton et al., 2008). Further, emerging research in the field of
engagement is based on multiple frameworks, which are dependent on the variety of definitions
researchers have concluded were appropriate for their study (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). This has
created the need for multiple tools for measurement and not uniformity in research findings.
Another limitation is that much of the research on engagement focuses on the
institutional factors that schools have control over, but rarely takes into account social, cultural,
and physical factors outside the control of school that may affect a student’s ability or motivation
to engage (Zepke & Leach, 2010). However, from a practitioner standpoint, the focus on
institutionally controlled factors may provide insight and strategies to increase engagement at the
school and in classrooms (Zepke & Leach, 2010; Samson, 2015). While there is emerging
research on the role of engagement in middle and high schools, much of the early literature
focuses on the role of engagement in predominantly white post-secondary institutions, which
may have distinct social and cultural factors changing the applicability of the findings for at-risk
students (Kuh, 2001).
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

65
One problematic area of concern is that student engagement is difficult to measure. This
is compounded by the various conceptualizations of engagement, which leads scholars to use a
wide variety of measurement instruments (Fredricks & McColskey, 2012). Having a common
theoretical framework and improving measurement would strengthen the body of research and
make a more compelling case for school practitioners.
Although limitations exist, there is strong support for the connection between student
engagement and academic achievement (Anderson, 2014; Appleton et al., 2008; Furlong et al.,
2003). The research indicates students who are engaged have higher rates of graduation, attend
college at higher rates, and even have better overall satisfaction and higher wages in their jobs.
On the other hand, the research is clear that disengaged students demonstrate anti-social
behaviors, have a higher drop out rate, and even higher rates of incarceration (Appleton et al.,
2008; Darling-Hammond, 2007). One last critical limitation is while much of the findings on
engagement are intuitively attractive from a practitioner’s standpoint; applications of the findings
are difficult and daunting (Shernoff et al., 2003). The multiple factors involved in the
behavioral, emotional, and cognitive realm of engagement necessitate the coming together of
many different stakeholders and will require further investigation on the part of researchers to
increase conceptual clarity if it is to have an impact on student achievement.
This study contributes to the extant literature by examining the organizational factors,
strategies, and pedagogies found in Linked Learning Schools that support student engagement.
A theoretical framework will be applied in order to systematically define and capture data. The
study investigated how Linked Learning schools create and foster culture of engagement and
high achievement. School programs, processes, and practices were studied to determine if they
contribute to student engagement and ultimately to student academic success.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

66
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Achievement disparities between ethnic and racial groups have been a part of the
educational landscape for as long as the United States has endeavored to educate its citizens.
However, it was not until much later in American history that it was decided these gaps were of
importance to the nation. Increasingly, since the Civil Rights movement began in the mid-
century, educators have collectively recognized these educational gaps are tightly aligned with a
larger body of inequalities non-white races have endured (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). In 1980, with
the publication of A Nation at Risk and the Bush presidential initiative of No Child Left Behind,
an era of accountability began with a focus on closing the achievement gap between white and
brown students that has endured until the present (Firestone & Shipps, 2003). Some, however,
would argue that a hidden agenda to further segregate education by laying the groundwork for
charters, student “choice,” and vouchers systems was the real purpose for higher accountability
(Lather, 2010). Nonetheless, for practitioners of education, it is the application of promising
theoretical research that drives much of our work. Teachers are constantly looking for
education’s elusive Rosetta Stone, which they hope may provide a definitive understanding of
how to unlock the secrets of pedagogies and methodologies that will aid in closing the
achievement gap. This study focused on the role of engagement in an out-performing urban
Linked Learning school that serves at-risk youth and seeks to unlock promising strategies that
might influence instructional practice for the many students struggling in our educational system.
This chapter presents the study research questions and reviews the study’s design and methods.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

67
Research Questions
The central purpose of this dissertation is to present a case study of students at a out-
performing Linked Learning high school, their levels of engagement during classroom activities,
and to what extent certain classroom processes area a factor influence engagement. The
theoretical framework for this study is a synthesis of research on engagement and social change
theory (Shernoff et al., 2003; Appleton et al., 2008), which is described in more detail below. In
this study, the researcher hoped to observe the instructional practices that support or do not
support student engagement and the ensuing varying levels of student engagement or
disengagement. The data for this study came from five classroom observations, five teacher and
student interviews, and a school-wide survey of staff and students at a school shown to be
outperforming according to the data. The following questions guided this study:
1. To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement
present in a high-performing urban school?
2. What school programs, processes, and practices are perceived to contribute to student
engagement?
3. What are the unique elements within Artistic High School structure that support
student engagement?
4. To what extent do students achieve a state of flow in lessons, as measured through
concentration, interest, and enjoyment?
Research Design
The relationship between student engagement and academic achievement was examined
utilizing a bonded qualitative case-study approach involving surveys, interviews, and
observations with 12
th
grade English Language Arts (ELA) students. A bounded qualitative case-
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

68
study approach is one in which a specific defined area of study (person, organization, or
program) can be clearly defined and delineated (Merriam, 2009). A bounded case-study
approach is appropriate as the primary purpose of this study is to uncover and illuminate the
possible relational factors that may be at play between classroom practices and student
engagement at a high-performing Linked Learning school and may provide insight, discovery,
and probable interpretations for this phenomenon (Merriam, 2009).
Qualitative Approach
There are multiple reasons to use a qualitative approach in this study. The researcher
examined the topic from the perspective of constructivism. Constructivists hold basic
assumptions that people construct meanings as they interact and grapple with the phenomenon
they are endeavoring to interpret. Constructivists are also in alignment with Bourdieu and the
idea of habitus in that the world and their experiences are strongly and continually influenced by
both the historical and social lens they have been given by the culture into which they are born
(Bourdieu, 1984; Vygotsky, 1987). This perspective provides the basis for using first-hand
experiences in the settings of the participants (Creswell, 2009). Constructivists believe meaning
making is always social, which also motivates the researcher to look for meaning from data
collected in the field (Creswell, 2009). While there is much more to constructivism, these basic
guiding principles and beliefs give personal meaning and motivation to use a qualitative design.
Maxwell (2013) notes qualitative studies lend themselves to particular intellectual and
practical goals. The intellectual goals are (1) understanding the meaning for participants in the
study, and of the events, situations, experiences, and actions they are involved with, (2)
understanding the particular contexts within which the participants act, and the influence this
context has on their actions, (3) understanding the process by which the events take place,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

69
(4) identifying unanticipated phenomena and generating new theories about the latter, and
(5) developing causal explanations (Maxwell, 2013). This study involved the direct observation
and interviewing of students and teachers at an out-performing school and is directly influenced
by these five factors as the researcher will seek to understand the experience of engagement in
context of specific place, conditions, participation, and any causal factors that may be found.
However, at heart and in practice, this researcher is an educational practitioner with 29
years of experience seeking to improve practices that can lead to higher student achievement.
For this reason, this researcher finds Maxwell’s practical goals for qualitative research the most
compelling reason to choose this particular research design as it seeks to (1) generate results and
theories that are understandable and experientially credible, and (2) are intended to improve
existing practices, programs, or policies (Maxwell, 2013).
An additional reason for using a qualitative research design is it commonly triangulates
data in its various forms of interviews, surveys, observations, and document analysis (Creswell,
2009). This adds an additional safeguard against biases that could result from the limited focus
of using only one data-collection method or source (Merriam, 2009; Maxwell, 2013), as well as
increased credibility (Creswell, 2009). The use of a variety of data with a variety of subjects
creates a broader and more focused understanding of the variables impacting student
achievement than could be understood with only one source (Maxwell, 2013). Further, if the
results of multiple approaches agree, the findings are generally considered to be credible, which
is the qualitative equivalent of validity and reliability in quantitative studies (McMillan, 2004).
In this study, interviews, observations, and surveys were conducted and document analysis was
used to triangulate data and potentially illuminate possible issues that may have implications of
the effect of engagement in Artistic High School.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

70
Interviews
Interviews play an integral role in most qualitative studies as they allow the researcher to
gather and assemble more pieces of information than would be possible from more restricted
forms of data, as in a survey (Weiss, 1994). Interviews can also be structured in many different
ways, from highly structured to very informal, eliciting a variety of nuanced findings (Merriam,
2009). Additionally, interviews allow the researcher to gather historical information and explore
participants’ feelings that may not be readily apparent during an observation (Creswell, 2009).
However, interviews have limitations in that they gather information filtered through the
biases and views of the participants, and are not usually done in the natural field setting. Further,
the researcher must deal with the variance of abilities of participants to articulate their
experience, and the possibility that participants answer in a particular way due to the presence
and position of the interviewer (Creswell, 2009). To counteract these possible limitations, the
researcher conducted multiple observations of the participants in the natural setting of the
classroom.
Observations
This research seeks to understand, in part, the relationship of classroom activities on
student engagement, which would best be seen with direct observation (Merriam, 2009).
Observation in qualitative research is used to describe settings, behaviors and events, and allows
the researcher to learn about a subject’s behavior and the particular context in which it occurs
(Maxwell, 2013). Merriam (2009) makes an important point about the inherent tension a
researcher faces when trying to find an appropriate balance between participation and observing.
Initially, due to the limited time spent in the classroom, the intention was observations would be
completely non-participatory. However, there were imposed factors about the nature of the
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

71
researcher’s positioning in the observations that led to interacting at times to set a more natural
stance between researcher and those being observed. Due to the nature of this researcher’s
professional role as Linked Learning director, the role of researcher could be described as
participant as observer. However, a participant as observer role is one in which the role of
observer is subservient to the role of participant. In other words, the role as director would be
seen as foremost in importance in classroom visits. In this case study, the researcher’s role was
as an observer as participant, where participation as director is clearly secondary to the role as
observer (Merriam, 2009). To do so, full discloser of activities and the purpose of the study were
made clear, and efforts to eliminate monikers of position, such as suit and tie were eliminated.
While observer as participant can possibly limit the level of information revealed, it is generally
assumed this affect is less pronounced in observation and a bigger factor in interviews (Maxwell,
2013; Merriam, 2009). Although observation has limitations, it allows for an immediacy of
direct experience that can possibly mitigate biases that may arise from a self-reporting method
like interviews, and allows the researcher to consider contextual factors that could change the
interpretation and use of results (McMillan, 2004). Further, data from observations interpreted
through the lens of the researcher’s framework would allow for specific questions to be
examined. As stated earlier, engagement was measured through the specific researched based
aspects of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive domains and how they interact to create a state of
flow. Observation is critical to deepening the researcher’s understanding of these processes.
Document Review
Document reviews are an important part of data triangulation in that they provide a stable
and objective source of data that remains unaltered by the researcher (Merriam, 2009).
Documents are also an important component of research as they aid in verifying or supporting
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

72
data collected from observations and interviews (McMillan, 2004). Public schools receive
funding based on a variety of accountability measures that were used in this study to denote a
high achieving school. Further, Linked Learning certified schools have gone through a lengthy
process of gathering documentation that is readily available online. These online materials cover
lesson design, school culture, student work, curriculum, and organizational processes in place at
the school that may influence engagement.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework (Figure 1) used in this study was cooperatively developed by
a team of doctoral students examining the role of student engagement in out-performing urban
schools. The thematic dissertation group at University of Southern California was comprised of
four doctoral students who met regularly from September of 2015 to March of 2017. The focus
of the cohort was to examine the programs, processes, and practices that were perceived to
contribute to high levels of student engagement and the possible impact on student achievement.
Each member of the USC cohort choose a different school to study, however the overarching
shared theme allowed for rich discussion, sharing of critical research, and deep collaboration on
the conceptual framework.
There are multiple existing frameworks for looking at student engagement that share
many common components (Appleton et al., 2008; Finn & Zimmer, 2012; Fredricks et al., 2005;
Mosher & MacGowan, 1985). However, no one framework seemed to encompass a synthesis of
current research on engagement. Further, the existing frameworks on engagement did not
specifically address the ecological factors facing at risk, urban students. While the literature
reviewed by the research team used widely different theoretical models and definitions of
engagement, the team eventual agreed upon an emerging theoretical conceptualization, where
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

73
engagement is perceived to be a multifaceted construct that can be categorized into behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive dimensions (Appleton et al., 2008).
To address the many ecological issues putting urban students at-risk, the team also looked
to the early work of Urie Bronfenbrenner. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory focused
on the influence that macro, exo, meso, and micro systems, have on human social and emotional
development. Much like Bronfenbrenner, the early work of Csikszentmihalyi capitalized on the
role of engagement as an active response to the environment (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Marks,
2000). Together these models form a foundation for looking at multiple factors that have social
justice implications in that schools may be able to address school controlled factors that could
have a positive impact for at-risk students and form the foundation of the theoretical framework
used in this study.
However, one distinct branch of student engagement research encountered by the
research team, focused on the emotional state of the learner when physically engaged in a task
and sought to understand what conditions should be present to produce this state. This research
is based on Flow Theory and is a critical component of the theoretical framework for this study.
Flow Theory was first proposed y Csikszentmihalyi in Flow: The Psychology of Optimal
Experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). A state of flow can best be described as total absorption
and immersion into an activity. A student in flow will exhibit intense concentration, interest, and
enjoyment (Taylor & Parsons, 2011). When a person is in flow, they can stay engaged in the
activity and disregard time, food, and other interests or needs. When in flow, a student would
feel not only pleasure in the activity, but more importantly for educational implications,
successful and competent (Shernoff et al., 2003).

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

74

Figure 1. Conceptual framework

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

75
Finally, it is the hypothesis of this research team that, while students come with a
complex ecological history that impacts daily learning, if a school can effectively create
opportunities that increase student engagement in the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive
domains, there is a higher likelihood a student will be in flow; Thus, effectively creating the
conditions for a love of education, life long learning, and greater academic achievement.
Sampling
The sample for this case study was intentionally chosen and nonrandom. Sometimes
nonrandom sampling is necessary due to what is available, cost and/or time effective, or what is
convenient. However, the researcher used purposive or judgmental sampling, which is a
nonrandom sampling technique where a researcher chooses a sampling based on carefully
selected criteria that will serve the purpose of the study (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). In this
particular study, issues of availability and the theoretical theory drove the research and were the
basis for the researcher’s decision.
The overarching purpose of this study is to examine the role of engagement at an out-
performing urban Linked Learning high school. The study illuminates promising practices that
may be factors in engaging students and raising achievement. Research on engagement notes
educational practitioners intuitively understand the role engagement plays and they tend to be
willing to implement promising practices (Shernoff et al., 2003). While qualitative studies are
not overtly generalizable, the purpose of this study was to examine what high-achieving Linked
Learning schools are doing differently to affect student achievement and potentially inform
district and school site policy decisions on work-based learning approaches. Thus, for purposes
of this study, an out-performing urban Linked Learning high school was chosen.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

76
School Selection
Criteria for urban school designation. Two factors were of importance to determine if
a school was deemed urban. A cohort of doctoral students working on similar research
developed the following criteria collectively. The cohort consists of four researchers, whom met
every other Sunday for six months to examine common issues within engagement and high-
performing schools.
The cohort’s criteria to qualify as an urban school was characterized by:
• Ethnically diverse student population of 51% minority or higher
• A minimum of 65% of the students qualified for free and reduced-priced meals
• The school’s English Language Learner population was at or near the state average
for California in 2014 (22.3%).
Criteria for an out-performing school. In addition to defining what urban would be,
the cohort also defined what it would mean to be a high-performing high school. The following
factors were used to determine if a school was an out-performing high school:
• The school was ranked two or more points higher on the similar school ranking than
the statewide ranking.
• The school’s graduation rate was at or near the state average for California
• The school’s California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) results for Language Arts
and Math met or exceeded the state average for California.
• Specifically for this study, the addition of Linked Learning Certification was
included.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

77
Artistic High School
The school chosen for this study is a Linked Learning high school with an Arts career
pathway. Artistic High School (AHS) is a pseudonym chosen for the school in this study to
protect the identity of the students, staff, and community, but still highlight the significant role
the arts play in every facet of the school. Further, pseudonyms or generic pronouns have been
used for all teachers, students, and administration to ensure confidentiality and protection
(Creswell, 2009).
Artistic High School (AHS), a pilot school within a large urban district, was chosen as an
appropriate subject (Maxwell, 2013) for this case study in part due to the convenience of it being
a school within the researchers cohort of Linked Learning schools in the district. Although not a
criteria of the cohort due to the newness of the test, AHS was seen as outperforming as it has
routinely outscored other schools in the similar geographic area and, most strikingly, far
outscored all similarly ranked schools in their SBAC ELA results, scoring a very impressive
84% proficient or advanced. Another important factor is AHS is a certified Linked Learning
site, a special focus of this study. Schools that are Link Learning certified have gone through a
yearlong rigorous process that is done through an independent team of educators working for
ConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career, which is dedicated to advancing
practice policy, and research aimed at preparing youth for both college and career and with the
Irvine Foundation, a major grantor for Linked Learning in California.
Artistic High School is located in a Unified School District in the Southern California.
The school serves a large number of minority students who are self-identified in the categories
shown in Table 1. In addition, the school serves students who qualify for free or reduced price
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

78
meals. The percentage of the student population qualifying for free or reduced price meals is as
shown in Table 2.

Table 1
School Demographics
Ethnicity %
African American 2.7%
Asian 8.7%
Filipino 0.2%
Hispanic or Latino 87.1%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
White (non-Hispanic) 0.2%
Multiple Ethnicity or No Response 0.5%

Table 2
Students Qualifying for Free or Reduced Price Meals
School Year %
2011-2012 80.5%
2012-2013 90.3%
2013-2014 89.1%
2014-2015 90.4%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

79
Artistic High School serves a student body that is comprised of 20.2% of English
Language Learners. Table 3 illustrates the percentages of ELLs in the school for the last four
consecutive school years.

Table 3
Percentage of English Language Learners
School Year %
2011-2012 26.1%
2012-2013 24.9%
2013-2014 26.5%
2014-2015 20.2%

According to the Artistic High School’s School Accountability Report Card (SARC), the
vision of the school is through the lens of performing and technical theatre arts; AHS students
will become active and articulate leaders in their personal and professional lives. The school’s
mission is to foster a rich academic and artistic community inspiring their students to be
independent, cooperative young adults who meet challenges with creativity and determination.
As a public school, Artistic High School is regularly ranked against other similar public schools.
The site’s similar schools rank was a five while the statewide rank was a three in 2013.
Although still a new accountability measure, the results from the school’s 11
th
grade
SBAC results are as shown in Table 4.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

80
Table 4
11
th
Grade Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Results
2014-2015
Performance Level English Language Arts Mathematics
Standard Exceeded 10% 1%
Standard Met 54% 12%
Standard Nearly Met 21% 37%
Standard Not Met 15% 49%

Additionally, the school’s results on the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)
are as shown in Table 5.

