Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Response to the growth of charter schools in California school districts: an evaluation study
(USC Thesis Other)
Response to the growth of charter schools in California school districts: an evaluation study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS
Response to the Growth of Charter Schools in California School Districts:
An Evaluation Study
by
Edgar Zazueta
A Dissertation Proposal Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2018
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 2
Dedication
To my beautiful children, Evah, and Nico, you may not have understood why your dad
was still going to school when in your eyes he should have been done with "college" so long ago,
but I hope you know you have always been a source of inspiration to me. I hope you use your
parent's educational pursuits as a small source of motivation for each of you to forge your
independent paths.
To my family, while this project and course of study may have been somewhat of a
mystery, you were always consistent with your encouragement and support. There will always be
a sense of pride that I get to honor my family with this terminal degree attached to your name.
To my Leilani, you may have been the only person who truly understood my struggles
and occasional joys throughout this process. I wouldn’t have persisted on this long journey
without you. Whether it be making sure I was well fed before class, forcing yourself to be
attentive when hearing about Clark and Estes more than once, or simply enjoying a nice glass of
wine after a long day…. thank you for never endless companionship and support.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 3
Acknowledgements
There were many contributors that have helped along the way. First, I would like to thank
my dissertation chair, Dr. Larry Picus. Your counsel and advisement were always appreciated. I
enjoyed every interaction, especially when the conversations would move away from this paper
and dwell on anything from politics to school finance. I am honored to have such respected name
in our academic world attached to this degree. To my committee members, Dr. Maria Ott, Dr.
Dave Cash, and Dr. Franklin, you are all legends in our field and I feel infinitely appreciative to
have had your assistance on this journey.
To my OCL cohort, you were a remarkable group. I interacted with few groups more
supportive and generous in their willingness to help. I am proud to be connected to every single
one of you.
To my USC professors, thank you for genuinely helping me be better one semester at a
time. My goal will always be to humbly and accurately represent the learning you facilitated over
the last three years.
To my coworkers, thank you for your understanding and patience as I often stumbled to
meet the demands of life, work, and school. I also appreciated your willingness to often be
guinea pigs as I tried to apply what I learned along the way.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 4
List of Tables
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals ................. 14
Table 2. Comparison of California Student Enrollment in 2015-16 ............................................. 24
Table 3. Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Superintendents ................................ 30
Table 4. Summary of Assumed Motivational Influences on Superintendents .............................. 34
Table 5 Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences on Superintendents ........................... 38
Table 6. Sources of Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences. ............. 46
Table 7. Assumed Knowledge Influences and Proposed Assessments. ....................................... 48
Table 8. Assumed Motivational Influences and Proposed Assessments. ..................................... 49
Table 9. Assumed Organizational Influences and Proposed Assessments. .................................. 50
Table 10. Participating Stakeholders ............................................................................................ 57
Table 11. Summary of Results of KMO Influences ..................................................................... 58
Table 12. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ........................................ 87
Table 13. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ......................................... 90
Table 14. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ..................................... 93
Table 15. Summary of KMO Recommendations ......................................................................... 96
Table 16. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ........................ 98
Table 17. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for New Reviewers .................... 100
Table 18. Required Drivers to Support New Reviewers’ Critical Behaviors ............................. 102
Table 19. Components of Learning for the Program. ................................................................. 105
Table 20. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program. ................................................... 106
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 5
List of Figures
Figure 1. Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process .......................................................................... 16
Figure 2. Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ........................ 42
Figure 3. Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process .......................................................................... 44
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 6
Table of Contents
Dedication .................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................................. 3
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................... 4
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 10
Related Literature ................................................................................................................................................................ 10
Importance of Problem ...................................................................................................................................................... 12
Organizational Context and Mission ............................................................................................................................ 13
Stakeholder Group for the Study .................................................................................................................................... 14
Purpose of the Project and Research Question .......................................................................................................... 15
Methodological Framework ............................................................................................................................................. 15
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................................................................... 16
Definitions ............................................................................................................................................................................. 17
Organization of the Proposal ........................................................................................................................................... 17
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................. 19
History of Charter Schools ............................................................................................................................................... 19
Charter Schools in California .................................................................................................................................. 20
Charter School Approval Process .......................................................................................................................... 20
Public School Funding in California ............................................................................................................................ 21
Funding for Charter Schools .................................................................................................................................... 22
Fiscal Impact of Charter Schools ................................................................................................................................... 24
Competitive Impact of Charter Schools .............................................................................................................. 25
Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................................................................................ 27
Knowledge Types ......................................................................................................................................................... 27
Knowledge Influences ................................................................................................................................................ 27
Motivational Influences .................................................................................................................................................... 30
Self-Efficacy theory ...................................................................................................................................................... 31
Superintendent Self-Efficacy ..................................................................................................................................... 31
Expectancy-value theory .......................................................................................................................................... 32
Motivation to change ................................................................................................................................................... 32
Organizational Influences ................................................................................................................................................. 34
Perception of competitive disadvantage ............................................................................................................ 35
Reluctance to make budget reductions ................................................................................................................ 35
Innovative practices to compete with charter schools ................................................................................... 36
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 38
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 40
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................................................................... 41
Methodological Framework ............................................................................................................................................. 43