Table 5
CAHSEE Pass Rates
2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
English Math English Math English Math English Math
School 87% 86% 72% 74% 84% 91% N/A N/A
State 83% 84% 83% 84% 83% 85% N/A N/A

The Artistic High School is a relatively new school, starting in the 2011-2012 school
year. While they initially struggled with graduation rates, they have now nearly matched the
state and county average.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

81
Table 6
Percentage of Cohort Graduates
School Year %
2011-2012 64.3%
2012-2013 61.7%
2013-2014 59.3%
2014-2015 75.3%

While not qualifying criteria for an outperforming school for this study, it is noteworthy
that AHS was nationally ranked in the April, 2016 U.S. News Report on Best High Schools in
America at 177
th
within California.
Data Collection
Primary data resources that reflect student engagement include student-project reports
and student-portfolio defense videos uploaded to ConnectEd Studios. To protect privacy,
sources were only considered for students that had already publicly shared their portfolios in the
ConnectEd Studios online platform. Secondary data resources that reflect students’ engagement
include Artistic High School’s Western Association Accreditation Commission Report (WASC),
Ed-Data and the California State Accountability Report, and ConnectEd/Irvine Linked Learning
Certification report. Data resources also included assessment information provided by state
databases. The WASC document was collected as it provides robust quantitative and qualitative
data from both the school community point of view, as well as collaborative documentation from
an independent team not associated with the school. The State Accountability Report Card was
collected from the California Department of Education website for additional and corroborated
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

82
evidence. These resources were selected because they provided a rich narrative about the school
site and could be unobtrusively reviewed with the context of the framework for student
engagement (Merriam, 2009).
Survey
The research on engagement as a construct shows considerable promise in informing
future educational practice. However, it has become increasingly clear that a more systematic
approach to how engagement is measured is needed to ensure clear definitions and coherency
among the disparate theoretical frameworks used today (Fredricks & McColskey, 2012). In order
to maintain consistency with previous studies on engagement, the USC cohort adopted a student-
engagement survey developed at the Learning Achievement Coalition in Oakland, Michigan.
The survey, administered to students and teachers, was used as an internal measure of perception
data on student engagement in the Oakland county schools in 2010 and has been consistently
administered since then (Learning Achievement Coalition — Oakland, 2014). This survey was
administered to staff members and students at Artistic High School. The survey contained
questions that were based in the three engagement types cited in the group’s conceptual
framework. The engagement types were (1) emotional, (2) behavioral, and (3) cognitive. The
intention of the survey was to ascertain the staff members’ and students’ perceived opinions of
student engagement at Artistic High School. Prior to administering the survey to students,
parents at the site were informed as is required by the Institutional Review Board (IRB), a
committee established to review and approve research that involves human subjects. Survey data
was collected and examined for patterns and trends.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

83
Observations
The USC research team to examine the role of classroom culture, curriculum, and
pedagogy in increasing behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement and student academic
achievement conducted observations. The specific classroom site for the observations was
chosen based on initial recommendations from AHS’s principal and later from information
gleaned from the interviews with students that identified specific classrooms where they stated
they were most engaged. AHS is a pilot high school and considered a small high school, which
afforded the researcher an opportunity to observe a high percentage of all classrooms. In
addition, an observation was conducted during an Instructional Leadership Team meeting and a
staff professional development meeting. Observations are a key component of an ethnographic
study in that they do not rely on self-reporting that can have limitations of reporter motivation
and even faking (McMillan, 2004). The researcher sought to observe possible relational factors
between the naturalistic setting of the classroom and its contribution to behavioral, emotional,
and cognitive student engagement levels. Additionally, the observations served to confirm or
disconfirm data from the survey and document review.
Interviews
Five teacher and five student interviews were conducted during the research cycle. All
interviewees were selected in advance and permission from the various participants was garnered
in writing, via a signed consent form. Teachers were selected through principal recommendation
and personal choice to participate in the study. They were notified that they could opt out at any
time. Initially, the process for selecting which students to interview was based on teacher
selection. However, based on the initial observations, there was an opportunity to determine
likely candidates perceived to be deeply engaged in their work. Level of engagement was
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

84
determined by observations of body language, time at task, off-task behaviors if present, types of
questions asked of teacher, and classroom behavior (Shernoff et al., 2003). Once five students
were identified, students were given parent permission forms that were to be signed. Of the ten
initial students considered, five brought back permission slips and were chosen for the study. The
USC research team developed a semi-structured interview protocol. This approach allowed for
comparability, but allowed for the fluidity of participants’ answers to spark ideas that had not
been previously contemplated and included questions that arose in the moment. The semi-
structured approach is appropriate when a researcher is looking for specific information, but also
wants new ideas on the topic to emerge (Merriam, 2009). All of the interviewees were allowed
time to process the question and the question could be skipped at the request of the interviewee.
Interviews lasted 30 minutes with students and up to 45 minutes with teachers. Once the
interviews were completed, the data were examined and patterns and trends were identified and
analyzed by the researcher. As noted earlier, the focus of this study is the role of engagement in
high-performing urban high schools. Further, it has been noted that a multi-layered theoretical
framework drove the research and guided much, if not all, of the decisions made in designing
interview and observation protocols, as well as surveys. Out of that, the choice of observer as
participant was appropriate as it afforded an opportunity to record information as it occurred and
to change focus on different groups that may appear to be fully engaged and approaching flow.
Access/Entry
As noted earlier, the school was chosen based on convenience. It should be noted the
researcher had previously been the direct supervisor for this school during the 2014/15 school
year. Currently, the researcher supports the Linked Learning pathway as Director of Linked
Learning for the school district in which the research site is located. Further, he recently led a
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

85
Federal tour of the school and had an additional opportunity to observe classrooms. The
researcher met with the principal of AHS and explained the project, and asked for permission to
speak with teachers to see if they would be amenable to further observations for this study. The
initial teachers were approached by the principal and given information about their participation
and time and date and asked to identify five possible student candidates for interview.
Data Analysis
The researcher transcribed all interviews verbatim. The researcher shared transcripts
with participants to ensure accuracy in both letter and intent. Additional comments from
participants were noted and identified apart from the initial interview. Transcripts were then
analyzed and coded.
Data Analysis is a process of making sense out of data. The researcher examines the
gathered data and seeks large classifications that address and answer the researcher’s questions
(Merriam, 2009). The process is best understood in terms of a funnel where broad categories are
broken down into smaller meaningful and discrete bits of information that will eventually tell a
story that is referred to as a study’s findings (McMillan, 2004). The researcher in this study used
the theoretical framework for student engagement as a critical filter for determining initial and
subsequent categories reflected in the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive constructs of
engagement. Additionally, Flow Theory played an important role in category creation with its
emphasis on the internal and external factors involved in a deep and prolonged engagement in an
activity. Initially, statements and observations notes were combined into broad themes that
began to tell an emerging narrative of stakeholder experiences at AHS (Creswell, 2009).
Throughout the data analysis process, the USC cohort met regularly to debrief findings
and check methodological process for possible bias that might influence thought process and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

86
findings. Peer debriefing is a significant strategy to ensure internal validity. It mirrors the built-
in process of a dissertation committee review, but has the advantage of continuous early and
timely oversight that can prevent bias being undetected until late in the writing process
(Creswell, 2009; Merriam, 2009).
The final phase of the analysis was the creation of rich descriptive composite narratives
based on the codes, categories, and themes that emerged in the research (Maxwell, 2013).
Conclusion
The purpose of this chapter was to describe the methodology for the research. The
research methodology was a qualitative design. The research questions and purpose guide the
design for a bonded case study that explores how behavior, emotional, and cognitive aspects of
engagement affect student achievement. The conceptual framework supports the research
process and was a guiding factor in the development and design of the research. The data
collection methods were chosen specifically to triangulate data, and in this case study were
document analysis, observation, semi-structured interviews, and surveys. The conceptual
framework brought together social/emotional theories on child development, prominent theory
on the multiple facets of engagement, and Flow Theory. The framework provided a
comprehensive theoretical guide in reconstructing data meaningfully to understand the impact of
Linked Learning certified high school on student engagement and achievement. This chapter
described the methodology used in this research and the processes used to increase validity. The
purpose of the study and research questions began the chapter and was used to frame the design
of the methodology. The subsequent sections described research design, setting, population,
instrumentation, data collection, and analysis. Chapter 4 will present the results of the case study
and possible answers to the research questions: Are the indicators of behavioral, emotional, and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

87
cognitive engagement present in a high-performing urban school? What school programs,
processes, and practices are perceived to contribute to student engagement? And, finally, what
are the unique elements within the Artistic High School structure that support student
engagement?

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

88
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH FINDINGS
The main purpose of this chapter is to review and evaluate the research findings derived
from the Artistic High School (AHS) study. This study revolved around answering the specific
research questions dealing with student engagement. The research questions for the study were
as follows:
1. To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement
present in a high-performing urban school?
2. What school programs, processes, and practices are perceived to contribute to student
engagement?
3. What are the unique elements within Artistic High School’s structure that support
student engagement?
4. To what extent do students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day?
The data collection for this study took place over a two-week period at Artistic High
School, which is located within the Villa Grove Unified School District (VGUSD). A thorough
Institutional Review Board (IRB) process was completed by the University of Southern
California and internally by the VGUSD prior to the researcher gaining access to the school of
study. Upon receiving clearance, the researcher contacted the principal of Artistic High School
and set up a meeting where the purpose of the study was explained. The principal was informed
her school was chosen based on the pre-set criteria the USC cohort had set for an outperforming
urban Linked Learning school. The principal appointed a person of contact, who facilitated
scheduling observations, interviews, and participant selection. The principal also provided time
at a faculty meeting for the researcher to personally address the purpose of the study and recruit
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

89
participants for observations and interviews. At this meeting, an on-line link to the faculty and
student survey was provided, as well as instructions and protocols for ensuring the survey
remained anonymous, protecting the confidentiality of participants. The faculty had an
opportunity to ask questions and clarify any misunderstandings or concerns they might have had.
At the meeting all teachers signed the consent form, allowing for wide participation in the study.
Students received the link to the on-line survey once they turned in the parental consent form.
All surveys were conducted outside the school day in accordance with VGUSD policy. There
was strong staff and student participation with the on-line survey where twenty-one teacher
surveys (66%) and 104 student surveys (25%) were completed respectively.
The study was a bonded case study that incorporated classroom observations, teacher
interviews, student interviews, and a general campus observation. The final data consisted of five
teacher interviews, five student interviews, ten classroom observations, and approximately six
hours over three days observing the campus and surrounding environment. The student
interviews were approximately forty-five minutes and teacher interviews were approximately
one hour in length. Classroom observations varied in length from thirty minutes to one hour.
All interviews were conducted after school and in classrooms.
The researcher triangulated survey and observational data to analyze emergent themes
and patterns relevant to the study of student engagement. By converging multiple sources of
data, the researcher can determine with some certainty the validity of the study (Creswell, 2009).
As previously noted, a qualitative approach was utilized in this study to create a robust and
meaningful narrative that might illuminate important patterns, relationships, and themes adding
to the body of research on student engagement.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

90
Initial Impression of Artistic High School
Artistic High School is one of six co-located schools on one expansive complex in the
center of an urban area. The complex is twenty-two acres and situated in the center of one of the
most densely populated neighborhoods in Southern California.
The complex site neared completion at the same time the pilot schools movement began
within VGUSD. The pilot school movement was the district’s answer to the increasing presence
and influence of charter schools and allowed for small learning communities to form and create
schools with autonomies similar to the charters. Pilot schools were inherently designed as small
schools and a decision was made to change the complex from one comprehensive high school
into six pilot schools. Currently, Artistic High School shares the campus with two K-12 pilot
schools, one 6-12 pilot school, one pilot high school, and one pilot elementary school. The
complex has state of the art physical fitness facilities, including an Olympic quality aquatic
center. The auditorium is a fully restored theater where the great music acts of the 20
th
century
performed. The auditorium is meticulously cared for and shows a sense of pride on the part of
students and staff. The complex also houses a larger central library. The library and surrounding
buildings are covered with murals, created by renowned contemporary artists. The site is
historical and attracts visitors from all over the world and gives the place a feeling of social and
cultural importance.
The north side of the complex is the center of the largest concentration of Koreans
outside of Korea. This area is rapidly changing and the gentrification process has brought
business, restaurants, and nightlife to a formerly dangerous and low rent district. Significantly,
few Korean families attend the six-school complex and opt for private or magnet school options
catering to gifted and high achieving students. To the South and East of the school are poorly
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

91
maintained buildings and rentals that are home to one of the largest Central American
populations in Southern California. The majority of the students at Artistic High School and the
other schools on the complex come from this area.
The entrance to the school is gated and has an attendant that checks in all visitors.
However, the attendants are school employees or volunteers, which provides a welcoming
entrance that does not have the feeling of high security found on other urban campuses.
Artistic High is on the third and fourth floor of one wing of the main building and can be
accessed through the central staircase or elevator. Although, daunting to locate one school from
the other, staff and students were very friendly and helpful every time the researcher needed
directions. When walking down the halls of AHS during passing times, although crowded and
boisterous, the researcher noted a sense of joyfulness and ease. During passing periods, teachers
stood in front of their classrooms and gently moved students to their next class. The researcher
never witnessed or heard any adult or student raise their voice in anger. The research at Artistic
High School was strategically planned for the end of the school year, due to many specific
culminating programs, practices, and procedures significant to the school and Linked Learning.
Findings by Research Question
Research Question 1
To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement
present in a high-performing urban school?
The organization of this section closely follows the organization laid out in the theoretical
framework presented in Chapter 3. One assumption made in the framework is that students who
come to school with high social capital may be academically successful in traditional school
environments that do not provide multiple research-based opportunities for engagement
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

92
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2010). For example, an affluent student with highly educated parents
and multiple opportunities to engage with academically and financially successful individuals
may intrinsically see high school as a stepping-stone to their future and not need to create strong
relationships with teachers to be successful. However, based on the same assumption, students
with less social capital may need a variety of experiences within the behavioral, emotional, and
cognitive realms to achieve academic success (Appleton et al., 2008). Thus, the researcher
included multiple measures of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive research based activities in
an outperforming urban high school (Ikpeze, 2013; Marzano et al., 2005; Masumoto & Brown-
Welty, 2009).
The researcher also observed that some of the emergent themes could easily fall under
multiple factors of engagement. For example, the theme of peer relationships and
student/teacher relationships was found to be a factor of engagement at Artistic High School.
The theme of strong relationships clearly emerges as a factor under the category of emotional
engagement; however, it cannot be separated from behavioral engagement when observed as
respectful interactions within the classroom and school environment. Likewise, bullying is
usually perceived to be a behavioral factor, but the perception of emotional and physical safety
on a campus is inextricably tied to the perceived lack of bullying at AHS and can also be
examined within the emotional domain. These are inherent ambiguities found in a case study
that attempts to make meaning of easily identifiable external behaviors and difficult to ascertain
internal and emotional factors that may influence levels of student engagement. The researcher
is aware of these ambiguities and attempts to address them in these findings.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

93
Behavioral engagement.
Behavioral engagement is generally defined quantitatively through attendance rates,
office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions (Finn, 1989; Fredricks & McColskey, 2012).
However, this study includes participation under behavioral engagement, which can be measured
qualitatively and includes paying attention, responding to teacher’s questions, asking for help,
and discipline issues such as following rules and acting respectfully towards teachers and
classmates (Finn, 1989; Finn & Zimmer, 2012). The research is clear that behavioral
engagement has a significant effect on achievement (Taylor & Parsons, 2011; Furlong et al.,
2003; Finn & Zimmer, 2012). This strong correlation to achievement is promising and gives
hope to the idea that learning how to manipulate engagement behaviors may provide important
pathways to narrowing or closing the achievement gap. The findings are categorized for this
study by attendance/tardiness, in-class behavior, and respectful relationships.
Strong school attendance. Teachers and students have an attendance rate of 96% and
97% respectively (VGUSD website). Students’ reactions to questions about attendance were
extremely positive. In fact, the idea of missing days seemed like something they had not
considered when asked about it. One student laughed and said, “Well, I’m always here!”
Another was equally enthusiastic about attendance and stated, “I’m always coming to school.
I’m actually really excited about it and so I’m always on time.” In the survey, student perception
about their attendance was generally very positive, with the majority reporting missing less than
four days. However, 16 of the 104 respondents did report missing more than 10 days. One
possible correlation for high attendance was found to be with students who were involved more
deeply in the school theater performances. Students spoke about the amount of hours they put
into the preparations for performances and even attending working sessions on Saturdays. The
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

94
researcher did not address the correlation between attendance and extra-curricular participation
in this study, but further research in this area could illuminate possible solutions to chronic
absenteeism. Finally, one teacher made a poignant and telling comment about why attendance
might be high:
I think [Artistic High] is like a hideaway from the things that happen in this
neighborhood. I think it’s often a hideaway from a lot of the stuff that happens in their
homes. You know, for a lot of the kids, they won’t go home because it’s better here. I
think part of it is the school and environment here is going to be the same thing every day
and that consistency is great for a kid that has a life that is in turmoil.
As indicated in the research, the perception of a safe environment was significant in achievement
rates, and thus, could be seen to be a possible factor in attendance.
Culture of respect for classroom procedures and activities. The researcher was able to
complete ten classroom observations in which a consistent on-task and respectful behavior was
visible and the norm. Every classroom had objectives posted for the current day; the Artistic
High Student Outcomes were posted and consistently referred to. Students were observed
working mostly in cooperative groups, but when in whole class discussions, students were
attentive and engaged with questioning and interactive note taking. In one class students were
given an opportunity to reflect on conclusions they had been working on for a presentation.
During the reflection time, 100% of the students were intent on rereading their material. When
asked to find a partner and present their conclusion, the students knew how to find a partner and
within minutes the room was abuzz with students presenting their conclusions to each other and
there was no off task behavior observed. Students were seen to be listening and jumped in when
it was their turn. In another classroom, students observed a student presentation. Every student
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

95
was sitting up, intently watching, and taking notes. After the presentations, students were
reflective and respectful in their critique. One student pointed out about a peer, “Even though
she stumbled, she kept moving forward and I think that shows how prepared she was.” Another
student remarked on how she was honest about her mistakes and her ability to be reflective
allowed her to grow. In another class, the students were preparing to receive an elementary
school class, who they were going to show how to make puppets. Once the students arrived,
they filtered towards the tables where the AHS students were waiting for them. The AHS
students greeted them warmly and immediately got them into the activities. The entire period
was buzzing with activity, but there was never a moment where students were off task or the
teacher had to intervene.
Whether it was in Social Studies, where hands flew up to answer questions about a poll
tax during a lesson related to American Government or in design where students were working
with machines to create sets, students were seen to be involved in on-task behaviors. Even when
it came time to clean up the set design workshop, every student seemed to know what to do and
joined in. Students were completely self-directed and worked until every woodchip was cleaned,
the floor swept clear, and chairs and tables straightened and readied for the next class. Only in
one instance did the researcher notice a girl with her head down during a class. However,
another girl came by and put her arm around her in a gesture of empathy. This was obviously an
outlier, but pointed to the more meaningful culture of caring and respect observed throughout the
study.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

96
Table 7
Student-Reported Indicators of Learning Environments Characterized by Respect for Classroom
Learning and Procedures
Survey Item Agree Strongly Agree Total
I behave appropriately in my classroom 51% 45% 96%
I com to class with all my supplies 62% 33% 95%
I complete assigned work on time 61% 23% 84%
I ask questions in class 68% 20% 88%
I am actively engaged in learning in class 68% 20% 88%

Table 8
Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment Characterized by a Respect for
Classroom Learning and Procedures
Survey Item Agree Strongly Agree Total
My students behave appropriately in my classes 53% 29% 82%
Students help develop classroom rules 41% 41% 82%
My students put effort in my classes 59% 29% 88%
My students take pride in their work 50% 38% 88%
My students show me respect 47% 47% 94%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

97
Emotional engagement.
Emotional engagement is commonly defined as identification and feeling a part of school
or class community (Appleton et al., 2008). This idea was reiterated in multiple studies that
surveyed for student attitudes about school identification and participation rates, which
overwhelmingly found that students rated their engagement higher in schools and classrooms
where mutual respect was fostered, strong discipline policies guided cultural norms, and teachers
actively sought to build strong relationships with students (Shernoff et al., 2003; Appleton et al.,
2008; Taylor & Parsons, 2011; Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Four clear patterns of emotional
engagement emerged in the data for AHS students: Student/teacher relationships, Peer
relationships, physical and emotional safety, and a deep sense of belonging and identification
with the AHS community.
Teacher/student relationship. The student/teacher relationship emerged as a significant
factor at AHS. Evidence of strong, empathetic, and trusting relationships was consistent
throughout observations and surfaced as a repetitive theme in the interviews. The survey data
were also consistent with these findings with nearly 90% of the students reporting having at least
one adult at the school they could trust and 80% reporting multiple trusting student/adult
relationships. Interestingly, one teacher reported about a self-study the school had completed in
prior years and in conjunction with the counseling office. Their report also found 90% of the
student’s at Art High School had at least one adult they could go to for emotional and academic
help. Although, the self-study was unavailable for review, the teacher’s comment points to the
staff being reflective about the role of student/teacher relationships and a general belief that
strong relationships matter.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

98
Students self-reporting in interviews when asked about their relationship with teachers
were ebullient in their reflections. One student said about one of her teachers:
I’m able to talk to her about personal issues, as well as academic issues. We [my friends
and I] could talk to her about anything without having to feel judged and she gives us
advice on how to fix it or improve.
Another student noted that “we honestly have counselors and teachers that care for us and they
communicate with us.” Later, the same student noted:
Each student communicates mostly with a certain teacher. I started getting close with
Ms. Smith. The way she talked and interacted with me was different. She gives me
advice for college. It’s nice to connect and learn more about our teachers.
One student even noted he liked to stay in his teacher’s classes instead of going to lunch or
nutrition. He said, “I have a personal connection with my teacher that that makes it more like a
family to me.” Teachers reported similar feelings about their students. One teacher said,
Students just come in and talk. They just sit down and talk about their weight or their
mom or that they really do love their parents. It is really so sweet. They might even talk
about an issue they have with another teacher. It just seems to be the natural flow of
things around here.
Another teacher when reflecting on student/teacher relationships said, “You know, sometimes
we are more therapists than teachers!”
Classroom observations confirmed teacher and student self-reporting of strong
teacher/student relationships. In every classroom observation it was evident that teachers and
students respected and cared for each other. In one observation a teacher announced the
retirement of a fellow teacher, and there was an audible and heartfelt response from the students.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

99
The teacher warmly responded that he would be deeply missed. All interactions observed were
polite, respectful, and, at times, even tender. There was a consistent rhythm of work followed by
praise and encouragement. The researcher did not note at any time any negative comments
coming from teachers or students.
A teacher summed up the researchers observations when she said, “I think we have
really caring staff members and I think student will give back what they’re getting from the
adults and they are getting love, they are getting so much love here.”

Table 9
Student-Reported Indicators of Supportive Teacher/Student Relationships
Survey Item Agree
Strongly
Agree Total
Teachers show a personal concern for me as an individual 66% 22% 88%
I feel accepted by my teachers in my classes 67% 25% 92%
Teachers make themselves available outside of class time 67% 28% 95%
I enjoy my teachers 67% 20% 87%

Table 10
Teacher-Reported Indicators of Supportive Teacher/Student Relationships
Survey item Agree Strongly Agree Total
I treat all students with respect 12% 88% 100%
All students feel accepted in my classes 41% 53% 94%
I make myself available to students outside of
class time
41% 59% 100%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

100
Peer relationships. The researcher’s observations of peer relationships mirrored those of
teacher/student relationships. In fact, when it came to classroom observations, student disrespect
for one another was not observed. The same pattern held true in all ten observations and in all
interactions in the hallways or at lunch. The only negative comment came from the anonymous
survey in which one student reported that “no school rally for homos, queers, and trans” was a
factor in a high quality school that supports student growth and learning. However, all other
comments were supportive and caring. One student reported,
My peers… We are like friends. Here, everyone could be a friend with everyone. You
know everyone in the hallway and it’s like, oh hey what’s up? It’s easy to be happy,
because you’re with friends and they feel like your family.
Another student remarked that as she saw other students interact with each other and ask for help
gave her the confidence to be more involved with her peers. It is clear that the quality of peer
relationships is closely tied to a school culture that promotes emotional and physical safety.
Emotional and physical safety. As noted in the research section of this study, the
physical environment seems to play an important role in creating conditions that promote deeper
relationships and engagement (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Monikers of a positive school
environment include respect, fairness, safety, and positive communications, however, even the
perceptions of unsafe school environments can lead to student dissatisfaction and disengagement
(Marks, 2000). At AHS, the perception is clearly one of a safe environment immune to many of
the issues confronting most school communities. One striking example is the perception that
bullying does not exist on the campus. Although, not observed, this researcher acknowledges
that bullying most likely exists in some form on the AHS campus; however, the perception of
students and faculty to the contrary makes for powerful conditions of perceived and actual
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

101
emotional and physical safety. One student noted that perhaps it was that students at AHS had
chosen an arts pathway, and it united them and prevented them from bullying others. Another
attributed it to the small school environment and another indicated that students were encouraged
to express themselves and honor diversity. Regardless of the reason, comments of “there is no
bullying here,” “I’ve never been bullied and have never bullied,” and “I hear there is bullying at
other schools” are prevalent in the student interviews. Of 103 responses on the survey, 96 agreed
or strongly agreed that bullying is not tolerated on the AHS campus. The same perceptions
seemed to hold true for drugs and gang activity that were thought to be issues on other campuses,
but not at AHS.
In contrast to the anti Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) comment
previously reported from the survey, the data clearly pointed to a very safe school environment
for LGBT and other minority students. The message from both faculty and staff was that AHS is
a sanctuary school for diversity. One significant observation by the researcher was that every
faculty member, including the principal and administration either wore or had displayed a button
that had the LGBT rainbow flag colors and read “OUT, SAFE SCHOOL.” The message was
considered a statement that AHS was a safe space for LGBT students. One student reiterated
this idea when she said, “AHS is a safe place to express yourself and express who you are. I
think that is one thing that AHS really shines in.” Teachers and school also created specific
events to highlight their openness to diversity and gave students forums to debrief and discuss
their feelings. One class was noted for creating a weeklong event that raised awareness about
LGBT issues and to show love and respect to member of the LGBT community at AHS.
This openness to LGBT issues is seen as part of a larger openness to diversity and
cultural differences in general. A sociology teacher said, “In the class there are opportunities to
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

102
speak about what they experience about being members of a specific gender or being part of the
LGBT group or certain socio-economic groups.” Another teacher emphasized, “We’re tolerant.
It’s beautiful. I think we’re more appreciative of like, oh, you’re different, come in and hang out
with us. I think that culture is infused in the rest of the way the school works.” This idea of
honoring diversity clearly sends a message of emotional and physical safety that resonates
broadly.
Not surprisingly, the consensus from faculty and student interviews was that there are
virtually no discipline issues at the school. The school report on suspensions and expulsions
confirms that at the minimum there are no serious discipline issues, as there have not been any
for the last four years. It was this researcher’s experience to not have witnessed any discipline
issues over the course of a month of observations, interviews, and days spent on campus.
However, it is important to note that smaller disciplinary issues are perceived to take place as
noted in the survey where 25 out of 104 students reported having been removed from class for
talking or that it is easy to be asked to leave class for disciplinary issues. This information is
consistent with 96 of the 104 students reporting that teachers stick to established rules.
Overwhelmingly however, the perception this researcher noted of students and faculty can be
summed up by a teacher who brought her brother to attend the school and said, “I think AHS is a
place where students feel really, really safe, really respected, and really wanted, and really
special.”

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

103

Table 11
Student-Reported Indicators of Emotional and Physical Safety
Survey Items Agree Strongly agree Total
Teachers care that I Learn 64% 31% 94%
Teachers show respect for different races and
ethnicity
55% 43% 98%
Teachers use materials in the classroom that reflect
my cultural or ethnic identity
56% 17% 74%
Bullying is not tolerated 47% 47% 94%

Table 12
Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment That is Characterized by a Perception
of Emotional and Physical Safety
Survey Item Agree Strongly Agree Total
I care that all my students learn 6% 94% 100%
All student feel accepted in my class 6% 94% 100%
I use materials in my class that reflect my
students’ cultural and ethnic identities
47% 53% 100%
Bullying is not tolerated 12% 88% 100%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

104
Belonging and community. The research on engagement is clear that a sense of
belonging is a crucial factor in engagement and the researcher anticipated finding evidence of
this in the study. Emotional engagement has been deemed fundamental to human motivation
(Appleton et al., 2008) and is described as a sense of belonging, relatedness, and identification
with the school. This state of belonging seems to need ongoing, pleasant and positive
interactions that occur in a framework of long-term, stable caring, and concerned adult or peer
relationships (Appleton et al., 2008). It has also been shown that identification with school
develops over time and is affected, positively or negatively, by a lifetime of academic successes
or failures (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). As noted in the previous section, these conditions for
belonging were found to be abundant at AHS. However, other unexpected themes emerged from
the data that suggest a deep connection to a shared vision, and student and teacher autonomy are
critical factors in creating a community connection that goes beyond spirit wear and school
pride. A deeply shared vision and educational autonomy appear to be co-contributing factors in
multiple aspects of student and faculty engagement and are further addressed in subsequent
sections of this chapter.
The student survey data for all questions in the study were generally consistent with
approximately 85% of students reporting favorably to the questions. This was true for students
reporting they felt a sense of community at AHS. Notably, 100% of teachers surveyed agreed or
strongly agreed that it was important for students to feel a sense of community and they took
time to create community in their classrooms. An overwhelming amount of data in the
observations and interviews corroborated the survey findings. The idea of typical or expected
school pride was noted in the data, and one student said she was proud to be an AHS student and
always had AHS pride wear on her. However, the theme of a shared vision as an arts school
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

105
emerged throughout the data as a more significant factor in developing a sense of belonging. The
connection to the Arts theme was noted multiple times by students as a reason for feeling
connected. One student explained her connection to the school art community when she said,
“Well, I’m related to the singers and actors, well as far as goals and interests. We all work hard,
no matter what.” Teachers reiterated this sentiment. One teacher kept referring to the staff and
students as theater people and noted that she thought the theater culture brought the school
together. The Career Tech Education (CTE) teacher compared the way AHS is run similarly to a
theater company in attempting to explain the deep sense of community at AHS. She said:
Just like the way theaters are run, we have the same kind of close connection thing. We
do lots of team building activities. You know, theater is a community art. It’s a
collaborative art. I think the pathway creates that kind of community.
Another student compared her experience in school and with the theater pathway to family and
noted:
I think it is more like family vibes. For me, family is real important. I value family and
for me to see AHS as my family… that’s important for me. I like coming to AHS
because there are no disappointments and they are there for you all the time.

Table 13
Student-Reported Indicators of a School Characterized as One of Belonging and Community
Survey Items Agree Strongly agree Total
I feel a sense of community or belonging in my classes 63% 20% 83%
I feel accepted by my teachers in my classes 67% 25% 92%
The classroom atmosphere supports my learning 71% 16% 88%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

106
Table 14
Teacher-Reported Indicators of a Learning Environment Characterized by a Sense of Belonging
and Community
Survey Item Agree Strongly agree Total
I feel it is important for students to feel a sense of
community in my classes
12% 88% 100%
I take time to build community in my class 35% 65% 100%
All students feel accepted in my classes 41% 53% 94%

Teacher and student autonomy. As noted, in research and in the findings, a sense of
belonging is built on a foundation of strong relationships, perception of safety, and shared vision
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995). However, it was a deep sense of autonomy that seemed to create an
unwavering commitment to the school in both student and faculty. The history of AHS plays an
important role in how the culture of empowerment and autonomy developed. Prior to the
inception of AHS at this complex, it existed as an arts academy created in 1998 within a very
large comprehensive high school. In 2007, a group of teachers from the arts academy applied to
become a pilot school with an arts theme. The pilot school model allowed for broad autonomies
in curricular development, staffing, scheduling, and maintained school size to approximately 400
to 500 students. Much like a charter school, the plan had to be written and approved by the
district. The plan was written by a group of nine teachers. Eight of the original academies
founding teachers are still at AHS and another eight were hired in the first or second year. The
pilot was accepted as the former historic site was converted into a school, and AHS was given
their location. For the first five years of AHS history, the former academy’s theater and English
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

107
teacher served as principal. Teachers interviewed for this study referenced multiple times the
history and inception of the school and emphasized that it was teacher driven and led. One
teacher said, “I mean, we were nine teachers who decided to start a school because we got the
opportunity. So we have that kind of grass roots feeling and we make our own decisions.”
Another teacher reiterated, “We are teachers for a teacher driven school. There are a lot of
decisions that are made as a group.” Even teachers, who were not part of the founding, knew the
history and connected with the idea of teacher driven and academic autonomy. One of the newer
teachers explaining AHS’s uniqueness said, “I think the teachers basically created AHS. Even
before our former principal became principal, she was a lead teacher at the academy. So, teachers
created it all. We created the vision that we wanted for the school.” The CTE teacher had been
part of the founding and spoke about how empowering her experience has been when she said,
“it’s cool to have that kind of input and ownership of the growth of the program.” She also
pointed out that with their autonomy to hire, they were able to seek out like minded individuals
with whom they would better bond. It is important to note that the creation of AHS is unique and
will rarely be able to be duplicated in most unified school districts. However, there are some
unique elements that are discussed under research question 3 that may provide some guidance to
others seeking to build a strong culture of belonging and community.
Significantly, the valuing of and commitment to autonomy by teachers seems to have
transferred to teaching styles, empowering students and creating a passion for the AHS
community. This freedom was readily observed in the costume design and set design
classrooms, where students were given great leeway to make designs based on the play and
historical data used to understand the play. However, it was also observed in academic
classroom. In Social Studies, after a robust discussion of civil rights, students had an opportunity
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

108
to share out what projects they were working on and then move into cooperative groups sharing
similar themes. One student summed it up nicely when she said:
I think it’s because teachers give us the freedom to do projects, but they also give us the
freedom to do whatever we feel most comfortable with. Maybe we are told you have to
write a policy paper, but they let you choose a topic that is important to you, whether it’s
immigration, poverty or gun laws. We have the freedom to choose, so we feel more
invested in our work.
Cognitive engagement.
Cognitive engagement is generally seen as a student’s investment in learning (Fredricks
& McColskey, 2012) and is denoted by students’ psychological investment and the quality of
their engagement, in contrast to their physical (behavioral) efforts (Pintrich, 2003). In this way,
teachers may perceive students to be engaged due to their behavior, but still not achieving due to
an overall lack of cognitive engagement in the work. Cognitive engagement is perceived
through student behaviors that may include persistence, going the extra mile, extending the
learning on their own, and using self-regulation strategies to accomplish tasks and guide learning
(Finn & Zimmer, 2012).
Persistence. The observations and interviews conducted for this study corroborated the
research, and the themes of persistence and reflection clearly emerged. The data also indicated a
culture that values a growth mindset. During multiple observations students were observed
deeply engrossed in their work. During one extended observation of the design class, the
researcher was able to follow a group of students that worked through a difficult design issue to
completion. The group needed to translate a drawn plan for a theater set into a full size model by
first creating a prototype. The group encountered multiple problems and would discuss possible
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

109
solutions, approach the teacher for feedback, and return. At one point, they became worried
about not finishing, but were relieved to see they had 36 minutes left. They continued to work
until the last minute and asked if they could stay a few minutes after the bell to finish. This same
behavior was observed in an English class working on final presentations. The student presented
their material to each other in pairs, revised their conclusions, presented again, and continued
with this cycle until the end of the period. One student spoke about how there are days where he
would wonder what he had learned from the work or how he could connect it to his future, but
mused, “By the end of the projects we are all proud of our work. It’s really weird, but it
happens.” One teacher observed in her interview that often students in the earlier grades
complain they don’t want to do the projects or participate in the theater programs and
preparations. However, she said, “By the end they are doing very impressive projects. They
resist, but we insist, and they learn the skills and they practice. They get it done.” The
Government teacher explained how she plans scaffolds and supports the need to persist through a
project by planning a series of deadlines throughout the project to create moments of success and
encourage completion. Another form of support provided students to encourage persistence is a
willingness on the part of teachers to go the extra mile. All teachers interviewed spoke about
providing additional one on one tutoring and support when needed. Students overwhelmingly
shared a similar experience with teachers when answering the survey questions about what
teachers have done recently to help them learn with nearly 35% of the responses indicating a
teacher stayed after school to help. The counselor was singled out for her persistence in helping
students get their FAFSA and college applications in. One teacher said of her:
The students know that a lot of it is due to Ms. Jones, the counselor. She is very
persistent and she will harass them until they get their paperwork turned in. In the end it
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

110
pays off for the students, because they get their acceptance letters and everybody is
crying and happy.
It should be noted that AHS has a 100% completion rate for the UC application process and a
71% acceptance rate.
Not unexpectedly, the picture that emerges is one of symbiosis between students and
faculty, and the cognitive domain of engagement seems to be strengthened when behavioral and
emotional supports are in place. Although not addressed in this study, future research might seek
to understand to what extent the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive domains influence one
another. For example, do teachers exhibit the same levels of commitment to students and their
success when the behavioral domain is dominated with anti-social or apathetic attitudes? Is there
one domain that has a bigger impact on student achievement or that must be in place for the other
domains to flourish?

Table 15
Student-Reported Indicators of Persistence
Survey Item Agree Strongly agree Total
I have pride in my work 64% 29% 93%
I put forth effort in my classes 57% 36% 93%
I ask for help when I need it 72% 24% 96%

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

111
Table 16
Teacher-Reported Indicators of Perceptions on Student Persistence
Survey Items Agree Strongly agree Total
My students take pride in their work 50% 38% 88%
My students put effort in my classes 59% 29% 88%
My students have a desire to learn in school 76% 18% 94%

Relevancy. One major theme that emerged from the interviews and observations was that
the instruction at AHS is continually made relevant to the students’ immediate and future lives.
Although not specifically addressed in the literature review done for this study, it became
apparent student engagement in high school occurs when students take ownership and invest in
learning and internalize curricula to incorporate and purposefully use it in their lives (Pike &
Kuh, 2005). One student addressed the issue of relevancy to her life 13 times in 30 minutes. She
initiated our interview by telling me “we focus on what’s going on around us. So, we come up
with stuff that matters or our community.” She directly related this to a feeling of Flow and said
this relevance was the reason “time just goes by so fast. It just goes so fast that we can’t even
believe the class is over.” Significantly, Data on Linked Learning schools across California
mirrors this finding.
The issue of family and race was a key factor in much of the instruction. It was obvious
that the teacher has played an important role in making sure students knew from the beginning of
the year that “this is going to be really personal. It is going to be about families and immigration
and how families come here to the United States.” One student mentioned her teacher “really
brings in a personal side” and that they were often brought into discussions that involved their
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

112
place in current affairs, as when they debated Donald Trump’s policies where they “talked about
what his perspective is about Latinos and stuff like that.” That was true in the researchers’
observation of Ms. M’s government class. During the observation she worked with students on
their essays and guided them to relate their topics to their families and communities. In
relationship to education and immigration, she pushed one student by asking “Your parents’
experiences? What would you say they did for you?” and in another case she asked a student
about employment for immigrants. She also made clear in the written instructions to “write
about how the experience affected you.” Ms. S also focused on the day-to-day reality of the
students by having the students debate “whether their city should increase the minimum wage to
$15 dollars per hour.” During the preparation for the debate they looked at what different per
hour wages played out over the year and compared it to the current cost of living in their city.
She made this incredibly relevant when she pointed out “working 7 days a week at the current
minimum wage garnered you $18,720 per year, but if you pay $75 a month for a bus pass, you
might be paying almost $1000 each year just for transportation.” Time and again in every
interview the idea connecting the learning to kids real life was prominent.
However, another aspect of relevancy was in the application of learning current skills for
future use. Student 1 was emphatic when she told me:
I think everything I do here is going to have purpose later on and what I want to continue
doing. I mean acting skills are always going to be there, my government discussions are
going to help because I will know how to handle a discussion properly and how to debate
what I want.
The school focus and pathway itself also contributed to a sense of relevancy as when Student 2
said, “In our pathway, our teacher gives us problems related to our pathway and the real world
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

113
and says you are building a machine its engaging and challenging, because your are making
something that has a real purpose.” I think Student 1 summed it up best when she spoke about
how learning was relevant at her school: “I honestly don’t know if its going to be at work, at
home, or with friends, but I do know they [skills learned in classes] are going to help later on.”