Assessment of Performance Influences ....................................................................................................................... 44
Knowledge Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 47
Motivation Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 49
Organizational Assessment ..................................................................................................................................... 50
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................................ 50
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 7
Data Collection .................................................................................................................................................................... 51
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale ...................................................................................................... 51
Interview Recruitment Strategy and Rationale .............................................................................................. 52
Interviews ....................................................................................................................................................................... 52
Document Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 53
Credibility and Trustworthiness ..................................................................................................................................... 53
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................................................................... 54
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 54
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 55
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................................ 56
Definition of Validation .................................................................................................................................................... 57
Results ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 58
Results for Knowledge Influences ........................................................................................................................ 59
Results for Motivational Influences ..................................................................................................................... 64
Results for Organizational Influences ................................................................................................................. 69
Findings .................................................................................................................................................................................. 79
Reasons for Students Leaving ................................................................................................................................. 79
Critical Relationship with Labor Representatives ......................................................................................... 79
Failure to Pursue Statutory Flexibility ................................................................................................................ 80
Marketing Traditional Public Schools ................................................................................................................. 81
Little Evidence of Change ......................................................................................................................................... 81
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 81
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 83
Organizational Context and Mission ............................................................................................................................ 83
Organizational Performance Goal ................................................................................................................................. 84
Description of Stakeholder Groups ............................................................................................................................... 84
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study ............................................................................................................ 85
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................................................................... 85
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ............................................................................... 86
Knowledge Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 86
Motivation Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 89
Organization Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 92
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ....................................................................................................... 96
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ................................................................................................... 96
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations .......................................................................................... 97
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ............................................................................................................ 97
Level 3: Behavior .......................................................................................................................................................... 99
Level 2: Learning ........................................................................................................................................................ 103
Level 1: Reaction ........................................................................................................................................................ 105
Evaluation Tools ......................................................................................................................................................... 106
Data Analysis and Reporting ................................................................................................................................. 107
Recommendations for Future Research ..................................................................................................................... 107
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................... 108
References ............................................................................................................................................................. 110
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................................................ 118
Appendix B ............................................................................................................................................................ 121
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 8
Appendix C ............................................................................................................................................................. 123
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 9
ABSTRACT
This dissertation study examined the factors that influence school district superintendent ability
to respond to the challenges posed by the growth of charter schools. Using the Clark and Estes’
Gap Analysis framework, the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences defined by
literature were examined. The methodology employed in this study included a document analysis
and interviews administered to a purposeful sample of school district superintendents across the
state of California. Gaps were either validated, partially validated or not at all validated. The
results of the project demonstrated a high probability there are a number of influences that are
manifesting themselves as barriers affecting a superintendent's ability to lead efforts to respond
to the competition from charter schools effectively. The data demonstrated that many
superintendents might not be doing everything within their power and authority to lead efforts to
make their school districts more appealing to families in their community. The results from the
data collected were used to drive recommendations for the superintendents that would support
future efforts to respond to charter school growth in their regions. It was recommended that the
superintendents be provided a broad range of information and resources to assist them in leading
their respective school districts. The recommended program is blended, consisting discussions
with experienced practitioners through target assistance and a face-to-face application delivered
through a workshop at the annual superintendent symposium.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
There is growing concern that the growth of public charter schools in California is
negatively impacting traditional public-school students by diverting scarce resources from their
neighboring schools. The original intent of the public charter law in California was to provide
parents with expanded choice in schools while encouraging innovation in teaching and learning
(Edwards, Perry, Brazil, & Studier, 2004). While the field of research evaluating the academic
achievement of students attending charter schools is extensive and mixed (Davis, 2013, Gleason,
Clark, Tuttle, Clark & Dwoyer, 2010; Cremata, Davis, Dickey, Lawyer, Negassi, Raymond, &
Woodworth, 2013), there is evidence that the increase in the number of charter schools may be
financially hurting traditional public schools’ due to the loss of enrollment (Bifulco & Reback,
2012; D'Arcy & Richman, 2013). This issue is important to address because charter school
enrollment continues to increase and demand for charter schools remains high (California
Charter School Association, 2015). School district leaders must develop strategies to effectively
serve the students at traditional public schools amidst the challenges that the presence of charter
schools may present.
Related Literature
Proponents of market-based school reform believe that competition from charter schools
should have a positive effect on traditional public schools, but the literature is inconclusive on
whether choice benefits traditional public schools. In 1992, California was the second state in the
nation to authorize charter schools with the intent that these schools would serve as a mechanism
for expanded parental choice while serving as a laboratory for innovative instructional methods
(Edwards, Perry, Brazil, & Studier, 2004). The literature suggests that traditional public schools
will change their practices to better meet the needs of students’ due to the competition of charter
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 11
schools (Buddin & Zimmer, 2005; Davis, 2013; Ni, 2009;). Similarly, Hoxby (2001) invokes a
standard economic principle to argue that organizations typically respond to competition by
becoming more efficient in allocating resources and effective in performance.