Table 17
Student Indicators of a Relevant Learning Environment
Survey item Agree Strongly agree Total
Teachers ask me about my personal goals and
plans for life
58% 20% 78%
Teachers help me explore career goals 54% 17% 71%
Teachers us materials in the classroom that reflect
my cultural or ethnic identity
56% 17% 73%
We can talk openly about racial issues in my
classes
59% 31% 90%

Personal transformation. Perhaps the most significant and impactful outcome, for this
researcher, was the emergence of the unexpected theme of personal transformation. This was
sometimes described as finding one’s voice, a direct correlation to the AHS student outcomes,
but often emerged as an outcome of self-reflection and meta-cognitive understanding of how the
school experience had fundamentally transformed students and prepared them for their future.
One student described her experience this way:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

114
Before AHS, I was a totally different person. I wasn’t someone I would be proud of, but
because I’ve been at AHS, it changed me into a different person. I like being this person.
AHS has taught me to be myself and find my voice.
Another student similarly said:
I think AHS has really changed me for the better, because in my other school I was
probably one of the worst students…one of the students that don’t care about school.
Coming to AHS changed my perspective on how I want to live my life and what I want to
do with my life.
Sometimes students were specific about a particular characteristic or trait that had been
transformed. Three of the students interviewed spoke about being shy and later having the
ability to stand in front of an audience to perform or present information. One student noted that
“before I would say I was not a creative person, but because I actually took in the techniques I
could use to be creative, I would say I am now a creative person.” These comments typify what
many would argue is the ultimate goal of education: to help students understand the impact
education can have on their lives and be motivated to be life long learners. Teachers at AHS
play an important role in providing the conditions where transformation can happen by providing
opportunities for meta-cognitive reflection. During a student senior presentation the teacher
asked, “I would like to know more about your growth. How have you grown?” To which the
student replied, “I have grown in that I am more comfortable in my own skin.” Another student
responding to the same question in a different presentation answered:
If you would have asked me last year, I would not have been the first student to volunteer
to speak in front of all the teachers. I have learned to be more confident and do things I
wouldn’t have otherwise done.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

115
One teacher described how the staff pushes students to deeper reflection through a senior
defense:
[i]n order to do their defense, they have to have done a lot of meaningful reflection. They
may have reflected on things before and have written it, but I don’t think they have had
the experience of having a reflection given back to them and told they need to go much
deeper. I think as a school, we’re working on getting them to have those experiences
earlier on, so when they get to the 12
th
grade it is part of who they are.
The CTE design teacher noted that her role allowed her to facilitate transformation with students
that may not be strong academically or even a problem student. She noted:
I get to see a lot of kids others see as problems or low achieving and maybe sometime
they are, but to see them from a different lens, to have them find something they are good
at… It’s like, well, you suck at algebra, but you are a bad ass with those power tools.
Helping kids find something they are good at and a reason to come to school is
transformative.
It would seem the students agree. One student commented, “I feel as if other schools could
incorporate the way that AHS teaches and way they do everything, you know, the dynamics of
AHS, then I think other students could also change.” Another showed missionary zeal and
stated:
I would actually go to middle schools and be happy to talk about how AHS can change
you as a student. I’ve seen how seniors are more confident, more out there, more open
about certain stuff, and not shy to go in front of a teacher or group and actually present!
The meta-cognitive reflection and awareness that personal success is connected to the school
experience may have a domino effect in that it contributes to the culture of perseverance,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

116
determination, and high expectations observed at AHS. One of the goals for high school
education is to prepare students to be college ready. One student epitomized this transformation
when she said:
At my other school teachers looked at me and had lost hope. But here I have changed.
When I go back to my other school and I tell them I’m going to UC Riverside they are
shocked. I guess, AHS is the only place that I can say, because I went to here, I was able
to change.
Research Question 2
What school programs, processes, and practices are perceived to contribute to student
engagement?
Educators across the country have been in a continuous search for what is commonly
referred to as Silver Bullet program, believed to be a program that will finally fix the
achievement gap. However, research indicates educational programs focus on symptoms and not
root causes. Buying every student a laptop to bridge the digital divide becomes the driver and
instructional change takes a back seat with this approach (Fullan, 2014). In light of the larger
educational communities push for specialized programs, it was striking for this researcher that
very few programs were perceived to exist or have importance at AHS. Even when referring to
larger programmatic adoptions like Linked Learning, teachers were very quick to point out that,
“Linked Learning is not a program, it’s more of a philosophy.” In fact, there seemed to be an
emphasis that, while Linked Learning provided career readiness activities, it was really linked to
already embedded practices at the school prior to its adoption, like project based and
interdisciplinary learning. One teacher said, “Basically, Linked Learning is project based
learning. To some degree you are collaborating with other teachers, you’re combining other
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

117
disciplines like the humanities with PBL.” Another teacher was forthright when she said, “We
have had Linked Learning since Ms. A was here [about 5 years] and I think our understanding of
it always grows.” However, she also reiterated, “So, all grades work together and we develop
interdisciplinary projects that have some real world or career focus.” One teacher spoke about
how Linked Learning was something they jumped into because there was grant money attached
to it and that, “no one really knew what it was. To this day, we are still trying to define it.”
When pressed on the idea of what Linked Learning is and how embedded into the school it was,
she, like the other teachers focused on PPL when she said, “It’s pretty entrenched, but we still
struggle to find the project we can come back to year after year.” Other teachers saw Linked
Learning as an extension to what they were already doing. In describing how it came to be, one
teacher said, “I think the way the school was originally set up with a strong theater component
made it easy for Linked Learning to work here.” The same held true for students who
unanimously referred to the school wide practice of interdisciplinary projects when asked about
Linked Learning. A deeper reflection of the influence of Linked Learning on engagement is
described later under research question 4 that focuses on unique elements that support
engagement at AHS. However, this discussion serves to highlight a possible AHS faculty
aversion to pre-packaged programs coming from outside the community and is consistent with
the shared ideology that values autonomy and independence. What emerges from the data then,
is not a series of easily identifiable programs, but deeply embedded practices and processes that
faculty and students perceive to be cornerstones of the AHS experience and setting it apart as a
school where students desire to be.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

118
Practices.
For the purpose of this study, a practice is defined as an idea, belief, or methodology
applied to the classroom or within the school community. A process differs in that it denotes a
series of actions or activities to achieve a desired outcome.
Teacher’s role as coach or mentor. One emergent practice of significance was the role
of teacher as a coach or mentor. This role of coach or mentor seems significant, as this
researcher’s experience in supervising 38 high schools over the last few years was dominated by
the vast majority of instructional time being spent in teachers talking and students listening. At
AHS, the researcher’s experience was the opposite. One student explained it in relationship to
classroom debate, “She is there as a teacher, but she is also there to keep the conversation going,
to motivate us and to get us back on track to talk about the things we are supposed to talk about.”
Another student seemed to allude to this when he said, “In my other schools, the teacher always
tells you that this is going on and you don’t have a lot to say, but in this school, it’s just
different.” The first student said that in her government class students spent “about 30 to 35
minutes talking and she [the teacher] talks about 15 minutes.” Significantly, she added, “She
doesn’t talk the whole 15 minutes. It is like five minutes here, two or three minutes here and
there.” All students interviewed were asked about how much time they thought their teachers
spent talking and how much time they gave students to work in a given period. All students
interviewed reiterated the first student’s response and indicated the ratio of teacher talk to student
cooperative or individual learning was 25% to 75%.
The same dynamic was observed in all three observations. In two of the classrooms, the
students were organized in small cooperative working groups and in one they were working
individually on essays. However, in all classes the role the teacher took was that of guide. In
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

119
Mr. R’s classroom, he spent the entire time moving from group to group. He would either give
instructions in a big picture way as, “We are going to lay this out on the stage with 12 foot
perimeters. You need to translate this into scale and split it out so that each piece becomes an
individual project,” at which point he would leave them to problem solve for a time. Or later he
would come back, observe the work, and nudge on with comments such as, “That’s going to
have to change… What is that? What about the O, can you do that as well?” In Ms. M’s class
the same was observed. She moved from group to group and didn’t offer many answers, but
continually pushed student thinking, looking at work, and asking probing questions such as,
“What have you found in your research or what is your next step from here?” Even when
teachers were not using a questioning strategy, they continued to push students into problem
solving, as when Ms. E said, “There’s no right or wrong answer, but you need to support your
claim” or “If you can find three reasons to support your ideas then, argue that side.”
A significant part of the coaching/mentor role was a growth mindset and the use of praise
and encouragement. Mr. R continually praised the work he saw with comments, “This looks
really good,” “Even if you don’t get it completely finished, what you are doing is super helpful.”
“We can continue after school”, or “You guys are really getting better. There used to be lots of
stripped screws, but now there are only a few each day. Great job!” Ms. E would validate
thinking and work by pointing it out and putting student thoughts and ideas on a chart she kept
during the class. And Ms. M reinforced her expectations using praise as when she said, “You all
took your role of feedback giver very seriously. That is an important part of working together as
a team. Nicely done.”
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

120
Specialized activity-based/hands-on learning. Data from both the interviews and
observations demonstrated that AHS is characterized by specialized activity-based or hands-on
instruction. One student described AHS as a place where within
pathways our teachers give us problems related to our pathway and, say you are building
a machine… it is engaging and challenging. Because if you are making something from
a design that you made, it is really engaging. You are really doing something!
Another student described how, “In biology we are building a digestive model and we will
present to our class what we are learning.” One student directly related hands-on learning
activities to the idea of flow and losing her sense of time in an activity when she said:
It was my first year experiencing construction, so I got very into this new aspect of it. So
I want to keep going and then Mr. R is like ‘Five more minutes and it’s time to clean up’
and we are just like, ‘Damn, it passed really fast.’
Another student gave her opinion as to why these kinds of activities were effective in engaging
students. She said she thought it was “because it is hands on, you’re moving, your physically
active and you are just learning new stuff, and you are like this is something that could help later
on.” This aspect of students losing themselves in an activity was most evident in the observation
of Mr. R’s classroom where they were working on building the set to the play the school would
soon be producing. During that observation, one group was so focused on solving a difficult
design aspect of the staging that the only time they were observed breaking from the activity was
when one of the students briefly looked at her phone, but then went right back to working on the
problem. This was also seen with the group that struggled with a set of stairs and platform that
had to hold multiple people at a time. The three students worked at it until they got solved the
problem and then had to be reminded multiple times to stop and clean up at the end of the class.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

121
The hands-on and activity-based learning seems to propel these high school students to stay in
the moment and holds their attention much longer than in other settings. One aspect that lends
itself to these kinds of activities is that the school had the physical resources in tools and
materials to effectively pull off activity-based learning. Overall, all three observations were
performed at random times, and all three experiences were activity based or hands on. In
addition, both students described rich activity-based learning, which leads the researcher to
surmise that this kind of pedagogy is the norm at AHS and not the exception.
Interdisciplinary project based learning. This AHS practice differs from the previous
practice in that the former was specifically seen in the CTE classrooms. However, even in the
other classrooms, where the content follows the prescribed curriculum, project based learning
was regularly observed and always connected to interdisciplinary practices. Both student and
faculty interviews were rich with details about the important role interdisciplinary PBL played at
AHS. It is of note that the interdisciplinary PBL assignments were often referred to as Linked
Learning assignments. The emerging perception, for AHS students and faculty, is the link in
Linked Learning has more to do with linking content areas rather than to an industrial or work
based theme, as outlined in Linked Learning literature. In one classroom observation, when
asked what he was working on, a student replied, “It’s an essay. It is for our history and English
class. It’s a Linked Learning assignment.” In the set construction classroom the
interdisciplinary aspect of PBL was also evident. One student explained about a project
involving geography, English, science, and social studies, “We are looking at what filtering
systems work best for getting clean water. We have used charcoal, rocks, sand, and are now
trying other materials that might make a better filter.” This project was further explicated by
one of the teachers in her interview:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

122
I think we hit all of our outcomes with this project. We really went off the grid. It
doesn’t completely fit our California curriculum, but worked really well for chemistry.
For this project, we focused on water, access to clean water, drought situations, water
tables, contamination, and damming. Students have to identify a problem and advocate
for a solution and create a public policy. So, that required research and writing that
would satisfy the English component, and present it in a documentary style film for
Presentation.
When asked in an interview what Linked Learning meant to her, one student offered:
Basically, it’s work that related to other classes like English, math, or history class, they
are all going to link together. They may all be about different stuff, but they are all going
to link together and it is like a whole big project at the end.
She further explained:
For example, in my 11
th
grade class we did renderings of women and men’s dress and
how it changed throughout the history, and in English, we had to do an essay about
feminism and how it relates to the changing of women’s rights and customs. In math, we
did something about statistics with it.
Students appeared to find deep value in making connections through the projects. One student
mentioned that prior to AHS she was not involved, but:
Seeing how they do things at AHS make me want to be involved after school to work on
my text or essays, because I like how each one of them was connected to the tech class
and with English or history class.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

123
Another student summed it up nicely when she said:
At AHS, that was the first time I heard of Linked Learning and it was confusing and cool
at the same time. If you think about it, we are an arts school, right? That’s our focus, but
we still have other classes we need to focus on as well. So to incorporate everything into
one project, it kind of makes everything click in your head. Like, wow, like everything
just made sense.
Collaboration. Collaboration emerged as a deeply embedded practice for both faculty
and students. In fact, the collaborative structures and activities observed were so ubiquitous it
would be easy to miss the forest through the trees. In all ten observations, the only time this
researcher witnessed a more traditional setting of speaker in front of the class with students
listening was during student presentations. When teachers were observed delivering instruction,
the classrooms were set up with students working in groups or pairs. The interactions between
teacher and students were a flow of question heavy instruction followed by discussion or group
activity. The CTE classrooms are set up for work in groups or pairs. Projects in those
classrooms were also designed to be group design projects. One student explained:
I am the costume designer and I have to learn to collaborate with others. I have to work
with the lighting designer and stage designer. It taught me to be open minded. For
instance, the set designer put a slide on the set and I imagined how that would work with
my costumes. Typically, I have a hard time working with others. This really forced me to
learn how to work closely and respectfully with others.
Based on the extent of research on engagement, the researcher expected to find hands-on
projects, cooperative learning, and a deeper perception of student engagement in the CTE
classrooms. However, this level of engagement was notable in core content areas as well.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

124
During the observation of the English class, students spent approximately 80% of the time
working in groups presenting their writing to other students for feedback and revision. In
another class, students were asked questions by the teachers and immediately went into a
structured collaboration in pairs. Each student took time answering the question and then shook
each other’s hand with what was called a Cool Job Handshake and said, “thank you for sharing.”
One student said:
Our teachers usually give us questions and then tell us to talk with our partners or get into
our groups. In Government, she gives us chapters to read and we [our group] have to
come up with a lesson plan to teach the entire class.
One student summed it up when she stated, “Honestly, people are friendly here. It might be that
we are an arts pathway and are active together. We get to know more people and experience
how to work as a group.”
This same level of dedication was observed among teachers. In one key observation of
the staff preparing for Senior Defenses, the culture of collaboration was clearly evident. The
purpose of the staff meeting was to calibrate how teachers would score students during their
senior presentations. For this meeting, one student had volunteered to do an early senior defense.
Teachers arrived early and were ready to start on time. The room was packed, but orderly. One
group of teachers worked on setting up the room, while another set up the technical aspects of
the filming the event. Another small group helped the student prepare. Before starting the
presentation teachers agreed upon ground rules for attentive behavior, went over rubrics, scoring
guides, and asked questions for clarity. Following the student presentation, they spent time going
over every score and judged it against each other and the rubric. The discussion focused on
ensuring rigor in scoring and while the discussion was vibrant and animated, the level of
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

125
communication remained respectful and purposeful. In interviews, teachers confirmed the
culture of collaboration. One teacher said, “I think over the years our understanding of Linked
Learning has grown, so now all grade levels work together. Each grade level team works to
develop interdisciplinary projects that have some real world or career focus.” Another teacher
reiterated this when she said, “We are a very collaborative staff and very communicative.”
There seems to be deeply developed expectations for collaboration. The CTE teacher explained,
“we also go to every professional development session. We are expected to be there. We are
welcomed there.” This culture of collaboration seems to be aided by the Linked Learning
adoption, but was perceived to be part of the culture from the creation of the school. One of the
founding teachers described the inception of AHS as:
a lot of very intense meetings. More than expected. It was lots of working together to
plan and far beyond our paid hours. So the first year was rough, but I think that is why we
are so tight now. I think the way the school was set up originally was to be collaborative.
The continuation of a collaborative culture with teachers is purposeful and new teachers are
initiated into it from the start. New teachers spend time observing veteran teachers’ classrooms.
This seems to have an impact on the collaborative culture as observed from one teacher’s
reaction to her visit:
She came in and saw we were doing small groups with a US History project. She walks
up and tells me she can’t believe I don’t have to tell the students very much. They are
making a plan and moving on. It’s true, everyone has a role, but it’s not just me. They
learn that here at AHS.
As in other areas of findings in this study, it is a symbiosis of faculty and school cultures that
make for a powerful learning environment. One teacher observed, “I’m not entirely sure the kids
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

126
are cognizant of what’s going on with the teachers, but I have to wonder if some of the
collaborating between teachers just isn’t osmosis that goes to the kids.”
Distributive leadership. Collaboration is almost inextricably intertwined with processes
of distributive leadership. However, it is possible to have a collaborative school without a
distributive leadership model. At AHS, the distributive model of leadership has been a core
principal since the inception of the school as a pilot. Initially, AHS used multiple committees to
govern explained one teacher, “When we started this school we had separate committees. Some
were on discipline, some were on curriculum and such.” Later, AHS combined committees into
an Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) with representatives from every grade level and content
area. The ILT is lead by the principal, but acts as a governing body for the school. The ITL
meets twice each month and is responsible for aligning school curriculum, ensuring the school
budget aligns with AHS goals, sets the calendar for the years events, and creates the professional
development calendar in alignment with school identified needs. The faculty perception seems
to be the ILT is effective in representing the needs of the school. One teacher explained:
I used to just hate PD in my other school. But I think our leaders have done a good job,
the former principal, our current principal, and even the coordinator. But it’s not just
those three people on the ILT. We come together twice each month, sit down, and talk
about the direction of the school, instruction, what our PD needs to look like. We poll the
teachers a lot about and make decisions based on their feedback.
The pilot also has an outlined process for hiring that includes faculty and retains the right over
the district to elect a principal should the position be vacated. One of the founders of the school
explained:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

127
We started as a group of people that make decisions for our school. We have never been
top down. When we had to get a new principal, even as great as she is, there was a
training period where she had to be told that she didn’t get to make decisions yet, not
without talking with the teachers.
This was further reiterated by another teacher when he said:
I think the larger school community has the ability to speak out about larger and
important issues. I think we’ve been able to do that because of the very free climate we
have here. I am able to approach the principal and say I think there is a need here or
about something I’m interested in and she is very supportive of me and other ideas.
Processes.
As noted previously, a process is a set of steps or actions used to achieve an outcome.
AHS student outcomes play a significant role in determining what the stated goal for students
should be. Significantly, Linked Learning’s stated goal of preparing students to be college and
career ready is also clearly stated in the interviews. However, of the four significant processes
observed, three appeared to have the unstated outcome of creating a relevant educational
experience for students. The fourth process observed was focused on creating deep buy-in and a
sense of belonging for freshman students even before they started the year.
Senior portfolio defense. Of all the processes observed at AHS, the Senior Portfolio
Defense (SPD) seems to have the most significant impact on student and faculty perceptions
about what it means to be college and career ready. Starting in their freshman year, students are
guided in choosing projects or work they feel is representative of who they are as a student
and/or something they are proud of. The work is uploaded into an on-line portfolio through
Connect-Ed Studios and is housed for the duration of their time at AHS. At the end of their
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

128
senior year students are asked to choose two artifacts from their portfolio and defend their time at
AHS. The students sit before a panel of teachers, administrators, and invited school district
officials, and present their case for graduation. If a student does not pass the portfolio defense,
they cannot walk at graduation. However, if a student fails the defense or even a part of the
defense, they are given clear feedback with outlined steps in accordance with the rubric and can
re-defend. This researcher had the opportunity to observe in-class preparation for the defense,
mock senior defenses, teacher calibration sessions, and a full senior defense. What struck this
researcher was the intensity and rigor of the process and the adherence to high expectations. One
teacher said of the process:
Many students question the whole process of the senior defense and fight the whole way.
They will say, actually, many of them will say, you know, other schools don’t make us do
all these things. Why do you make it so hard for us? However, we are transparent. We
tell them they are going to college next year and many professors don’t think kids are
coming prepared for the rigors of college. We do this because we love you and want you
to be as prepared as possible.
Recognizing that many students will be challenged by the process, AHS puts many
scaffolds are in place to foster success. The government teacher explained:
We let them know we believe in them, but we also arrange afterschool, one-on-one
sessions to help them out. We give them deadlines to make sure they are on track. Even
the many projects and presentations throughout their time at AHS are designed to help
them prepare.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

129
Another teacher explained the process:
As students are selecting their artifacts for their defenses, we’ve developed a proposal
form so teachers can help them select and then sign off. We didn’t have this in previous
year, but it has helped us avoid students using artifacts that don’t meet the criteria. Then
before their defense, students have to put together a portfolio that demonstrates their
work and their reflections. We are striving to make the preparation process meaningful.
In three of the classroom observations, the researcher observed the process of supporting
students for the SPD. In those classrooms, students were writing, re-writing, rehearsing with
fellow students, getting feedback and incorporating it into their presentation. In another class,
students were watching a video of a fellow student, who had volunteered to do her defense for
the teacher calibration meeting and be filmed. The film was being used to help students give
feedback and reflect on their own defenses. It was powerful to watch students grapple with how
to bring together content, reflections, and presentation skills in one product. During the actual
SPD, students were pushed to explain the relevance of their artifact choices and relevance to
their life. Some of the questions were: tell us what the assignment was and what you learned
from it; what were the skills you were supposed to learn and demonstrate; How will these skills
help you in your career? How does this artifact connect to the AHS outcomes? Can you talk
about your weaknesses and how you plan to overcome them? The questions were tough and
teachers were not apt to allow for weak answers. In two SPDs the researcher watched, one
student passed and the other failed one section. It was reported to the researcher the student did
return and passed the section. The opportunity to fail and get back up and try again seems to be
an important component of the process. One teacher concluded:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

130
It is at the end, when they are getting feedback that they get it. Before their defense they
want to know why we don’t just give them their diploma, after all they completed their
classes. They have been socialized to think that they did their work and got points, not
just it’s time to move on. This is a foreign concept for them. However when they
actually go through it and pass, that’s when they get it.
Mock interviews. The mock interview process is a key experience for all juniors at AHS
and one of the most visible Linked Learning activities. The Work Based Learning Coordinator
at AHS leads the process in conjunction with advisory and English teachers. Using the Career
Development curriculum from Connect-Ed Studios, teachers guide students through a series of
lessons that cover Career awareness, career preparation on professionalism, resume writing, job
application, and interviewing skills. Throughout the first semester, students work on creating a
resume based on their current skills and experiences. During the second semester students are
introduced to two fictional companies looking for new employees and informed they will be
using these companies as a guide for understanding the job search process. Students pick one of
the companies they are interested in working for and are guided in creating a cover letter specific
to that companies needs. During advisory, students have multiple opportunities to practice their
interview skills.
For the actual mock interview, industry partners and school district officials volunteer to
interview students. Interviewers are prepared ahead of time with a short bio of the two possible
companies students will be interviewing for and instructed to role play a hiring manager or
owner of the company the student has chosen. Volunteers are given the resume and cover letter
for the students they will be interviewing and suggested interview questions. Students arrive
dressed in business attire. Once they are interviewed, the interviewers score their performance
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

131
against a rubric while the students are there. Once completed, the interviewer has an opportunity
to give both positive feedback and tips for improvement. Students who complete all the steps are
given an opportunity to apply for summer internships if available.
The mock interview process is seen as an important component of AHS and their Linked
Learning program. The 11
th
grade English teacher explained:
Our work-based coordinator brought in people for the mock interview. Even my husband
and friends have participated, and they thought this year was the best the kids have ever
done. In the beginning, students didn’t want to do, but when they had the experience, it
was really positive for them. I mean, to shake somebody’s hand, someone you don’t
know and talk to them and try to convince them you are the person you need. That is
powerful.
The experience is perceived to be relevant and powerful preparation for AHS students. One
teacher related a story of how the experience was uniquely preparing students for the real world.
She said:
Two of our students went to an interview for One Voice, an organization that helps you
get into colleges. They related how of all the students from other schools, they were the
only two dressed professionally. They were the only ones that walked in and introduced
themselves and shook somebody’s hand. I mean, all of those things they had done in the
mock interview was what they carried through to the interview with One Voice. And,
they both got into One Voice and are going to get help with college applications and
more.
The Mock interview emerged as a key process in bringing immediate relevancy to the school
experience. However, no questions were directly asked of students, therefore, no direct student
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

132
responses were gathered. In future studies, the mock interview process would be worthy of a
more focused study.
Theater production team competition. Although few specific data emerged regarding
students or teachers experiences with this process, it is noteworthy in that it is one more example
of the systemization of AHS and Linked Learning principles put into action.
AHS produces two major theater events each year. For each event students in the arts
career technical path form teams of three: one set designer, one costume designer, and one
lighting designer. Using the chosen play as a guide, the cooperative groups create a presentation
proposal for the play. For the presentation, they must have a full model mock-up of the set,
renderings of the costumes, and a detailed plan for lighting and how it will enhance the thematic
issues of the play. Prior to the competition, industry professionals mentor the students. The
CTE teacher explained:
There are lots of opportunities for them to work with professionals that come in. We have
a friend of mine that works as the national electrician at Kirk Douglas Theater. He has
been a lighting mentor. Another friend is a professional costume designer for the Los
Angeles Opera and she comes in and works with our kids.
On the day of the competition, a panel of theater professionals also comes in and listens to the
presentations. They judge the presentations and choose one group to lead the work for the
production. The CTE set design and costume classrooms become the workforce to see the
chosen vision through. This was observed in the CTE class where groups of students were
building the set for the upcoming play, working out design problems from the original mock up
designs and drawings, and sewing costumes and fitting them to the mannequins. The impact on
students was noted by the student who said:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

133
I am the costume designer and I have to learn to collaborate with others. I have to work
with the lighting designer and stage designer. It taught me to be open minded. For
instance, the set designer put a slide on the set and I imagined how that would work with
my costumes. Typically, I have a hard time working with others. This really forced me to
learn how to work closely and respectfully with others.
The relevancy to the real world is at the heart of this process. The CTE teacher connected it to
work as well:
You know, the theater world runs at night and it would be very hard for our students to
have all of these experiences. So, it’s been really great that we run our own production
company. And we try and keep it as professional, as close to the real word as you can
get. Students have to clock in and out. We give them job titles. My seniors, fight for
those coveted positions of set, costume, and lighting designer. And you know, we treat
them like that. They are given these responsibilities and they have to fulfill those
commitments.
Research Question 3
What are the unique elements within Artistic High School that support student
engagement?
Pilot school model.
The initial impetus for this study was to look at a high performing Linked Learning high
school to understand the role engagement plays at the school. One surprising finding that
emerged from the data was the significance of the AHS pilot school model and structures that
seemed to play a more significant role in school engagement than Linked Learning. This is not
to say the researcher found Linked Learning to not have a significant impact. However, Linked
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

134
Learning was adopted after the inception of AHS as a pilot school and was not part of the
original plan. In addition, the original impetus for adopting Linked Learning seems to have been
the grant money that came with the adoption and a belief that the community would be able to
use the money to enhance their existing arts and theater program. One founding teacher
explained the early adoption and teacher perceptions about it when she told the researcher:
We didn’t start out AHS as a Link Learning school. It came two, maybe three years later.
Our first principal came to us at a meeting at the end of the year and said there was this
new thing called Linked Learning and it’s something we already kind of do anyway and
there’s money for training and other things. I think when people heard money; everyone
was like, sure, what ever, lets do it. It was a bad economic year and some teachers were
getting pink slips, so we thought the money might be able to help.
She further explained that when they actually had to look at what the expectations for Linked
Learning were going to be, there was a lot of contention. Significantly, she believed they made it
through that time due to the fact they had already set up the school to be highly collaborative and
with distributive leadership. Therefore, this researcher found that the Pilot School model is a
unique element of AHS that supports engagement in a significant way. The study of the impact
of the pilot school model on engagement deserves its own study, but for purposes of this study a
brief outline of a few significant features and possible impact on AHS will be outlined.
The pilot school model is publicly stated as a joint teacher’s union and district initiative
to encourage innovation and relieve overcrowding at downtown high schools (LAUSD, 2017).
However, many teachers mentioned it was also created to counter the growth of charters in the
district. Pilot schools were envisioned to be innovative, vision and mission driven, small with
between 400 and 500 students, research based, equitable, student centered with high
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

135
expectations, rigorous curriculum, and empower students to be responsible for their own learning
in an effort to raise engagement and intrinsic motivation. They were also mandated to partner
with parents, be professional learning communities with a focus on shared decision-making, and
self-governed and led (LAUSD, 2017). After a review of the previous findings in this chapter
with themes that closely resemble the pilot school mandates, it is easy to understand how this
researcher came to conclude one of the largest impacts on student engagement at AHS was likely
due to the deeply embedded pilot school model. Even one student’s perception of the
importance of being a pilot school was clear when she said, “Coming to AHS was exciting,
because I had never been to a pilot school before, so I’m always on time, never late, and always
doing my stuff.”
Out of the pilot school model, specific autonomies should be noted as significant for
AHS.
• Scheduling. AHS uses a block schedule Tuesday through Thursday to accommodate
the workshop and PBL model of instruction. One teacher said, “I now hate Fridays
because there is barely enough time, you know, a one-hour block is just impossible if
you are doing projects.” The schedule is also distinct from the district in that
teacher’s meet for PD twice each week, One day of which takes place on Friday
morning when students have a late start and accounts for not having a block schedule
on that day.
• Time commitment. AHS pilot stipulates that students will give an additional 40 hours
each year to working on theater productions. They can log their time as actors, set
designers, stage managers, costumes designers and other similar activities. Students
seem to take this serious. One teacher pointed out, “I have kids that do, like, 300
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

136
hours. So many of our kids are so into it that I have to tell them to go home, because
I need to go!” Teachers also commit to additional time over and beyond their district
paid schedule for PD, committee work, production work, and other similar activities.
• Staffing. Pilot schools are given significant autonomy over hiring of staff and
administration. When teachers are hired they agree to a shortened version of the
regular district union contract. Teachers can be asked to leave the pilot school at the
end of the year if they are found to not uphold the mission and vision of the pilot.
This is significant and could have a major impact on school culture.
Small school model.
The pilot model also mandates a school size of 400 to 500 students. At AHS school size
emerged as a constant theme in all student and teacher interviews. Teachers often connected the
small size to the caring and family like culture. They also mentioned it as a perk. One teacher
said:
It takes a lot to work here. You have to be willing to do all this [projects, performances,
PD, extra time], but in exchange we get a lot in return. We get smaller class sized and
freedom. We get to know the kids really well. You are very noticeable here. I mean, we
have a graduating class of only 100 students each year.
Another teacher similarly pointed out:
I think because we are small and that the principal can know every kid is part of it. It is
an amazing thing when the principal knows everybody’s name. We are so small it’s also
hard to get away with stuff.
Students were as forthright about the effects of a small school. One student said, “AHS is so
small you get to meet a lot of people and then you get to know them well. I guess there is no
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

137
bullying in this school because we’re a small school.” Another student repeated almost word for
word the same feeling, “At bigger schools, you might run into new people everyday. But at
AHS, everyday we see the same people over and over. I guess that contributes to the fact that
there’s no bullying here, because everyone know each other.” The theme of a caring culture was
also seen in light of the small school feature of AHS. One of the students said, “Here at AHS,
because it’s small, you get to spend a lot of time with teachers. You get to know them on a
personal level. They become like a friend and you can talk to them about anything.”
State of the art professional facilities.
The CTE teacher was previously quoted about the level of professionalism and real world
application of the way they run, what they call, their own production company. She spoke about
how titles, job descriptions, and responsibilities mimic the real world and believed AHS is able
to further create a true realistic world experience is because their facilities are of the highest
caliber and far surpass the resources many professional companies in Los Angeles. The facilities
include the historic full size and fully restored theater. From velvet seats to a proscenium that
rivals the best opera house, the theater is a jewel and point of pride for faculty and staff. The
theater’s staging area is two stories high and can accommodate full size professional sets. It also
contains a state of the art lighting and sound system with a fully integrated control booth. The
theater has dressings rooms and multiple access points for actors. Behind the theater is an extra
wide, two story hallway that connects the set design and construction workshop, which allows
for professional sets and large groups of people to maneuver. The workshop is fully equipped
with state of the art machinery, where students construct all sets for the shows. There is a
loading dock attached to the workshop to allow for the entry of wood, machines, and other
supplies. Next to the set workshop is the costume shop. While not as large as the former, it is
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

138
fully equipped with all the materials, mannequins, sewing machines, and storage needed to create
full sets of professional costuming for the school’s productions. In addition to the workshops,
actors have their own rehearsal and practice room that can double as a ballet/dance studio.
Finally, the school also has a small black box theater that serves as a space for experimental
theater and additional rehearsal space when needed. Oddly, very few students or teachers spoke
about the facilities and seemed to take them for granted. The one exception was the CTE teacher
who remembered what it was like before they had the facilities:
When we started, we had a costume shop in a tiny closet in the back of the former
auditorium. I have worked my butt off in order to get us from that tiny little closet to
having facilities where you can actually do something. We used to have to drag costumes
and sewing machines out of this little storage room, set them up in a poorly lit hallway,
and build costumes like that. We had to do a lot of the work at home and it was all over
my living room. And so, now, to have a hundred different design areas is a huge step.
Thematic arts and theater school.
Linked Learning is traditionally noted for helping schools create an industrial connection
and theme. However, the arts and theater focus of the school existed before Linked Learning and
was integral to AHS becoming a pilot school, as it fulfilled the pilot initiative mandate for
student-centered educations tied to real world pathways with relevance to the world (LAUSD,
2017). There was abundant data from observations and interviews to support the idea that the
arts and theater focus have created a foundation for deeper engagement at AHS. One student
stated, “We are a performing artistic high school, right? So to incorporate everything into one
project, it just makes sense.” Another student spoke about how being part of an art school
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

139
allowed people and even teachers to express themselves, which she felt created a stronger
bonding to the community. One student mentioned the connection to real world application:
I’m related to the singers and actors. We all work hard no matter what. We learn
different stuff that could help us with our future and jobs. We get skills that eventually,
no matter what you are doing are going to help you later on in the future.
This was strongly reiterated by another student when she said:
I think everything I do here is going to have purpose later on and what I want to continue
doing. Acting skills are always going to be there. Construction is helping us to always
have a way to figure problems out. Those skills are going to be there.
Teachers felt as strongly as students about the arts and theater focus. The CTE teacher spoke
about the culture of the theater and that there is a certain kind of bonding that comes from
working together on a production. One comment from a teacher alluded to the pathway helping
to unite students that didn’t necessarily come to AHS for the arts when she said:
So, students who don’t even choose the acting pathway are placed in it when they come
to AHS. Initially they fight it and resist for a long time because it’s a challenge to them.
But it is very consistent that by the 12
th
grade they’ll say that the acting classes and
productions help them find their voice, which is really our model here at AHS.
These perceptions were borne out in the observations, where students routinely were involved in
theater arts skills. Perhaps, most strikingly, were how many of the artifacts chosen for senior
defense to show growth and relevance were based on some aspect of the arts pathway, whether it
was acting, costume design, set construction, or writing and producing films. This researcher’s
overall impression of AHS was that there is a deep connection to the pathway by the majority of
staff and students.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

140
AHS student outcomes.
The central role of the AHS student outcomes for students and faculty clearly emerged in
observations and interviews. The AHS student outcomes are a set of skills created by the faculty
that students at AHS practice throughout their four years. The educational outcomes, in
conjunction with the common core, are the standards that guide instruction at AHS. As seniors,
AHS students are asked to reflect on their educational career and show how they have met these
standards. In doing so, they prepare for the intense self-study, called the senior portfolio defense,
that will be needed for their post-high school careers.
The AHS Outcomes are:
• Communication: AHS grads articulate ideas in a clear and organized fashion in
multiple ways.
• Citizenship: AHS grads contribute to the global and local community as culturally
aware and informed citizens and leaders.
• Collaboration: AHS grads maintain accountability within the dynamics of a team.
• Critical thinking: AHS grads strategically and systematically solve problems through
analysis and inquiry.
• Forward thinkers: AHS grads independently set goals and implement a plan and
reflect on their current academic and post-secondary goals.
The AHS Outcomes were clearly visible in every classroom visited, in the hallways, and
in the main office. The outcomes are also posted on the student website and used for recruiting
new students. The school podcast also displays them on their website as the foundation for why
the podcast exists. There seems to exist a very strong culture around the outcomes and a
perceived belief in the impact they have on student learning. One teacher said:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

141
We have our AHS outcomes. They are what we want our students to walk away with.
And we have these posters in the room that list them and have a brief overview of what
they are. But we spend a long time going over the more comprehensive bulleted list to
explain what we mean, for instance, what we want students to develop within
communication skills. We explain it’s not just talking, but being able to express yourself
orally and in writing. But we also constantly ask our students to reflect on how they have
met or mastered the outcomes.
The outcomes feel embedded in a natural way. One teacher mentioned hitting all the outcomes
with an interdisciplinary project in such a way that it seemed planning for the outcomes was
taken for granted. For students, the outcomes were clearly tied to their sense of transformation
and finding their voice. One student said that without the AHS focus on outcomes, “I wouldn’t
have become the person I am and I’m very proud to become this person.” Another student
mention how he is able to do a variety of things because of the focus on the outcomes. Upon
reflection, this researcher could see how this study could have been organized around the AHS
outcomes, as they are aligned with the research on engagement and the data from the study has
shown AHS to exhibit the qualities the outcomes were created to produce.
College counselor.
Most public high schools have a college counselor. However few can claim to have the
California Counselor of the year. The role of counseling in a Linked Learning or Pilot school
model deserves a study of its own. However, the counselor was referred to often in the
interviews and, while the researcher did not interview or directly observe her for this study, he
did use her office as a workspace after school and observed that her office was always filled with
students working on essays and applications for college. On at least 10 occasions, the researcher
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

142
observed her working with students until 6 pm. This last year AHS had a 100% application rate
and a 71% acceptance rate into the UC system. One student said, “We honestly have counselors
here and our college counselor really cares about us and communicates with us.” Another student
attributed the counselor for her staying at school and coming on time:
The counselor gives me advice, but then actually helps me to sign up for programs like
EIP, which helps a lot of students with money and even getting to school on time.
Thanks to her, I obtained EIP help and I’m really grateful, because without that I
wouldn’t know what to do next. It was a push to keep going.
A fellow colleague was equally effusive about the counselor:
Over the years the counseling team has gotten stronger and stronger. We have a really,
really strong college counselor and the students love her. They all thank her in
graduation. They all write a little graduation speech that gets read for them as they walk
across the stage and her name comes up in almost all of them, because we have a really
high college going rate, 71%, and the students know allot of it is due to her.
Linked Learning.
The pilot model appears to have had the biggest impact on engagement through the
structures, arts focus, governance, hands-on approach to learning, schedules, etc. However, the
adoption of Linked Learning has emerged as am important additional element, which has helped
AHS hone and even broaden its vision and mission to include career readiness on the same level
with college readiness. It has also brought a more focused approach to interdisciplinary PBL and
the role it plays in career readiness. While teachers interviewed said Linked Learning was still
being defined, there was general agreement it had strengthened their original program. One
teacher said, “Linked Learning did help to galvanize who we are. I think it kind of layered on to
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

143
our already established model. I want to say that we were already collaborative, but it helped us
to create stronger departments.” When pressed about what Linked Learning was she said, “The
stakes are higher in Linked Learning, because you have these big interdisciplinary projects.”
Two of the teachers, when asked about Linked Learning described a project involving history,
acting, and English and a third described a project involving math, science, history, and English.
Another teacher agreed the faculty’s understanding of Linked Learning had grown over the
years, but when pressed, also focused on how all grade level teams now worked together to
develop interdisciplinary projects that have a real world or career focus. The same held true for
students, who all referred to interdisciplinary projects when asked about Linked Learning. One
student, when asked, focused on PBL and the interdisciplinary approach and gave a long
explanation about one project involving Heifer International that incorporated English, Math,
and Design. Another student spoke about how she didn’t know what Linked Learning was when
she came to the school, but now really enjoyed the interdisciplinary nature of the projects. When
asked if teachers created learning opportunities other than lecturing, one student said, “I believe
it’s mostly Linked Learning. You get the freedom to choose what you want to create. And
basically, you learn how it relates to other classes and how they all link together in our projects.”
One of the main components of Linked Learning is the connection to the real world and
to the career readiness skills. While this aspect of Linked Learning was evident in processes like
the mock interviews and project judging that used professionals as judges, the data was less
suggestive of this aspect being fully developed as part of the culture. However, there did seem to
be a connection to Linked Learning and relevancy. When pressed on the subject, one teacher
reflected:
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

144
I would say the component of Linked Learning is what makes it different from project
PBL. It is collaboration with other teachers, but it also has that work-based component.
But we have found internships to be almost impossible and have focused on bringing
professionals to us. There are a lot less legal issues with that.
This aspect of Linked Learning was seen with CTE and using outside professionals to mentor
students. Another teacher also connected the interdisciplinary projects with a real world and
career focus through the use of professionals, whom she described as, “coming in and giving
feedback on projects or professionals coming in and helping student in the development of the
project, that is part of what we do as a Linked Learning school.” Although students did not seem
to make a strong connection to the work based component of Linked Learning at AHS,
significantly, they did relate their interdisciplinary projects to a sense of relevancy in their lives
and futures.
Two key and unique structures that appear to have an impact on engagement is the
addition of a part time Work Based Learning Coordinator (WBLC) and an arts industry board.
The Work Based Learning Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that teachers have access to
industry professionals to help with project creation and judging. She is also responsible for
helping guide teachers and students through the process of the yearly mock interview. Another
component of her job is to conduct the regular meetings for the Arts Industry board. The board
is made up of local professionals in the arts and provides industry guidance and volunteers when
needed for projects. One of the teachers described the impact of the WBLC when she said:
The WBLC has helped a lot because, we are spread so thin around here in terms of what
we’re trying to accomplish. So, she really helps us when she brings in professionals to do
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

145
mock interviews, give feedback on resumes, or even giving students feedback on their
Linked Learning projects.
Research Question 4
To what extent do students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day?
As noted in the research, motivation and engagement are often understood as symbiotic
partners where motivation answers the question of why someone is doing a task, while
engagement is the connection between a person and the activity. The idea of engagement as an
action through participation in an activity is at the center of this research question and is referred
to as flow. Flow is where the moment of engagement is characterized by a loss of time and
feelings of great interest and even joy. When a person is in flow, they can stay engaged in the
activity and disregard time, food, and other interests or needs. Research question 4 focused on
the extent to which students perceived to be in a state of flow. However, the limitations of a
qualitative study make it difficult, even when there is the appearance and perception of flow, to
determine if a student is in an actual state of flow or responding to other internal or external
motivating factors. For instance, it is quite conceivable that a student could push through a
difficult task due to fear of a failing grade, parental scorn, or peer pressure in cooperative group
settings. In trying to uncover rich and illuminating data for research question 4 it was important
for the researcher to focus on the student’s perception of being in a state of flow, as it was the
most reliable source of internal information. However, teacher perceptions were also important,
as they knew their students well and offered rich insights about possible motivations for their
perception of flow. Finally, the researcher’s multiple observations revealed perceived moments
of flow as denoted by intense engagement, problem solving, and an exhibition of positive, even
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