On the other hand, critics of the market-based school reform argue that these types of
changes do little to enhance or address educational inequality (Fuller, 2002; Lubienski &
Lubienski, 2006). Even researchers who traditionally support school choice and other market-
based reforms acknowledge that most school districts studied have not positively responded to
competition from charter schools (Hess, 2004). Several studies have suggested that the growth of
charter schools is negatively impacting the finances of traditional public schools’ due to loss of
enrollment (D'Arcy & Richman, 2013; Los Angeles Unified School District Independent
Financial Review Panel, 2015).
There is a tremendous debate on whether charter schools are equitably serving high-need in
seeking to close the achievement gap. According to national averages, charter schools serve
comparatively fewer students with disabilities (Gross & Lake, 2014) which places the balance of
the responsibility for educating high-cost children with the traditional public schools. While the
impact on the finances of traditional public schools is evident in the research, the literature also
suggests that some charter schools may be helping close the achievement gap. Farrell,
Wohlstetter, and Smith (2012) cite a report on the KIPP charter network that concluded that
academic gains at many of their schools were large enough to substantially reduce race and
income-based achievement gaps. On the other hand, Hill, Angel, and Christensen (2006) argue
that despite the volume of research linking charter schools and student achievement, few studies
have been able to come to any strong conclusions one way or another.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 12
Importance of Problem
Charter schools have become a significant part of the educational delivery system in
California, especially in areas such as Los Angeles where more schools are authorized than
anywhere else in the country (California Charter School Association, 2015). According to
California Charter School Association (2015), the demand for charter schools in California is
significantly higher than the number of seats available. While many charter schools have
demonstrated significant levels of success in areas where students have historically
underachieved (Cremata, Davis, Dickey, Lawyer, Negassi, Raymond, & Woodworth, 2013),
school leaders around the country believe that the emergence of charter schools is impacting
their ability to adequately serve students in their respective school districts (Kassebaum, 2011).
The financial strain on school districts cited by education leaders often results from the
decline in enrollment due to the growth of charter schools in their geographic areas. For
example, a report from the Los Angeles Unified School District's Independent Financial Review
Panel (2015) concluded that a significant challenge for the long-term viability of the school
system is a decline in student enrollment. The financial review panel found that over the past six
years, the school district has lost more than one-tenth of its student population due to charter
schools. Despite the evidence, more research is necessary to substantiate claims that charter
school growth is one of the leading factors responsible for school districts facing fiscal
instability. Further analysis and research are necessary for school district leaders to determine
what are the most appropriate responses to mitigate the impact of charter school growth.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 13
Organizational Context and Mission
This study focuses on public school districts in California. California authorizes more
charter schools than any other state in the country (California Charter School Association, 2015).
There are almost 1,900 charter schools operating in the state (California Department of
Education, 2017) with a population of more than 580,000 students which amounts to
approximately 9% of the statewide student population. Charter schools are located in 54 of
California's 58 counties. Approximately 76% of charter schools are classroom or site-based, and
the remainder is partially or exclusively non-classroom-based independent study programs.
Furthermore, 73% of the charter schools are directly funded by state and federal programs, and
the rest received funding from the local educational agency that authorizes them (California
Department of Education, 2017).
This study analyzes the actions of school district leaders in a sampling of school districts
throughout the state of California. Patton (2015) argues that the power of qualitative research
comes from purposeful sampling in information-rich cases where one can learn a great deal
about the issues of central importance. In this study, the subjects come from a selection of school
districts that have experienced growth in charter schools in their respective area. According to
the California Charter School Association (2015), the Los Angeles region has seen the highest
growth of new charter schools and the North Coast and Bay Area of California has experienced
the second highest growth in the state. This study utilizes statewide data to select a group of
school districts to review. The following section will review the organizational mission of
California public schools and the adapted performance goals for school district leaders.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 14
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
The California State Board of Education (2017) declares that the mission of the state’s education
system is to “create strong, effective schools that provide a wholesome learning environment
through incentives that cause a high standard of student accomplishment….” The California
Department of Education (2017) states that “California will provide a world-class education for
students and parents from early childhood to adulthood.”
Organizational Goal
The superintendents in California have not collectively defined a specific organizational
performance goal as it pertains to charter schools, but it can be inferred that the foundational goal
of all school districts is to effectively provide instruction and services in a manner that improves
student achievement in their schools.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
The stakeholder group of focus in this study is school district superintendents from
California. Superintendent actions and responses have a direct correlation to student achievement
for the students in their school district (Waters & Marzano, 2006). School superintendents are
responsible for setting the strategic direction of their organizations, making personnel decisions,
and proposing annual budgets. School superintendents are in a unique position to lead efforts to
respond to the growth of charter schools in their area. As such, this study utilizes a purposeful
sampling of the stakeholder group.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 15
Purpose of the Project and Research Question
The goal of this project is to examine the factors that influence school district leaders’
abilities to respond to the challenges posed by the growth of charter schools. While charter
schools have been existence for more than twenty-five years (California Charter School
Association, 2015), the dramatic growth of charter schools in some parts of California is a recent
phenomenon. As stated, many school district leaders believe the increase of charter schools in
their area are having an adverse impact on their organizations. (Kopetman, 2015). It is important
to study underlying influences and propose solutions that might help school districts deal with
the issues presented by the presence of charter schools in their region.