146
joyful attitudes. Triangulation of this data was crucial in revealing an emergent and consistent
pattern of flow at AHS.
It is important to note, research has shown some activities better lend themselves to a
state of flow or deep engagement. For instance, computer labs and workshop spaces have been
noted as environments where flow is perceived to happen more frequently. Thus, for this study,
the researcher thought it was important to observe both workshop classrooms and traditional
academic classes to investigate if there was a difference in flow and what factors might
contribute to the difference, if any. Further, the research on flow indicates that students are aided
in achieving this state when provided with mastery experiences that contain clear modeling by
someone already successful at the task and scaffold key information. Therefore, the researcher
intentionally looked for opportunities to observe students in challenging activities where they
were pushed to stretch themselves beyond their current limits.
Study results.
The student interviews were key in helping the researcher identify how students
perceived flow within their day. It also became apparent students were metacognitive about flow
and understood the role it played in their AHS experience. As anticipated, all the student
interviews contained moments where they described flow in their workshop or acting classes.
One student describing his experience in set design and building offered:
Sometimes we even come in on Saturday to finish building sets. I remember many times
when we were building for four hours straight and then we take a break, but those four
hours prior to our break feel as if it was non-existent — it didn’t feel like four hours —
not even one hour. And then you are just building and building and, you know, hanging
lights, doing all these things and I completely lose track of time.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

147
Another student from the same CTE class said:
Sometimes, I’m told the class is over and I’m like, where did time go. I guess because
we’re so engaged in our work, most of the students are given a task and then we complete
it. And most of the time, you know, time goes by quick.
One student described flow through the process of losing herself in a challenging moment of
acting when she said:
I used to have stage fright, but now, when I perform, I get myself involved in the
character and struggle to connect myself with that character. That is when I actually
perform and I forget everything that is around me and just do it. I see myself as the
character and feel like the character and that puts me into an emotional connection where
I literally don’t remember anything. And that is amazing, because afterwards you say,
whoa, I actually did that. It is so cool.
This aspect of students losing themselves in an activity was clearly evident in the observation of
the set design classroom where they were working on building the set to the play the school
would soon be doing. During that observation, one group was so focused on solving a difficult
design aspect of the staging that the only time I saw them break from the activity was when one
of the students briefly looked at her phone, but then went right back to working on the problem.
This was also seen with a different group that struggled with a set of stairs and platform that had
to hold multiple people at a time. The three students worked at it until they got it and then had to
be reminded multiple times to stop and clean up at the end of the class. The hands-on and
activity-based learning seems to propel these high school students to stay in the moment and
holds their attention much longer than in other settings. During an interview with one of the
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

148
students she explained that she had completely lost track of time because she was so intent on
solving a problem:
It was a new skill, because I had never worked with pipe, so I was like, how are we going
to do this? And then the teacher said draw it to twelve feet and we were like-how long
does this or that piece have to be and we were trying to figure out how each part would fit
with the other. It seemed like everything just flew apart and then all came back together.
Sometimes you focus until you realize what’s going on and nothing else matters until you
figure it out.
In an observation of the acting class, the researcher entered at the start of the period. The
class entered and the acting teacher took no time in getting started. He seemed to set the
conditions for flow when he said, “Here’s my plan. We will work straight for forty-five minutes.
We are not going to do what we have done already. We are going to work on something you
haven’t done.” A few groans are made and he continues, “I know — forty-five minutes, but we
can do it. How many of you have your scripts out and ready?” All hands go up. The teacher
quickly called out working groups and within a minute every group was working on a different
aspect of the script. For the next thirty minutes each group worked without a pause. Although
there were moments when they would encounter a problem, it never stopped the flow of the
group. One group realized one of their members hadn’t been there for an earlier practice and
they immediately went into problem solving. One student said, “Maria, what do you think we
should do?” To which, the other replied, “I think we should have them circle over to the side.”
The first student said, “Great idea. Did everyone hear her? Good idea.” They immediately were
back into the script. Just before the bell rang, the researcher observed one student looking up in
surprise at the time and saying, “Wow, that passed quickly.” The other students looked up and a
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

149
murmur of disbelief went through the class with many variances of the same theme being
spoken, at which time they packed up and left for their next class.
One aspect that lends itself to students being able to lose themselves in these kinds of
activities is that the school has the physical resources, tools, and materials to effectively engage
students without the disruption of not having the proper tools or space as noted earlier.
However, even in the academic classrooms, where activity was more idea based, students also
experienced significant moments of flow. One student when asked about flow or losing track of
time in her government class said, “It happens when it is very intense. Especially, if we are in a
deep debate about something we care about. The teacher even has to stop us. It can be 1:30 and
then suddenly it’s 3:00 and school is done.” When asked if she experienced flow in other
classes, she mentioned acting and English. Another student when asked what she thought
accounted for flow offered:
I think it is because teachers give us the freedom to do projects. I also think most of the
activities we do here are challenging in their own sense because I know everyone must
struggle in one learning area or another. So we’re often challenged in a way we have to
process something or have to analyze something. Sometime we have to use different sets
of skills rather than just academic.
One teacher reiterated this observation when explaining what an engaging classroom was for her:
When I go downstairs to the design classes, I am wowed to see every student, not just
working on something, but doing something they care about, something they see some
sort of value in and they are taking pride in what they do, why they are there, you know,
doing some sort of sculpture or painting. They lose track of time where they’ll say, like,
Oh wow, it’s time to go already. Basically, they are active in some way. Either they are
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

150
doing something, talking about something important to them, thinking through something
challenging.
When pressed about other subjects, she said:
I’m not comfortable with lecturing all the time. Knowing how learning works… you
learn when you make connections. When we find ways for them to demonstrate their
knowledge in ways that might be more relevant for them, like creating a rap or a
simulation of an event, or a debate, then I think you are creating learning experiences
where they can lose themselves more than if I were lecturing the whole time.
Discussion of the Findings
The purpose of this chapter was to report the findings from the case study of Artistic
High School by examining the programs, policies, and procedures and other key factors that may
influence student engagement. The research questions served as a framework for the
organization of the results, data analysis, and findings. This chapter described the findings from
participant interviews, data analysis, observations, and surveys to answer the research questions
and illuminate important emerging themes.
The school-controlled factors for student engagement that were found at Artistic High
Schools were a deeply committed and student centered staff that extended their role beyond
teacher into mentor and even surrogate parent or friend. There was ample data to show faculty
and support staff holding high expectations for all students, being dogmatic about persistence
and completion of projects, and espousing a growth mindset that allowed students to take
significant academic risks. Structures and procedures like portfolio defense, interdisciplinary
project based learning were firmly embedded and students routinely were asked to show mastery
through multiple formats.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

151
Student Outcomes were thoroughly embedded into the daily culture and life of students
and faculty. The outcomes were thoughtfully connected to the school vision and mission and
used as a framework to scaffold college and career readiness skills required for graduation and
the final portfolio defense. Importantly, the student learning outcomes seem to be as important
to students, as to faculty, and were a tool for metacognitive reflection on their growth and
experience at the school. Thus serving to increase student awareness of their own role in the
educational experience and ultimate perceived self-actualization and transformation into capable
young adults.
Adult participants were enthusiastic about and deeply committed to their work and school
community. Faculty engagement was perceived to be a result of the autonomies and freedoms
they experience as members of the Artistic High School Faculty. The leadership was seen to
support this through the use of highly collaborative practices and distributive leadership.
Further, the adult connection to the performing and theater arts emerged as an additional factor in
their commitment, sense of belonging, and engagement at the school.
Students at Artistic High School expressed deep connection to their school, but more
importantly a drive for learning and succeeding after high school. This drive to learn and remain
engaged was perceived to come from a pedagogy that honored student choice and autonomy, a
faculty that was sensitive to the cultural and generational needs of the students, a curriculum that
was project based, interdisciplinary, and connected to real world outcomes, and a deep sense of
supportive peer and adult relationships.
While Linked Learning was a major focus of this study, the data analysis indicated many
of the perceived factors of engagement, for both student and faculty, were attributed to the
organizational and cultural structures initiated through the Pilot School reform effort and
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

152
instituted many years before the adoption of Linked Learning. The efforts to create a pilot
school necessitated deep collaboration on the part of district and union leadership and was a
result of hard fought negotiations that resulted in the creation of a limited teacher contract, which
laid the pathway for broad autonomies at the school site level. Further, the creation of a pilot
school demanded a cohesive vision and passionate teacher driven organization before the school
could be authorized. Artistic High School was created on a foundation that included the multiple
and distinct elements required by the new reform model. The researcher is cognizant that
Artistic High School is unique in its autonomies and the freedom it enjoys for innovation, hiring,
scheduling, and curriculum design. However, the data analysis and findings from the case study
indicate programs, practices, and procedures that are perceived to have a deep impact on student,
faculty, and stakeholder engagement can be implemented into non-pilot schools. While the
unique organizational history of Artistic High School cannot be replicated, there is much to learn
from their experience that should be thoughtfully considered by schools and districts to increase
engagement.
Although the pilot model emerged as a significant factor at Artistic High School, Linked
Learning also proved to be an integral factor in increasing student engagement, especially
through providing strong structures around project based and interdisciplinary learning. After an
examination of the methodology used for this study, it is important to note the potential some
findings were influenced by the researchers limitations. Strikingly, the data collected did not
reveal as strong a connection between Linked Learning and career readiness. While, mock
interviews and project judging emerged as important practices within the career readiness
curriculum, the data were less robust than expected by the researcher. The researcher
acknowledges the probability the survey and interview questions lacked the specific inquiry that
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

153
could have led to more robust data. Future researchers should consider including specific
questions about Flow to elicit richer and more robust details specific to Flow, as well as deeper
inquiry into possible connections within the Linked Learning framework.
Conclusion
Artistic High School is outperforming similar schools in the area and across the state.
Significantly, the study showed the school to have multiple indicators of engagement in the
behavioral, emotional, and cognitive domains as outlined by the theoretical framework created
for this study. Further, there was ample indication that students at Artistic High School
experienced a perceived deep sense of flow in both their career tech and academic courses on
many occasions. One expressed goal of educators is to create life long learners and AHS
students’ academic life often moved beyond the bell where students participated in long hours
after school in pursuit of deepening their abilities and learning. AHS is a school with an
established community of learners, both student and adult, that encourages, supports, and holds
each other to high standards and expectations creating the conditions for profound student
engagement.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

154
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
Summary
Achievement disparities between ethnic and racial groups have been a part of the
educational landscape for as long as the United States has endeavored to educate its citizens. For
more than a century now, founding educators, like John Dewey, have struggled to find solutions
for the disparities they saw emerging in a new and public American education system. However,
it was not until much later in our history that we decided these gaps were of importance to us as a
nation. Increasingly, since the Civil Rights Movement, we have collectively recognized that
these educational gaps are tightly aligned with a larger body of inequalities that non-white races
have endured. In 1980, with the publication of A Nation at Risk and the Bush presidential
initiative of No Child Left Behind, we began an era of accountability that focused on closing the
achievement gap between white and brown students that has endured until the present (Firestone
& Shipps, 2003). Currently, we are in an era where federal and state government, and even local
districts, look for possible solutions outside of traditional public school systems and unions. Out
of this struggle have come charters, pilots, and even voucher proposals, all with proponents that
promise their brand of reform is the silver bullet we have been looking for. However, for
practitioners of education, it is the application of promising theoretical research that drives much
of our work. We too, are looking for education’s elusive Rosetta Stone, which we hope may
provide a definitive understanding of how to unlock the secrets of pedagogies and methodologies
that will aid in closing the achievement gap. This study focused on the role of engagement in
and outperforming urban school, specifically, Artistic High School, a certified Linked Learning
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

155
high school that serves at-risk youth and endeavored to unlock promising strategies that might
influence instructional practice for the many students struggling in our educational system.
The Statement of the Problem
While there have been some overall improvements for students of all races, the gap has
doggedly persisted with a majority of black and Latino students across the United States still
lagging far behind their white counterparts (Torlakson, 2013). However, there are a small
handful of urban schools, serving at-risk black and Latino students, which are defying the
national achievement gap by outperforming their counterparts and producing students who are
college and career ready (Bell, 2001). While educational researchers and practitioners have
looked at a myriad of possible reasons for the persistence of the achievement gap, as well as
promising practices to close it, there has yet to be a definitive body of research that points to
universal solutions. There is, however, an increasing academic interest and emphasis on the role
student engagement has on providing powerful scaffolds and safety nets for at-risk students
(Finn & Zimmer, 2012). Building on earlier seminal work that sought to broaden the definition
of school engagement, a burgeoning body of more recent work has emerged to help coalesce a
multi-faceted understanding of what school engagement is and how it affects student outcomes,
both pre- and post-high school graduation (Furlong et al., 2003). In fact, research is
comprehensively clear that engagement is a critical factor in positive student outcomes (Shernoff
et al., 2003). This is crucially important as the opposite of engagement is disengagement, and
research is very clear that student disengagement is a primary factor in poor performance,
dropout rates, and even prison for black and Latino boys (Fenning & Rose, 2007). Further, in
multiple studies it has been shown to be a significant correlation between engagement and
achievement (Finn & Zimmer, 2012). While a comprehensive understanding of the many facets
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

156
of student engagement was beyond the scope of this study, there are commonalities among the
research that provides a basic framework in which to look at key aspects of engagement and how
it affects achievement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of engagement in student achievement
in an outperforming and certified Linked Learning urban school. The underlying motivation for
this study was to illuminate promising practices that may be factors in engaging students and
raising achievement. Research on engagement notes that educational practitioners intuitively
understand the role engagement plays and tend to be willing to implement promising practices
(Shernoff et al., 2003). While qualitative studies are not overtly generalizable, the purpose of
this study is to see what high achieving Linked Learning schools are doing differently and later
to examine if those promising practices would make a difference at other sites. Thus, for
purposes of this study, Artistic High School, a high performing urban, certified Linked Learning
high school was chosen.
Methodology
The relationship between student engagement and academic achievement was examined,
utilizing a multi-method qualitative approach through a case study to identify perceived factors
that have an effect on student learning and ultimately student achievement in an outperforming
certified Linked Learning high school. A bounded case study approach was applied to the study
of the relationship between academic achievement and student engagement. For the purposes of
this research Artistic High School served as the focus of study.
The researcher utilized the qualitative research method. The qualitative method creates a
thick and rich narrative that you cannot get from quantitative studies. Qualitative research
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

157
allows the researcher to explore areas of interest which may have not been considered before.
Because of the exploratory nature of qualitative research, components of engagement that were
not considered in the past may now be explored and documented, which may lead to additional
research.
This qualitative study utilized methodological triangulation that included: (1) surveys;
(2) interviews; (3) document reviews; and (4) observations. Surveys, interviews, and
observations were conducted with Artistic High School’s staff, students, and stakeholders.
Documents were analyzed for data on former practices with regards to student emotional,
behavioral, and cognitive engagement. Through a series of interviews and surveys, insight
emerged about the meaning participants assigned to the school’s programs, processes, and
practices that showed promise for improving student achievement. The researcher directly
observed the different engagement strategies in practice with students, teachers, and stakeholders
through site observations. The use of multiple sources of data and collection methods allows the
researcher to triangulate the data, a process that increases the reliability of the study’s findings.
Research Questions
The study was guided by four overarching research questions:
1. To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement
present in a high-performing urban school?
2. What school programs, processes and practices are perceived to contribute to student
engagement?
3. What are the unique elements within the school structure that support student
engagement?
4. To what extent do students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day?
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

158
Instrumentation
The relationship between student engagement and academic achievement was examined
utilizing a bonded qualitative case-study approach. A bounded case-study approach was
appropriate as the primary purpose of this study was to uncover and illuminate the possible
relational factors that may be at play between classroom practices and student engagement at a
high-performing Linked Learning school. The USC cohort team developed a thematic and
conceptual framework, which served as a framework for this study. All members off the USC
cohort used identical protocol tools and surveys for the study. Qualitative studies are unique to
the specific site studied and the results from the study cannot be generalized to other schools.
However, qualitative studies add to the existing body of research and can aid educators in the
field to gain insight, understand perceived factors, and expand probable interpretations of the
issues with student engagement in urban schools.
Data Collection
The researcher sought to develop a thorough understanding and picture of the factors that
contribute to student engagement in a outperforming urban Linked Learning high school. Prior
to beginning data collection, the researcher examined and appraised multiple school, district, and
state documents to understand and identify Artistic High School’s strengths and weaknesses.
The data collection for this study used teacher and student surveys, interviews of students and
staff, and observations of classrooms, staff meetings, professional development, and general
campus environment. The researcher spent ten days over the course of a month gathering data in
an attempt to understand what might be significant factors in Art High Schools ability to
outperform other urban and surrounding high schools. The data from document reviews,
surveys, observations, and interviews was triangulated to help create a thorough and clear
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

159
picture. This data collection process allowed the researcher to immerse himself in the school
community and gain a broad insight into the practices, procedures, and programs at Artistic High
School.
Findings
The study was conducted at Artistic High School, a small Linked Learning high school
created through the pilot school reform model. Themes that emerged in the study that supported
AHS as a school where students are engaged in behavioral, emotional, and cognitive domains
were relevant topics of interest with ample autonomy for personal expression, authentic reasons
to interact with adults and peers, creating a deep sense of community, high expectations and
accountability to learning and student outcomes, a perception of liberal acceptance, a deep sense
of belonging, and commitment to community.
The culture of Artistic High school has from the start been deeply committed to
collaborative practices. Collaboration among faculty had a deep impact on collaborative
approaches used in the classroom with students. These practices provided opportunities for
students to build social skills applicable to work environments they will someday be part of, but
also allowed for deeper relationships to form, providing a foundation for community and a
profound sense of belonging. The theater and performing arts company approach also provided
students with multiple opportunities to collaborate in real-world environments and
contextualized learning, thus increasing relevancy and purpose.
The small school and learning environment emerged as a significant theme that was
perceived to create an environment where empathetic and caring relationships were fostered and
students felt emotionally and physically safe. Additionally, the lower class size and intimate
nature of the peer and faculty relationships contributed to a learning environment where students
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

160
were encouraged to take academic and social risks and in turn, rose to the occasion. The
message of acceptance was key for student emotional safety. Overt messages of acceptance for
LGBT created less overt, but powerful cultural message that everyone one was an equally
accepted part of the AHS family and community.
The themes of autonomy and academic freedom were prevalent and extensive and
indicative of both student and faculty perceptions of engagement. The structures at the school
promoted academic freedom, where teacher led professional development, distributive
leadership, and ample time for collaborative work and decision-making was the norm. The
faculty and administration commitment to collaboration crossed over into the classroom, where
they provided students with daily and multiple opportunities to collaborate in authentic ways.
Additionally, the role of the pilot autonomies in the school’s structures emerged as an
unexpected, but significant finding. School site human resource autonomies ensured that the
AHS community hired and retained faculty committed to the schools vision and mission. The
shortened contract allows for teachers not demonstrating commitment to AHS ideals to be
removed at the end of any given year and returned to their former district school. Significantly,
these autonomies also include additional time commitment beyond the bell for both teachers and
students. However, the stated additional hours were routinely seen as a base and significant
more hours were given to the community projects and theater productions.
The role of the performance arts theme emerged as a cohesive factor in creating a
community of like-minded individuals committed to a singular school vision. The nature of the
theater theme and perception of those who were attracted to it was perceived to be a meaningful
factor in a community that not only accepted, but also relished diversity.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

161
Finally, the combination of pilot autonomies, commitment to the theater and performing
arts theme, and Linked Learning’s role in project based and interdisciplinary learning created the
conditions where students could make the connections between learning and the real world.
Relevancy was reinforced through authentic assessment that demanded deep reflection,
persistence, and high expectations from faculty and students alike. Faculty further supported
these outcomes by stepping away from the traditional role of stand and deliver pedagogy and
fully embracing their role as mentor and coach in a workshop model that was experiential,
hands-on, and provided multiple ways for students to show mastery and learning. AHS is a
model school where students are supported in and demonstrate engagement in the behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive domains routinely resulting in demonstrable deep learning and flow.
Recommendations for Policy or Practice
The research and data from this study support the implementation of specific programs,
procedures, and practices to increase student engagement in behavioral, cognitive, and emotional
domains. Many of the suggestions are easily implemented at the school site level, while others
would take a major commitment on the part of the local district to support deeper autonomy and
innovation.
School Site Recommendations
• Implement a portfolio defense for graduation. The portfolio defense allows students
and teachers to track work and accomplishment history, provides a system for
reflective practice, and promotes rigor and high expectations. A further step would
be for schools to work with k-8 feeder schools to implement portfolio defense at 5
th

and 8
th
grade. This would facilitate students entering the 9
th
grade with the habit of
reflective learning in place.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

162
• Curriculum should be infused with interdisciplinary and project based learning
opportunities. This would include moving pedagogy from a stand and deliver lecture
model to a mentor/coaching model.
• Collaborate on a clear vision and mission. School sites should take the sufficient time
to create a cohesive philosophical foundation and communicated to students, families,
and local community.
• Provide time and leadership support for deep faculty collaboration. Lesson studies,
calibration of rubrics, criteria, and grading practices, and time for interdisciplinary
projects are areas that need sufficient collaboration time to impact student
engagement.
• Adopt and incorporate student outcomes aligned to the school vision, mission, and
theme. Student outcomes should reflect the overall vision, be posted in classrooms
and around school and communicated regularly to students. School leadership should
maintain a focus on outcomes during professional development and staff meetings.
Outcomes should be tied to graduation standards to ensure full buy-in.
• Connect the mission and vision to a unifying thematic focus that has relevancy to
students’ lives. Arts, business, information technology, global or international
education, and other such themes provide coherence and relevancy to the curriculum.
Hiring practices should reflect the theme and seek out like-minded individuals with a
passion for the chosen theme.
• A distributive leadership model should govern schools. Building teacher leadership
and capacity is key to creating belonging and commitment with faculty. Committees,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

163
Instructional leadership teams, and governing boards are possible steps to teacher
empowerment.
• Commitment to specialized hands-on learning and training is a key factor in student
engagement. CTE, Linked Learning, and California pathways models all have
components that focus on relevant and focused hands-on learning and should be
considered as key functions in a high school.
• Adopt and embed a career readiness curriculum into the daily experience of students.
ConnectEd Studios works closely with Linked Learning schools and provides a
college and career readiness curriculum proven to raise achievement.
• Create a local governance board of community members connected to school vision,
mission, and theme. Forums for community participation through project planning
and evaluation create deep community buy-in and can provide valuable targeted
resources.
District and State Recommendations
• Districts should provide options for school autonomies. Pilot schools, shortened
union contracts, site based teaching hiring autonomy, and flexible scheduling allow
schools to create unified communities with deep commitment to vision and mission.
• Districts and the states should commit financially to small schools of no more than
500.
• Districts and states should commit to creating state of the art high school facilities
that provide teachers with all the tools and resources needed to prepare students for
college and career. State of the art schools increase belonging and commitment to
school community of both students and faculty.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

164
• Districts and states should commit resources to increase the current 500 to 1 ratio of
college and career guidance counselors to the recommended 250 to 1 or below.
Suggestions for Future Research
This case study illuminated many aspects of the role of engagement in an outperforming
Linked Learning high school. However, the data collection process also uncovered possible
factors and influences of student engagement outside the scope of the study. Based on this
researchers finding, there is much further research on the role of engagement in outperforming
Linked Learning high schools that could prove useful and enlightening:
• The role of Art High School’s pilot model was key in many of the programs,
processes, and procedures found in this study. Similar case studies should be
conducted in non-Linked Learning pilot schools to try to understand what unique
features exist in the pilot school model that influence student engagement
• Although not addressed in this study, it would be purposeful to understand to what
extent the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive domains influence one another. For
example, do teachers exhibit the same levels of commitment to students and their
success when the behavioral domain is dominated with anti-social or apathetic
attitudes? Is there one domain that has a bigger impact on student achievement or
that must be in place for the other domains to flourish?
• The role of distributive leadership and teacher led initiatives was key in how many of
Art High School’s staff felt empowered as educators and even exuberant about their
school community. A study focusing on perceived teacher role within school power
structures could illuminate how we create and structure new schools or reform
existing low performing schools.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

165
• The senior portfolio defense was key in creating a culture of reflection, high
standards, rigor, and relevancy and deserves a study of its own.
• Teachers indicated taking regular time to build community. A study on best practices
for building classroom and school communities would be worthy of a researcher’s
time.
Conclusions
Students, teachers, and leaders spend a great part of their daily life on school campuses
across country. In many instances, they are spending more time at school than with their own
families. It is imperative we create schools that are the center of the community and not holding
tanks until graduation. Engagement is key for both students and faculty. However, for schools
to truly engage all stakeholders, a deep commitment to the programs, practices, and processes
that create the conditions of engagement must be made at the state, district, and school site level.
Teachers and teachers unions must be prepared to allow for contractual flexibility in order to
provide a platform for school site autonomies. Districts must allow school sites more autonomy
over curriculum and pedagogy. States must provide financial resources to infrastructure and
more school site autonomy with budgets. LCFF and LCAP are a good start, but a great local and
site based vision and mission will never fully be developed and implemented without the
resources and autonomy to use those resources.
Linked Learning provides key elements that can help create the conditions of engagement
by providing a framework connected to an industrial theme and project based learning. The
industrial connection provides relevancy and can answer the question, “why do I have to learn or
do this?” However, creating relevancy for an urban student also requires a deep commitment to
cultural sensitivity and educators must be prepared to understand the unique circumstances,
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

166
cultures, and family backgrounds our students bring to school each day. Additionally, true
communities are founded upon mutual respect and the perception that one’s opinion, training,
and education matter to the organization. Teachers and students must be made to feel they have
the freedom and autonomy to use their talents to create and innovate. While no single program
can compensate for lack of commitment and disenfranchised students, programs, processes and
procedures that honor individuality, uniqueness, and personal freedom in the context of a deep
sense of belonging and commitment to the school community may provide a path where the
educational divide can finally be conquered.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

167
REFERENCES
Anderson, F. M. (2014). Linked Learning and African American student engagement: A case
study (Doctoral dissertation). California State University, Long Beach, CA. Retrieved
from http://teachingcommons.cdl.edu/linkedlearning/research_reports/index.html
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school:
Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the
Schools, 45(5), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Astin, A. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of
College Student Development, 25(4), 518-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1997). Caring school communities.
Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3203_1
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-
529.
Bell, J. A. (2001). High-performing, high-poverty schools. Leadership, 31(1), 8-11.
Bempechat, J., & Shernoff, D. J. (2012). Parental influences on achievement motivation and
student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook
of research on student engagement (pp. 315-342). New York, NY: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_15
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of Educational
Research, 71(2), 171-217.
Bensimon, E. M. (2005, Fall). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An
organizational learning perspective. New Directions For Higher Education, 131, 99-111.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

168
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. London, UK:
Routledge.
Brick, B. (2005). Changing concepts of equal educational opportunity: A comparison of the
views of Thomas Jefferson, Horace Mann and John Dewey. American Educational
History Journal, 32(2), 166-174.
Brown v. Board of Education, 374 U.S. 483 (1954).
California Department of Education. (2012). 2012-2013 APR glossary-base API. Sacramento,
CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/glossary13b.asp
California Department of Education. (2014a). Smarter balanced assessment system [Fact sheet].
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/index.asp
California Department of Education. (2014b). Standards for career ready practices. Sacramento,
CA: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/sf/documents/ctescrpflyer.pdf
California Department of Education. (2015). Adequate yearly progress report information guide.
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/
California Department of Education. (2016a). Academic Performance Indicator [Measurement
instrument]. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/
California Department of Education. (2016b). STAR California Standards Test Blueprint.
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/blueprints.asp
California Department of Education. (2016c). Career technical education standards and
framework. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/sf
California Department of Education. (2016d). Common Core State Standards [Fact sheet].
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

169
California Department of Education. (2016e). California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)
[Fact sheet]. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/
California Department of Education. (2016f). ESEA reauthorization: A blueprint for reform
[Fact sheet]. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/index.html
California Department of Education. (2016g). Facts about English learners in California —
CalEdFacts [Fact sheet]. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/cefelfacts.asp
California Department of Education. (2017). School Accountability Report Card (SARC) [Fact
sheet]. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/
California English Language Development Test, California Education Code § 313(a) (2001).
Chavez, A. F., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1999, Winter). Racial and ethnic identity and development.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 84, 39-47.
Cheng, C. (2009). Mulitracial identity integration: Perceptions of conflict and distance among
multiracial individuals. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 55-68.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., Berman, S., Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (2008).
Best practices in fostering student engagement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 1099-1120). Washington, D.C.: National
Association of School Psychologists.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Coeyman, M. (2003, July 8). Practical skills vs. three R’s: A debate revives. Christian Science
Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0708/p13s02-lepr.html
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

170
ConnectEd. (2010). Linked Learning. Berkeley, CA: The California Center for College and
Career. Retrieved from http://www.connectedcalifornia.org/linked_learning
Cooper, J. E., Ponder, G., Merritt, S., & Matthews, C. (2005). High-performing high schools:
Patterns of Success. NASSP Bulletin, 89(645), 2-23.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY:
Harper & Row.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Third annual Brown Lecture in Education Research — The flat
Earth and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future.
Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07308253
Darling-Hammond, L., & Plank, D. N. (2015, January). Supporting continuous improvement in
California’s education system. Stanford, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education.
Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CQDZrE
Diego, D. (2013). Teacher preparation, professional development, and long-term English
learners. Journal of Education, 5(4), 1-18.
Dolezal, S. E., Welsh, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vincent, M. M. (2003). How nine third-grade
teachers motivate student academic engagement. Elementary School Journal, 103(3),
239-267.
Duffy, T., Korkmaz, A., Dennis, A. R., Bichelmeyer, B. A., Bunnage, J. C., Cakir, H., & Onku,
S. (2005). Engagement in learning and student success: Findings from the Cisco
Networking Academy CCNA2 course (Report #WP05-05). Bloomington, IN: Cisco
Networking Academy Evaluation Project.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

171
Falout, J. (2012). Coping with demotivation: EFL learners’ remotivation processes. TESL-EJ,
16(3), 1-29.
Fenning, P., & Rose, J. (2007, November). Overrepresentation of African American students in
exclusionary discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42(6), 536-559.
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59(2), 117-142.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059002117
Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S.
L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student
engagement (pp. 97-131). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-
2018-7
Firestone, W. A., & Shipps, D. (2003). How do leaders interpret conflicting accountabiities to
improve student learning? In W. A. Firestone & C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda for
research in educational leadership (pp. 81-100). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., Friedel, J., & Paris, A. H. (2005). School engagement. In K.
A. Moore & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish? Conceptualizing
and measuring indicators of positive development (pp. 305-321). New York, NY:
Springer.
Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A
comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L.
Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student
engagement (pp. 763-782). New York, NY: Springer.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (20th ed.). New York, NY: Continuum.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

172
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Furlong, M. J., & Christenson, S. L. (2008). Engaging students at school and with learning: A
relevant construct for all students. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 365-368.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20302
Furlong, M. J., Whipple, A. D., St. Jean, G., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003).
Multiple contexts of school engagement: Moving toward a unifying framework for
educational research and practice. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 99-113.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340899
Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in
the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100(4), 765-781. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012840
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2010). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
30(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Gandara, P., Rumberger, R., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Callahan, R. (2003, October 7). English
learners in California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 11(36). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v11n36.2003
Goldin, C. (1999). A brief history of education in the United States [Historical Paper 119].
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/h0119
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

173
Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (1997). Why the United States led in education: Lessons from
secondary school expansion, 1910 to 1940 [NBER Working Paper No. 6144].
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from
http://www.nber.org/papers/w6144
Groen, M. (2008). The Whig party and the rise of common schools, 1837-1854: Party and policy
reexaminied. American Educational History Journal, 35(2), 251-260.
Grubb, W. N. (1996). The new vocationalism: What it is, what it could be. Phi Delta Kappan,
77(8), 535-546.
Ikpeze, C. H. (2013). Increasing urban students’ engagement with school: Toward the
expeditionary learning model. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 9,
55-64.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kantor, H. (1986). Work, education, and vocational reform: The ideological origins of vocational
education, 1819-1920. American Journal of Education, 94(4), 401-426.
https://doi.org/10.1086/443860
Kemple, J. J. (2008). Career Academies: Long-term impacts on work, education, and transitions
to adulthood. New York, NY: MDRC. Retrieved from
http://www.mdrc.org/publication/career-academies-long-term-impacts-work-education-
and-transitions-adulthood
Krashen, S. (1991, Spring). Bilingual education: A focus on current research (Occasional Paper
in Bilingual Education, No. 3). Washington, D.C.: NCELA FOCUS.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

174
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the National Survey
of Student Engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10-17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795
Lather, P. (2010). Scientific research in education: A critical perspective. British Educational
Research Journal, 30(6), 759-772. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192042000279486
Learning Achievement Coalition — Oakland. (2014). Student Engagement Survey, 2013-2014
[Survey]. Pontiac, MI: Author. Retrieved from http://www.lac-o.org/goals/Student/
SiteAssets/SitePages/Data/LAC-O%20Student%20Survey%202013-2014.pdf
Linked Learning. (2015). Facts to share with community partners. Sacramento, CA: Linked
Learning Alliance. Retrieved from http://www.linkedlearning.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/12/Factsheet_CommunityPartners_Nov2015.pdf
Loera, G., Nakamoto, J., Joo Oh, Y., & Rueda, R. (2013). Factors that promote motivation and
academic engagement in a career technical education context. Career & Technical
Education Research, 38(3), 173-190. https://doi.org/10.5328/cter38.3.173
Los Angeles Unified School District (2009). [Students’ active participation in academic
conversations]. Unpublished raw data.
Los Angeles Unified School District. (2017). History of Pilot Schools. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Retrieved from http://pilotschools.lausd.net/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=190037
&type=d&pREC_ID=393571
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in elementary,
middle, and high school years. America Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153-184.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

175
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From
research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Masumoto, M., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). Case study of leadership practices and school-
community interrelationships in high-performing high-povery, rural California high
schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 24(9), 1-18.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
McMillan, J. H. (2004). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Messacar, D., & Oreopoulos, P. (2013). Staying in school: A proposal for raising high school
graduation rates. Issues in Science and Technology, 29(2), 55-61.
Monzo, L. D., & Rueda, R. (2009). Passing for English fluent: Latino immigrant children
masking language proficiency. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 40(1), 20-40.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2009.01026.x.
Mosher, R., & MacGowan, B. (1985). Assessing student engagement in secondary schools:
Alternative conceptions, strategies of assessing, and instruments. Madison, WI:
University of Wisconsin, Research and Development Center. Retrieved from ERIC
database. (ERIC Document No. ED272812)
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

176
Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. M. (2006). Exploring sociocultural perspectives on race, culture, and
learning. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 449-475.
No Child Left Behind Act, 20 USC 6301 § 115 (2001).
Noguera, P. A. (2003, July). The trouble with black boys: The role and influence of
environmental and cultural factors on the academic performance of African American
males. Urban Education, 38(4), 85-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085903254969
Olsen, L. (2010). Changing course for long term English learners. Leadership, 40(2), 30-33.
Partnership Academies, California Education Code §§ 54690-54697 (1987).
Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and
universities. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 185-209.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Reeves, J. R. (2006). Secondary teacher attitudes toward including English language learners in
mainstream classrooms. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(3), 131-143.
https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.3.131-143
Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., . . . Shew,
M. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal
Study on Adolescent Health. JAMA, 278(10), 823-832.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Russell, B., & Slater, G. R. (2011). Factors that encourage student engagement: Insights from a
case study of ‘first time’ students in a New Zealand university. Learning, 8(1), 1-15.
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

177
Samson, P. L. (2015). Fostering student engagement: Creative problem-solving in small group
faciliations. CELT: Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 8, 153-164.
Saunders, M., Rogers, J., & Terriquez, V. (2013). Exploring the educational, labor market, and
civic trajectories of young adults who attended Linked Learning pathways: Survey and
interview findings. Los Angeles, CA: Institue for Democracy, Education, and Access.
Retrieved from https://idea.gseis.ucla.edu/publications/201306_LLYouthTrajectories.pdf
Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Optimal learning environments to promote student engagement. New
York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7089-2
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Steele Shernoff, E. (2003). Student
engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School
Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158-176. https://doi.org/10.1521/scpq.18.2.158.21860
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1-40.
Stern, D. (2009, Spring). Expanding policy options for educating teenagers. Future of Children,
19(1), 211-239.
Taylor, L., & Parsons, J. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current Issues in Education,
14(1), 1-26.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Torlakson, T. (2013, April 19). State schools chief Tom Torlakson releases first detailed data on
student suspension and expulsion rates [Press release]. Sacramento, CA: California
Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr13/yr13rel48.asp
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

178
Torlakson, T. (2015). A blueprint for great schools: Version 2.0. Sacramento, CA: California
Department of Education.
University of California. (2016). Freshman: Admission requirements. Retrieved from
http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/freshman/requirements/index.html
USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). National School Lunch Program (NSLP) [Fact
sheet]. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from
https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/national-school-lunch-program-nslp
U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of
2006 [Fact sheet]. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/sectech/leg/perkins/index.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) [Fact sheet].
Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/essa
Vygotsky, L. (1987). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warner, M., Caspary, K., Arshan, N., Stites, R., Padilla, C., Park, C., . . . Adelman, N. (2015,
December). Taking stock of the California Linked Learning District Initiative. Sixth-year
evaluation report. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: Free Press.
Yoon, B. (2008, June). Uninvited guests: The influence of teachers’ roles and pedagogies on the
positioning of English language learners in the regular classroom. American Educational
Research Journal, 45(2), 495-552. https://doi.org/10.3102/002831208316200
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

179
Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167-177.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787410379680
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

180
APPENDIX A
TEACHER SURVEY
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS! We want you to tell us about your thoughts and experiences as a
teacher to help us understand the educational climate of your school. This is an anonymous
survey.

DIRECTIONS: For each question, please mark the extent to which you agree or disagree with
the statement by filling in the corresponding bubble. For these questions, think of your collective
experience as a teacher and consider each of your classes as you respond.

Fair & Clear Practices
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I listen to my students’ ideas.
2. I tell my students when they are showing
improvement.

3. I frequently give useful feedback to students about
their work.

4. I stick to established rules.
5. I give students clear expectations for class work.
6. My students can explain why they receive a
specific grade in my classes.

7. I give students the opportunity to retake tests or
redo assignments.

8. Students understand expectations about
participation in my classes.

9. Students who know the material can still fail my
classes.

10. Students who don’t know the material can still
pass my classes.

11. My school has consistent assessment practices
within grade/content levels.

12. My school has consistent grading practices within
grade/content levels.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

181

Caring Environment & Expectations
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I have high expectations for all my students.
2. I make myself available to students outside of
class time.

3. I care that all my students learn.
4. I show personal concern for each of my students
as individuals.

5. All students feel accepted in my classes.
6. I feel it is important for students to feel a sense of
community in my classes.

7. I discuss with my students their personal goals
and plans for life.

8. I help students explore career goals.
9. I take time to build community in my class.
10. I can name the students in my classes who
achieve below proficiency.

11. The level of my students is below my classroom
expectations.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

182

Cultural Relevance
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I show respect for different races and ethnicities.
2. I represent individuals from various cultural,
ethnic, and racial backgrounds in my classroom
displays and materials.

3. When I have students work in groups, I ensure
there is a mix of students with different backgrounds.

4. I encourage my students to show appreciation for
people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds.

5. Students can talk openly about racial issues in my
classes.

6. I use materials in my class that reflect my
students’ cultural and ethnic identities.

7. I consider race as a factor or predictor for student
achievement.

8. We discuss achievement gaps in my school.
9. I feel empowered to make a difference in
narrowing achievement gaps in my classes (race,
socio-economic, special education).

10. My colleagues show respect for their peers of
different races and ethnicities.

11. My colleagues have the skill set to positively
impact the achievement of students regardless of
race, socio-economics, or special education
certification.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

183

What strategies do you use in your practice that promotes learning for all students, including
students of color, students from poverty, and non-traditional learners?

Respectful Interaction & Pride
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I treat all of my students with respect.
2. I encourage students to consider different
points of view.

3. My students take pride in their work.
4. My students put forth effort in my classes.
5. My students show me respect.
6. I tell my students that I am proud of their
performance.

7. I would send my children to this school.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

184
Engagement & Encouragement
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Student learning is an important priority at my
school.