The following questions guide this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences facing
superintendents in leading their organizations in response to the increasing number of
charter schools?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to meet
those needs?
Methodological Framework
This project employs a qualitative method to gather data and analysis. School districts'
current efforts to respond to the growth of charter schools will be assessed using document
analysis, interviews, literature review and content analysis. Research-based solutions will be
recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner. This study will utilize Clark and Estes'
(2008) analytical framework for assessing the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences impacting performance in the respective school districts. Figure 1 is a visual
representation of Clark and Estes’ gap analysis process for addressing organizational
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 16
performance issues.
Figure 1. Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process
Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis process utilizes several different types of approaches
to gather and analyze data. Research studies can apply qualitative methods such as observations,
surveys, interviews, document reviews, and focus groups; quantitative methods such as surveys;
and mixed methods, which combine qualitative and quantitative methods. This study is a
qualitative case study and includes collecting data through document analysis and interviews.
Limitations and Delimitations
The design of this project assumes certain restrictions. First, the sample size of this study
is relatively small, consisting of only eight superintendents. Additionally, the self-reported data
provided by interview participants may have sources of biases; participants may exaggerate
responses or may have an inaccurate view of how charter schools are impacting their school
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 17
districts. Finally, the project assumes that all participants interpreted the interview questions in
the manner intended.
This study is limited to analyzing influences that impact a superintendent's response to
the significant decline in enrollment at the sites studied. The findings cannot be generalized
beyond the scope of this project. However, other school district leaders may benefit from the
application of this project’s use of Clark and Estes (2008) framework to inform their responses to
possible declines in enrollment in their respective school districts. The project is also delimited
to examining a single key stakeholder group’s experience, which might not be representative of
another stakeholder group’s experience such as governing board members or other school district
officials. Although other stakeholder groups’ experiences are crucial to the organization’s
success, the scope of the current project was limited to superintendents, forgoing further
investigation of other stakeholder groups’ experiences.
Definitions
Charter school: a school that receives government funding but operates independently of the
established public-school system in which it is located.
Traditional public school: a school that operates under the governance of a school district and is
subject to the California Education Code.
Superintendent of schools or “superintendent”: An administrator in charge of a number of
public schools in a school district.
Organization of the Proposal
There are five chapters in this project. Chapter one identifies the purpose of the study and
provides a background of the problem, including key concepts and language about issues
surrounding the impact of charter schools and the role of superintendents in leading their school
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 18
districts. The adopted mission and goals of California public schools are summarized, and
chosen stakeholders are introduced. Also, the methodological framework for the study is
presented. Chapter two offers a literature review which includes an overview of charter schools
in California, including a discussion on the impact of charter schools on traditional public
schools. The literature review also examines knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
influences that may impact a district leader's response to charter schools. Chapter three
introduces the details, and the methodology for collection of data and analysis of the information
gathered. Chapter four summarizes the results of the data collection and analyzes how the
assumed KMOs influences impact the sample stakeholder group. Lastly, chapter five proposes a
set of recommendations to mitigate the KMO barriers and provides a framework for planning,
implementation, and evaluation of the recommendations.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 19
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews the literature on charter schools, specifically examining the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that influence a superintendent's response to
the presence of charter schools in his or her geographical region. The chapter contains two
primary sections. The first section provides an overview of charter schools in California,
including a summary of the literature on the impact of charter schools on traditional public
schools. The second section examines knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that
may influence a district leader's response to charter schools.
History of Charter Schools
Charter schools were established more than twenty-five years ago and have become a
central component of the national educational reform movement. Charter schools are public
schools but are exempt from many of the requirements of traditional public schools (Dorer,
2001). The first charter school legislation was enacted in Minnesota in 1991 but the origins of
the movement date back almost two decades before the first charter school (Steedman,
Cummins, & Ricciardelli, 2014). The catalyst for the charter school movement is often attributed
to Ray Budde, a University of Massachusetts professor, who presented Education by Charter: A
Key to a New Model of School District (1974) to the General Systems Research Society. Budde’s
ideas resurfaced in 1988 when he wrote Education by Charter: Key to Long-Term Continuing
Improvement in American Education, in which he once again called for the need for school
districts to offer options in schooling. Ted Kolderie built on Budde’s ideas in a 1990 publication;
The State Will Have to Withdraw the Exclusive, which called for the redefinition of the role of
the traditional public school district. Kolderie was instrumental in crafting the first charter school
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 20
law in Minnesota in 1991. California followed when it enacted its charter school legislation in
1992 with six more states doing the same the following year.
Charter Schools in California
California established charter schools with the intention of offering parents an alternative
to traditional public schools while encouraging local leaders to experiment with new educational
techniques (Legislative Analyst Office, 2016). The state of California authorizes the most charter
schools in the country with approximately 1900 schools. According to California Charter School
Association, approximately 600,000 California students attend charter schools which amount to
roughly 9% of the student population. California law requires that charter schools provide
nonsectarian instruction, charge no tuition, and admit all interested students up to school
capacity. The most defining characteristic of a charter school is the difference in accountability
models as compared to traditional public schools. Charter schools are exempt from most state
laws and regulations. Rather than being subject to a state-oriented accountability model, charter
schools develop local “charters” that are legal agreements between the individual schools and
their authorizer (Legislative Analyst Office, 2016).
Charter School Approval Process
The California Education Code grants three entities the authority to approve and oversee
charter schools: the governing boards of local school districts, the boards of county school
boards, and the State Board of Education. Governing boards along with the support of the
superintendents and their staff have three primary oversight responsibilities as charter school
authorizers: to review the charter petition; oversee the performance of the charter school; and
determine whether the charter school should be renewed (Buenrostro, 2016). When evaluating a
charter school petition, the local educational agency must approve unless a factual finding is
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 21
established that certain requirements have not been met. According to state law, a governing
board may not deny a charter school petition due to the potential impact to the local educational
agency's educational programs or fiscal health (Buenrostro, 2016). As delineated in the
California Education Code, any one of the following conditions must be met for a charter school
petition to be denied:
• The charter presents an unsound educational program.
• Petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program
outlined in the petition.
• The petition does not contain the number of signatures required.
• The petition does not contain information of each of the conditions described in
the education code.
• The petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of the
required elements as outlined in the law. (California Education Code 47605(b))
If approved, charter schools are granted a maximum term of five years, after which they
must renew their charter with their authorizer. The renewal process is an in-depth performance
review that requires the charter school to demonstrate compliance with academic, financial, and
operational criteria needed for initial authorization. The Education Code cites that student
academic performance is the primary factor in determining renewal. (Mayo, 2014)
Public School Funding in California
The mechanisms for funding all California public schools, including charter schools, has
changed in the last five years. In 2013, California enacted the Local Control Funding Formula
(LCFF) which revamped the state's funding system. Under the LCFF formula, all local
educational agencies receive funding based on the number of pupils in each grade level with
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 22
additional funding provided for students in three high-need categories: foster youth, low-income,
and English learners. Under California law, charter schools are defined as individual local
educational agencies and generate funding individually (California Department of Education,
2017). Charter school advocates argue that public funding follows the student to the public
school the parents choose, whether a charter school or a traditional school and therefore there is
no overall loss of public school funding when a student attends a charter school (California
Charter School Association, 2016). Before the enactment of the LCFF, charter school advocates
pointed to evidence that their schools were inequitably funded. In 2012, the California
Legislative Analyst's Office issued a report suggesting that there was
an inequity of at least 7% in funding between the state's charter schools and their traditional
public-school counterparts.
Funding for Charter Schools
California charter school funding is disbursed in two ways. In one method, the state
disburses funds directly to charter schools. These schools are referred to as "direct-funded
charter schools." In direct-funded charter schools, they manage their financial activities
independent of the entity that authorizes them. Direct-funded charter schools typically have
financial personnel on staff or on a contract that manages their finances (Reed & Rose, 2015). In
the second method of distribution, the funding goes from the state to the local education agency
that authorizes them. In these schools, known as "locally funded charter schools," the authorizer
often manages the financial activities as agreed upon. The authorizer typically retains some
portion of the funding disbursement to pay for the administrative services.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 23
Creaming of Students
In the midst of the historical debate about whether charter schools may predominantly
attract the highest achieving students, California’s new funding system may provide a financial
incentive to serve students who require additional support. There are suggestions in the literature
that some charter schools have admissions practices to attract and enroll a particular population
of students (Schellenberg, 2015) and others argue charter schools may have incentives to target
high-performing students who are less costly to educate and have higher test scores (Garcia,
2010). Interestingly, there is also research that suggests that charter schools may be
disproportionately segregated. Frankenberg, Siegel-Hawley, and Wang (2010) concluded that
charter schools are more racially segregated than traditional public schools in virtually every
state and the large metropolitan area in the nation. The study also showed that English learners,
who require more services, are underrepresented in charter schools. Despite the debate over
previous practices, the Local Control Funding Formula which provides additional funding to
school districts and charter schools who serve higher numbers of English learners, low-income,
or foster youth may alter practices and perspectives. Recent data cited by the California Charter
School Association (2016) suggests that charter school demographics in California are
comparable to the rest of the state's public schools. The following table shows a comparison of