2. I encourage students to ask questions in class.
3. My students complete their assignments on
time.

4. I use a variety of ways of teaching in my
classes.

5. My students need more help than I can give
them.

6. I use relevant technology to help my students
learn.

7. My students have a desire to learn in school.
8. When students are confused, I am willing to do
whatever it takes to help them understand.

9. I measure part of my success by student
learning.

10. I measure part of my success by student
engagement.

11. The curriculum I am responsible to teach
challenges all of my students.

12. I create a classroom atmosphere that supports
learning for all students.

13. Student thinking is visible on the walls of my
classroom and my school.

What makes a HIGH QUALITY SCHOOL that supports student growth and learning?

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

185
Behavior Standards
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I expect proper behavior from all my students.
2. My students behave appropriately in my
classes.

3. I enforce rules and expectations fairly.
4. My students come to class with all of their
supplies.

5. I start classes promptly each session.
6. Students help develop classroom rules.
7. Bullying is not tolerated.

Demographic Information

1. Gender:

Male Female

2. Years of Experience:

0-4 5-10
11-15 16-20
21-25 26 or more

3. Content area:

ELA Science
Counseling Electives
Social Studies Math
Special Education Other (please describe):

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

186
APPENDIX B
STUDENT SURVEY
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS! We want you to share your thoughts and experiences as a
student to help us understand the educational climate of your school. This is an anonymous
survey - please DO NOT write your name on this survey.

DIRECTIONS: For each question, please mark the extent to which you agree or disagree with
the statement by filling in the corresponding bubble. Think of your collective experience as a
student and consider ALL of your teachers THIS year when answering each question. Please do
not focus on your favorite or least favorite teacher.

Fair & Clear Practices
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Teachers listen to my ideas.
2. Teachers tell me about my improvement.
3. Teachers give useful feedback about my work
4. Teachers stick to established rules.
5. Teachers give clear expectations for class work.
6. I can explain why I receive specific grades in my
classes.

7. Teachers give me the opportunity to retake tests
or redo assignments.

8. I understand expectations about participation in
my classes.

9. Teachers are clear about what they expect me to
know for classroom tests.

10. Teachers have removed me from my class for
talking too much.

11. It is easy for a student to get kicked out of class
in this school.

12. My grades fairly reflect my achievement.
13. I earn the grades I receive.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

187
Caring Environment & Expectations
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Teachers have high expectations for me.
2. Teachers make themselves available outside of
class time.

3. Teachers care that I learn.
4. Teachers show a personal concern for me as an
individual.

5. I feel accepted by my teachers in my classes.
6. I feel a sense of community or belonging in my
classes.

7. Teachers ask me about my personal goals and
plans for life.

8. Teachers help me explore career goals.
9. The classroom atmosphere supports my learning.
10. I ask for help when I need it.
11. Teachers encourage me to live a healthy
lifestyle.

12. I enjoy my teachers.
13. Teachers help me learn.

Describe something a TEACHER has done recently that really helped you learn something
new.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

188
Cultural Relevance
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Teachers show respect for different races and
ethnicities.

2. Teachers represent individuals from various
cultural, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in classroom
displays and materials.

3. When teachers assign us to groups, they place us
with students from different backgrounds.

4. Teachers encourage students to show appreciation
for people from different racial and ethnic
backgrounds.

5. We can talk openly about racial issues in my
classes.

6. Teachers use materials in the classroom that
reflect my cultural or ethnic identity.

7. Teachers consider race as a factor or predictor for
student achievement.

What makes a HIGH QUALITY SCHOOL that supports student growth and learning?

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

189

Respectful Interaction & Pride
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Teachers treat me with respect.
2. Teachers encourage me to consider different
points of view.

3. I have pride in my work.
4. I put forth effort in my classes.
5. I respect my teachers.
6. Teachers tell me when they are proud of my
performance.

7. I have pride in myself.
8. I respect myself.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

190
Engagement & Encouragement
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Student learning is an important priority at my
school.

2. Teachers encourage me to ask questions in class.
3. I complete assigned work on time.
4. Teachers use different ways of teaching in my
classes.

5. I need more help than I get in classes.
6. Teachers use technology to help me learn.
7. I have a desire to learn at school.
8. When I am confused, teachers are willing to help
until I understand.

9. The work my teachers assign requires me to think.
10. I ask questions in class.
11. I am actively engaged in learning in class.

Behavior Standards
Strongly
Disagree Disagree
Not
Sure Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. Teachers expect proper behavior from me.
2. I behave appropriately in my classrooms.
3. Teachers enforce rules and expectations fairly.
4. I come to class with all of my supplies.
5. Classes start promptly.
6. Students help develop classroom rules.
7. Bullying is not tolerated.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

191
Demographics
1. What is your gender?

Male Female

2. What grades do you usually earn?

A’s & B’s (4’s & 3’s) B’s & C’s (3’s & 2’s)
C’s & D’s (2’s & 1’s) D’s & F’s (1’s)

3. In what grade are you?

4
th
5
th
6
th
7
th
8
th 9
th

10
th
11
th
12
th

4. What is your racial/ethnic background? (Please only choose one):

African American White
Arabic Latino / Hispanic
Multi-Racial Asian / Pacific Islander
Native American Other (please describe):

5. Which extra-curricular activities are you involved in this year?

None Clubs
Sports Both Clubs and Sports

6. Do you receive free or reduced priced lunch?

Yes No Don’t Know

7. How many times were you sent to the principal or assistant principal’s office for discipline
this year?

None 1 to 2 times 3 or more times

8. How many schools have you attended since kindergarten?

1 school (the one you’re in now) 2 schools
3 schools 4 or more schools

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

192
9. How many times were you absent from school this year?

None
1 to 4 times 5 to 9 times
10 to 15 times 16 to 20 times
More than 20 times

10. How many adults in your school do you trust?

None
1 2 to 3
4 to 5 6 or more

Thank you for participating!

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

193
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
I. Introduction (Appreciation, Purpose, Line of Inquiry, Plan, Confidentiality, Reciprocity,
Consent to Participate, Permission to Record):

Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study of role of engagement in student achievement
in out performing urban schools. I appreciate the time that you have set aside to answer some of
my questions…. The interview should talk about an hour, does that work for you?

Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study and answer any
questions you might have about participating…. I am currently enrolled in a qualitative research
methods course at USC… the primary purpose of this study is to learn how to conduct qualitative
research. We have been asked to conduct both interviews and observations and I have structured
my line of inquiry around how “outperforming schools influence student engagement and
ultimately student academic performance.” “I am particularly interested in learning how
outperforming schools engage students.” In order to gain insight into how an outperforming
school engages students, I will be observing classrooms and staff meetings.

I want to assure you that I am strictly wearing the hat of researcher today. What this means is
that the nature of my questions (and observations) are not evaluative. I will not be making any
judgments on how you are performing as a teacher…. None of the data I collect will be shared
with other teachers, the parents, or the district…

I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final paper if you are interested. Might you have
any questions about the study before we get started? …. If you don’t have any (more) questions I
would like to have your permission to begin the interview…. I have brought a recorder with me
today so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. May I also have your permission
to record our conversation?

II. Setting the Stage (Developing Rapport and Priming the Mind, Demographic items of
interest (e.g. position, role, etc.)

I am hoping we could start with you telling me a little bit about your school…

III. Heart of the Interview (Interview Questions are directly tied to your Research
Questions) (Minimum of 2 questions from Strauss, et. al. typology: Hypothetical, Devil’s
Advocate, Ideal Position, Interpretive (done in the moment))

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

194
Research Questions Teacher Interview Questions
RQ1: To what extent are the
indicators of behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive
engagement present in a high
performing urban school?
1. What does your school do in regards to discipline?
(behavioral)
2. What does your school do to encourage
attendance?(behavioral)
3. How do you know when students are on task?
(behavioral)
4. How do you create a sense of community in your
classroom? (emotional)
5. Do students have an adult on campus that they
comfortable confiding in? (emotional)
6. To what extent do you think students feel safe at
school? (Classroom?) (emotional)
7. To what extent do you feel students are challenged in
your school? (cognitive)
a. What opportunities does the school have for
students Enrichment…. Rigor…. Challenge
8. How do students to persist through difficult tasks?
(cognitive)
9. What does a highly engaging lesson look like?
(cognitive, behavioral, emotional)
10. Is there anything else you would like to share?
RQ2: What school programs,
processes, and practices are
perceived to contribute to
student engagement?
1. What programs do you have at the school that are
culturally inclusive?
2. How would you describe your interactions with
faculty, staff and administrators?
3. How welcome do you believe Second language
learners feel as a student at xxxx school
4. What extra-curricular activities exist at the school?
5. Do all students feel included in the mainstream school
community?
a. How well do you think EL, AA, Latino, SPED,
low SES are integrated into the mainstream
school community?
6. What does the school do to create a sense of student
belonging?
a. For instance…Second step…. Character
Counts….. Assemblies…..Mottos,, morning
message, attendance rallies, etc
7. Is there anything else you would like to share?

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

195

Research Questions Teacher Interview Questions
RQ3: What are the unique
elements within an X school
structure that support
student engagement?
1. How does the schedule at your school affect student
engagement?
2. Tell me about the academies at your school.
3. How do you describe students’ experiences in
utilizing campus support services such as tutoring,
library, advising, and counseling?
4. Is there anything else you would like to share?
(Student only)
RQ4: To what extent do
students perceive being in a
state of flow during the
school day?
1. Do you ever find yourself so into something you are
learning that nothing else seems to matter?
a. Can you tell me about a specific time when
this has happened?
b. Did you find the activity or learning
experience challenging?
c. Did you feel that you already had some skills
in that area or was it something you knew?
d. Have you had this happen to you in more than
one class, if so, in which subjects does it
happen more than others?
2. Can you tell me more about what was special or
particular about that experience that made it so
interesting for you?
3. What was the teacher doing while you were deeply
involved in the moment of learning?
4. How much time do you spend in academic
discussion?
a. How much time does the teacher spend
lecturing?
5. Is there anything else you would like to share?

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

196
Student Interview Protocol

1. How would you describe yourself to others?
2. Why are you here at Los Angeles Career Academy High School? What are your
educational goals?
3. How would you describe your overall experiences at LACAHS?
4. How would you describe your interactions with other students on campus?
● Within the classroom?
● Outside of the classroom?
5. How would you describe your interactions with faculty, staff, and administrators?
● Within the classroom?
● Outside of the classroom?
● What do you believe are the reasons for these types and levels of interactions?
6. How do you spend your time outside of class when you are on campus?
● Are you involved in any clubs, organizations, leadership programs, and or student
government?
● What do you believe are the reasons for this?
7. How do you describe your experiences with campus support services such as tutoring,
library, advising, and counseling?
8. Do you feel comfortable while on campus? Why, or why not?
● What makes you say this?
9. How welcomed do you feel as a student at LACAHS?
● What experiences have you had that make you feel this way?
10. How supported do you feel as a student at LACAHS?
● Within the classroom?
● Outside of the classroom?
● What experiences have you had that make you feel this way?
11. What are some of the challenges if any you have experienced as an African American
student at LACAHS?
● Within the classroom?
● Outside of the classroom?
12. Have you had any experiences with discipline issues?
● Within the classroom?
● Outside of the classroom?
● Do you feel the discipline policies support your academic achievement?
13. What experiences have you had that make you feel this way?
14. What is your attendance record here at LACAHS?
15. Do you feel the attendance policies support your academic achievement?
● What experiences have you had that make you feel this way?
Have you ever find yourself so into something you are learning that nothing else seems to
matter?
● Can you tell me about a specific time when this has happened?
● Did you find the activity or learning experience challenging?
● Did you feel that you already had some skills in that area or was it something you
knew?
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

197
● Have you had this happen to you in more than one class, if so, in which subjects
does it happen more than others?
● Can you tell me more about what was special or particular about that experience
that made it so interesting for you?
● What was the teacher doing while you were deeply involved in the moment of
learning?
● How much time do you spend in academic discussion?
● How much time does the teacher spend lecturing?
● Is there anything else you would like to share?
●
16. Is there anything else you’d like to add? Is there anything you feel I should have asked
you about your experiences here at LACAHS?

IV. Closing Question (Anything else to add)
I am wondering if there is anything that you would add to our conversation today that I might not
have covered?

V. Closing (thank you and follow-up option):
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your time
and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I
find myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact you, and if
so, if email is ok? Again, thank you for participating in my study. As a thank you, please take
this gift card as a token of my appreciation.

VII. Special Considerations and Probing

i. Transitions (notice the sections in your protocol where you transition from one topic to
the next… pre-manufacture a transitional statement that will help make the switch more
natural and insert where appropriate) (Patton p. 371):

We have been talking about what defines a high performing school, now I would like to ask your
opinions about the schools success…..Before we move to the next questions…..So, we have
spent most of our time talking about …. Now I would like to change gears a little bit and ask
about…. Before I ask you about the next question, is there anything else you would like to
add….

ii. Probing Statements/Questions (it is a good idea to pre-manufacture some potentially
helpful probing statements/questions):

That is interesting, could you please tell me a little bit more about…
I want to make sure I understand, could you please tell me what you mean by…
I am wondering how you were feeling in that moment?
It would be great if you could walk me though…

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

198
APPENDIX D
DOCUMENT REVIEW PROTOCOL
Research Question Potential Document Review Sources
RQ1: To what extent are the
indicators of behavioral,
emotional, and cognitive
engagement present in a
high performing urban
school?
Lesson plans
School plan
Classroom artifacts
Student work samples
Rubrics
Teacher feedback
Master calendar
Daily schedule
Mission statement
School plan
SARC (school accountability report card)
Curriculum guide
Student handbook
Staff handbook
LEA plan (Local education agency plan)
School site council minutes
School website
WASC (Western association of school and colleges)
accreditation
Linked Learning certification review
Departmental meeting notes/agenda
Student work/portfolio
District budget/fiscal year
Grant
Personnel
Leadership team meeting notes
Attendance rates
Dropout rates
Graduation rates
Discipline records
List of clubs/orgs
Faculty meeting notes
CAHSEE (California High School Exit Exam)
SBAC (Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium)
California Healthy Kids Survey
School Ranking Report (greatschools.com)
A-G completion rates
Free and reduced lunch program
CDE California Department of Education)
Linked Learning Certification Review
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

199

Research Question Potential Document Review Sources
RQ2: What school programs, processes, and
practices are perceived to contribute to
student engagement?
Lesson plans
School plan
Classroom artifacts
Student work samples
Rubrics
Teacher feedback
Master calendar
Daily schedule
Mission statement
School plan
SARC (school accountability report card)
Curriculum guide
Student handbook
Staff handbook
LEA plan (Local education agency plan)
School site council minutes
School website
WASC (Western association of school and
colleges) accreditation
Linked Learning certification review
Departmental meeting notes/agenda
Student work/portfolio
District budget/fiscal year
Grant
Personnel
Leadership team meeting notes
Attendance rates
Dropout rates
Graduation rates
Discipline records
Academy brochure
List of clubs/orgs
Faculty meeting notes
CAHSEE (California High School Exit Exam)
SBAC (Smarter Balance Assessment
Consortium)
California Healthy Kids Survey
A-G completion rates
CDE (California Department of Education)
Linked Learning Certification Review

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

200

Research Question Potential Document Review Sources
RQ3: What are the
unique elements within
the X school structure
that support student
engagement?
Lesson plans
School plan
Classroom artifacts
Student work samples
Rubrics
Teacher feedback
Master calendar
Daily schedule
Mission statement
School plan
Student handbook
Staff handbook
LEA plan (Local education agency plan)
School site council minutes
School website
WASC (Western association of school and colleges) accreditation
Linked Learning certification review
Departmental meeting notes/agenda
Student work/portfolio
District budget/fiscal year
Grant
Personnel
Leadership team meeting notes
Academy brochure
List of clubs/orgs
Faculty meeting notes
Linked Learning Certification Review

Research Question Potential Document Review Sources
RQ4: To what extent do
students perceive being in
a state of flow during the
school day?
Not Applicable

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

201
APPENDIX E
INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
THE ROLE OF ENGAGEMENT ON TEACHER AND LEARNING

You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study is to identify what programs, processes, and practices influence student
engagement in a high performing urban school.

This study will add to the existing literature by specifically examining the programs, processes,
and practices that are perceived to contribute to student engagement in an out-performing urban
school. This study aims to make this information accessible to educators to support them in
implementing similar strategies and practices that can improve pedagogical decisions and
interventions within their schools.

Your participation is voluntary. Your relationship with USC and/or your school/district will not
be affected, whether or not you participate in this study.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT

Researchers will be looking at how programs, processes, and practices influence student
engagement in the school. Researchers will specifically look at how school and classroom
structures affect behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement and the impact on teaching
and learning which have assisted your school in flourishing in the area student achievement.
If you agree to participate, you will be asked to complete a 64-question survey. The survey is
anticipated to take 20 minutes to complete.

You may also be asked to participate in an interview; the interview may be audio-recorded with
your permission and is anticipated to take 30 minutes of your time.

You will be asked to allow researchers to observe the general school environment, classroom
instruction, staff meetings, and leadership meetings.

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN A LINKED LEARNING SCHOOL

202
CONFIDENTIALITY

Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. The members of the research
team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

The data will be coded with a false name or pseudonym ; identifiable information will be kept
separately from your responses.

The data will be stored on password-protected computers and held for three years after the study
has been completed and then destroyed.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION

**Each investigator will complete this section with his own contact information**

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION

University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702 (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study applies a theoretical framework informed by Bronfenbenner’s ecological systems theory to understand the impact of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive factors on student achievement. The purpose of this study was to understand the role of engagement in an out-performing Linked Learning High School and to what extent ecological factors contributed to engagement and flow and to illuminate promising practices that may be factors of student engagement’s role in raising achievement. The study was guided by four overarching research questions: (1) To what extent are the indicators of behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement present in a high-performing urban school? (2) What school programs, processes, and practices are perceived to contribute to student engagement? (3) What are the unique elements within the school structure that support student engagement? (4) To what extent do students perceive being in a state of flow during the school day? This case study focused on Artistic High School, an out-performing, Linked Learning school serving at risk students. The school in the study met the criteria for an outperforming urban school, as well as the multiple indicators for at-risk students. The study utilized the qualitative research method. Through a series of interviews, and surveys, and observations, at Artistic High School, insight emerged about the meaning that participants assigned to the school’s programs, processes, and practices that showed promise for improving student achievement. Documents were analyzed for data on former practices in regards to student emotional, behavioral, and cognitive engagement. Findings from this study indicate that pedagogical or programmatic factors influencing student engagement were part of a larger system, which fosters a culture of deep interpersonal peer and student/teacher relationships. Contributive factors were found to include a culture that empowered teacher autonomy and student choice. Additionally, a culture of collaboration at community, administrative, teacher, and student levels created conditions for engagement and belonging of all stakeholder groups. Significantly, Linked Learning was found to be a significant factor in fostering key programs and practices perceived to increase student engagement. One key finding was the role engagement plays beyond academic achievement of student transformation and self-actualization.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Student engagement in an outperforming urban school as measured through cognitive, behavioral, and emotional indicators

PDF

The role of student engagement in outperforming schools

PDF

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

PDF

Factors contributing to the high performance of an urban high school

PDF

A case study of student engagement in a high performing urban continuation high school

PDF

Student engagement in high performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

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

PDF

Student engagement in a high-performing urban high school: a case study

PDF

A case study to determine what perceived factors, including student engagement, contribute to academic achievement in a high performing urban high school

PDF

Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study

PDF

A case study of technology-embedded instruction: a student-centered approach to enhance teaching and learning in a K-12 school

PDF

Student engagement in a high performing urban high school: a case study

PDF

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

PDF

A case study: a viable arts program at one elementary school in California

PDF

Sustainable intervention for learning gaps in middle school mathematics: a gap analysis

PDF

Integration of technology and teaching and learning practices at a technology magnet elementary school: a case study

PDF

School factors that facilitate viable arts programs and support student academic achievement: a case study

PDF

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

PDF

Transformational technology practices: a case study

PDF

1:1 device program in a K-12 public school: the influence of technology on teaching and learning

Asset Metadata

Creator Wilson, Donald Scott (author)

Core Title The role of student engagement in a certified Linked Learning school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/20/2017

Defense Date 03/14/2017

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

Tag Autonomy,engagement,flow,Linked Learning,OAI-PMH Harvest,pilot school

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Gothold, Stewart (committee chair), Escalante, Michael (committee member), Hocevar, Dennis (committee member)

Creator Email donaldsw@usc.edu,donaldswilson@icloud.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-363295

Unique identifier UC11256134

Identifier etd-WilsonDona-5245.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-363295 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WilsonDona-5245.pdf

Dmrecord 363295

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Wilson, Donald Scott

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