the demographic breakdown of California student enrollment in 2015-16.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 24
Table 2
Comparison of California Student Enrollment in 2015-16
Student Demographic Charter School Percent of
Enrollment
Traditional Public School
Percent of Enrollment
African American 8% 6%
Latino 50% 54%
Asian 5% 9%
White 29% 24%
English Learner 17% 24%
Free or Reduced Priced
Meals
Eligible
57% 59%
1
Students with Disabilities 10% 11%
Source: California Department of Education, 2016
Fiscal Impact of Charter Schools
There is evidence of the negative financial impact of charter schools on traditional public
schools in the literature. Bifulco and Reback’s (2014) research from New York suggested charter
schools have an adverse impact on school districts because the separate governance systems may
create excess costs while noting that charter policies can direct resources away from school
districts. In 2013, the Moody's Financial Services analyzed the impact of the expansion of
charter schools in urban school districts. In this financial report, D'Arcy and Richman (2013)
assert that the growth of charter schools is causing enrollment declines that lead to less revenue
which in turn result in programmatic reductions. Reductions resulting from the lower revenues
1
Reported number is percent of test-takers on 2016 California Assessment of Student
Performance and Progress and may not necessarily reflect actual enrollment
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 25
are causing parents to seek alternatives for their children that only result in the school district
losing more funds and thus continuing the cycle. Moody's noted that school districts such as
Cleveland and Detroit had trouble adapting and often kept schools open despite plummeting
attendance. In California, a blue-ribbon panel tasked with reviewing the Los Angeles Unified
School District, the largest school district in the state, also concluded that the growth of charter
schools is one of the factors contributing to projected fiscal deficits the school system is facing
(Los Angeles Unified School District Independent Financial Review Panel, 2016). Not
surprisingly, research that analyzes perceptions of school district leaders suggests that most
superintendents believe that charter schools are having an adverse impact on their organizations
(Kowalski, 2011; Ricciardelli et al., 2014; Steedman et al., 2014). It should be noted while the
literature on the effectiveness of charter schools is extensive (Davis, 2013, Gleason, et al., 2010;
Cremata et al., 2013), there are numerous calls in the literature for more research on the fiscal
impact of charter schools on traditional school districts.
Competitive Impact of Charter Schools
A discussion of research on the response of traditional public-school leaders is also
noteworthy given the purpose of this study. According to traditional economic theory,
competition should make schools more efficient by pressuring them to perform at a level not
previously attained in the organization (Friedman, 1955). The body of literature on educational
competition suggests the economic principle does not always materialize in the school setting
(Linick & Lubienski, 2013). Arsen and Ni (2011) present three general themes in analyzing the
literature of non-charter response to competition as the following 1) school districts
systematically respond to competition in some measurable way by shifting resources; 2) there is
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 26
no systematic response to the competition; and 3) most schools do not respond to competition,
and therefore any response is hard, if not impossible to measure.
Hoxby (2003), an economist, suggested that a 6% student attrition rate to charter schools
is the threshold for igniting a district response. The school district administration must then
decide what kind of reaction the increased competitive pressure warrants. The literature suggests
that school districts' most common responses are changing school or district leadership, creating
new curricular programs; expanding instructional time; or using marketing strategies to entice
new student enrollment (Ni & Arsen, 2010). In related research, Arsen and Ni (2011) argue that
public school districts that are exposed to significant competition tend to shift resources away
from instructional programs and into business and administrative expenditures. These findings
support research of other scholars who found, using more qualitative methods, that increased
exposure to competition induced school districts to invest in marketing strategies (Lubienski,
2005). Lastly, the research also indicates that organizational structures of public school districts
can influence response to charter schools. While the public-school district leadership set the
direction for response efforts, teachers employed by the school district have the most direct
interaction with students and their families. Hess (2001) argues that because teachers do not
enjoy any additional benefit from attracting other students unless they feel their employment is
threatened, the competitive pressure of charter schools is diffused throughout the faculty and
thereby lessens the pressure on the entire system. In other words, unless there is a consistent
commitment to an organizational mission related to specific efforts, the intended organizational
change may not be successful.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 27
Knowledge and Skills
Literature in this section will examine knowledge-based influences that is pertinent to a
superintendents’ ability to appropriately respond to the growth of charter schools in their region.
The research shows that school district administrators often dictate how well their organizations
react to the issues that arise with the growth of charter schools (Linick & Lubienski, 2013).
Regarding organizational success, a lack of knowledge and skills often leads to a failure to meet
organizational goals and objectives (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Knowledge Types
The research describes three general types of knowledge as declarative, procedural, and
metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Declarative knowledge refers to the facts and concepts.
Procedural knowledge refers to how to do things. Metacognitive knowledge refers to knowledge
individuals have about themselves as learners, what they know, and how to control their
learning.
Knowledge Influences
The sections that follow explore literature related to the knowledge and skills that can
affect a school district leader’s response to the decline in enrollment caused by charter schools.
`The knowledge influences cited in this study that is described as 1) superintendents need to
know how the growth of charter school schools is impacting their respective districts
(procedural) and 2) administrators need to understand why students are leaving their institutions
for charter schools (declarative).
Understanding charter school impact. The literature focused on school district
leadership suggests that superintendents require the financial knowledge to understand their
school district budgets. Superintendents cannot be successful in leading their organizations
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 28
unless they are grounded in the factors that impact the finances of the school district (Benzel &
Hoover, 2015). In school districts where charter school growth is substantial, the knowledge of
how the decline in enrollment is impacting their budgets is critical to understanding how to
respond (Ricciardelli et al., 2014). In California, it is essential for school district leaders to
possess particular knowledge of the state's funding formula. California's Local Control Funding
Formula (LCFF) dictates that students that are English Learners, low-income or foster youth
generate more resources for a school district of residence (Cabral & Chu, 2013). The impact of
declining enrollment differs depending on the characteristics of the students that school districts
are losing. Furthermore, the body of evidence indicates that many superintendents, including
those in California, perceive charter schools to have an adverse impact on their finances
(Knudson, 2014). As chief executives of their respective organizations, leaders must rely on
factual data to develop clear and concise fiscal and academic performance goals (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) define performance goals as organizational targets
aimed at closing gaps between current achievement and desired performance levels. As it relates
to school finance, school district leadership must know to understand if charter school growth is
truly one of the reasons for failure to meet their financial objectives.
Understanding why students are leaving. For superintendents to develop strategies to
keep their students from moving to charter schools, they must first decipher why families are
seeking alternatives in the first place. Cowen and Winter's (2013) research from Florida asserts
that the better a student performs on state tests, the less likely they are to transfer to a charter
school. The study from Florida is consistent with findings from California that show charter
schools are often attracting students performing below their peers in academic achievement tests
(Booker, Zimmer, & Buddin, 2005; Zimmer et al., 2009). Superintendents often believe that
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 29
students are leaving their school districts because of the perception that charter schools are
academically superior (Kolawski, 2011). Superintendents must also understand if the loss of
enrollment in traditional public schools can be attributed to the efforts to recruit and enroll
specific groups. For example, charter schools that target specific religious and cultural groups are
growing (Eckes, Fox, & Buchanan, 2011). Some charter schools now offer extensive language
instruction in a variety of languages and seek to appeal to families with particular social or
political values (Rotberg, 2014). Regardless of the reason for choosing to attend a charter school,
the information is a critical data source for district leaders to plan an appropriate response. Table
3 summarizes the organizational and stakeholder goals for school district superintendents in this
study as well as the knowledge influences discussed in this paper. The table also outlines how
the assumed knowledge influences will be assessed in this study. The following section will
discuss the assumed motivational influences that school district leaders may face.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 30
Table 3
Summary of Assumed Knowledge Influences on Superintendents
Organizational Mission
The California State Board of Education (2017) declares that the mission of the state’s
education system is to “create strong, effective schools that provide a wholesome learning
environment through incentives that cause a high standard of student accomplishment….” The
California Department of Education (2017) states that “California will provide a world-class
education for students and parents from early childhood to adulthood.”
Performance Goal
The goal of school district leaders is to effectively manage the challenges posed by the decline
in enrollment in school districts caused by the growth of charter schools.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
(i.e., declarative
(factual or
conceptual),
procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge Influence Assessment
Superintendents must factually
understand how charter schools
are impacting the finances of their
school district.
Procedural/Factual Document Review/Interviews
Superintendents need to know why
students are leaving their
institutions for charter schools.
Factual Interviews
Motivational Influences
Motivation is a critical variable that must be examined when evaluating performance
gaps in an organization. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that many performance problems are
often caused by a lack of motivation. The research indicates that motivation plays a prominent
role in the success of school district superintendents (Kowalski, 2011; Kassebaum, 2011).
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 31
Motivation and satisfaction have been defined both intrinsically and extrinsically. Cameron and
Pierce (1994) defined intrinsic motivation as behaviors that appear to have no identifiable or
tangible reward. On the other hand, extrinsic motivation occurs when a reward is present for
certain actions.
The review of motivational influences examines the impetus for the actions school
district superintendents may take in response to the growth of charter schools in their region.
This section discusses two influences that impact superintendent motivation as it relates to this
study. The first motivational variable is that school leaders must believe they can effectively lead
their school districts in a manner that keeps families from leaving, which corresponds to the self-
efficacy theory of motivation. The second motivational construct analyzes superintendents’
desire to focus resources on strategies that will lead to improvements in student performance.
Self-Efficacy theory
According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy beliefs can be defined as the judgments that
individuals hold about their capabilities to learn or perform courses of action. In essence, self-
efficacy beliefs are the perceptions that people hold about their abilities (Pajares, 2009). The
literature shows that the self-efficacy perceptions people have about themselves are the basis for
motivation as long as their actions result in positive outcomes (Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy
theory impacts the effectiveness and motivation of superintendents.
Superintendent Self-Efficacy. The literature suggests that school leaders need a strong
sense of self-efficacy if they are to persist in pursuing challenging goals such as trying to
compete with charter schools effectively. Leithwood and Steinbach (1995) argue that what
school leaders do is a direct consequence of what they think. For superintendents to be successful
in leading school districts to effectively respond to declines in enrollment, school district leaders
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 32
must have the belief that their school districts can compete. Despite mixed evidence on the
competitive impact of charter schools, Milliman and Maranto (2009) found that charter schools
push area schools to improve by empowering superintendents to make changes that they
somehow felt "were not possible before substantial competitive pressures." The research
suggests that despite the fact that most superintendents believe that the growth of charter schools
negatively impacts their institutions, school districts leaders also believe it is possible to retain
their students by implementing innovations (Ericson & Silverman, 2001; Booker, Gilpatric,
Gronberg, & Jansen, 2008).
Expectancy-value theory
At a basic psychological level, Eccles and her colleague’s (1998) expectancy-value
theory can be summarized into two questions: "Can I do the task?" and "Do I want to do the
task?" (Eccles, 2007). If individuals do not want to do a task, they are unlikely to engage in the
activity thoroughly. Even if a person believes they can successfully perform a task, their
engagement and persistence will depend on whether they have a desire to perform an activity
(Eccles, 2009). According to Wigfield et al. (2006), an individual's perceived ability to
accomplish a task will be a strong predictor of better performance and motivation on a
challenging task. Eccles and her colleagues argue that the enjoyment one derives from a
particular task determines the perceived value of work expects to experience. As expectancy
value relates to the stakeholder group of study, this section evaluates the literature on why
superintendents participate in specific actions in response to the growth of charter schools.
Motivation to change. The research suggests that superintendents' motivation to respond
to charter school growth is often based on their perceptions of the students they may be losing to
the competition. Cummins, Ricciardelli, and Steedman (2014) analyzed perceptions of
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 33
superintendents from Massachusetts and found that most school district leaders believe the
highest achieving students are the most likely to leave their schools and attend charter schools.
The study also found that the superintendents believe that the biggest reason parents choose to
enroll in charter schools is the perception that it is an elite academic alternative. In related
research, Steedman et al. (2014) cited several activities as a result of the competition from
charter schools. Superintendents were more likely to engage in marketing campaigns, develop
new programs in their school districts, and advocate for charter school policies as a result of the
perceptions of which students might leave their school district. Despite the motivation to often
engage in compete with charter schools, research from Massachusetts suggests that school
district leaders often resort to marketing campaigns instead of developing innovative academic
programs (Steedman et al., 2014). Survey data from Kowlaski (2011) tells a different story by
asserting that many school districts have been motivated to create new programs as a result of the
competition from charter schools. In California, some school districts have taken dramatic steps
such as calling on the state of California to place a moratorium on new charter schools due to the
alleged lack of transparency, accountability, and public review (Kopetman, 2015). In each of
these cases, the superintendents’ motivation to act or respond has been dictated by their
perceptions of the negative impact charter schools are having on their organizations. Table 4
summarizes the motivational influences on superintendents and the method of assessment for this
study.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 34
Table 4
Summary of Assumed Motivational Influences on Superintendents
Organizational Mission
The mission of the state’s education system is to “create strong, effective schools that provide a
wholesome learning environment through incentives that cause a high standard of student
accomplishment…” (California State Board of Education, 2017). The California Department of
Education (2017) states that “California will provide a world-class education for students,
parents, from early childhood to adulthood.”
Performance Goal
The goal of school district leaders is to effectively manage the financial challenges posed by the
decline in enrollment in school districts caused by the growth of charter schools.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Superintendents must believe they can lead their
schools in a manner that keeps families from
leaving.
Interviews
Superintendents must be motivated to focus
resources on strategies that will result in
improvements in student performance.
Interviews
Organizational Influences
In addition to knowledge and motivation influences, there are organizational factors that
impact the ability of a school district leader to effectively respond to the growth of charter
schools. Clark and Estes (2008) explain that even when a requisite level of knowledge and
motivation exist at an institution, performance problems may persist in preventing an
organization from reaching its goals due to a misalignment of resource allocation, internal
processes, and friction related to organizational culture in contrast to those aims. These factors
apply to this case study. In addition to the knowledge and motivation factors previously
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 35
discussed, persistent organizational barriers are a key component to school districts dealing with
the enrollment decline associated with the growth of charter schools.
Perception of competitive disadvantage
School districts often have difficulties responding to the increase of charter schools due
to institutional attitudes rooted in the belief of unfair advantages in laws and regulations that
benefit charter schools. The latest edition of the American Association of School Administrators
(2011) survey of superintendents found that there is an overriding perspective that school
districts cannot compete with competition from charter schools. The national study found that the
vast majority of superintendents hold the perception that they are at a competitive disadvantage
with charter schools (Kowalski et al., 2011). Steedman et al., (2014) interviewed superintendents
and suggested that leaders perceived charter schools to be attracting their highest performing
students despite the success of their respective traditional schools. Furthermore, Leung,
Alejandre, Roxanne, and Jongco (2016) suggested that some charter schools in California could
be illegally restricting enrollment. The evidence of "creaming" of high performing students adds
to organizational perceptions grounded in research that many charter schools often serve racially
and socio-economically segregated populations (Frankenberg et al.; Rotberg, 2014).
Reluctance to make budget reductions. School district leaders are often reluctant to
make the necessary fiscal modifications to respond to the loss of enrollment. The literature
suggests that most superintendents believe that the growth of charter schools has a negative
impact on their school district finances (Ericson et al., 2001; Kowalski et al., 2011; Bifulco &
Reback, 2014). Bifulco and Reback (2014) argue that the fiscal impacts to school districts could
be mitigated if leaders reduced costs by making personnel reductions or closing schools as
enrollment declines. Unfortunately, organizational and political pressures often deter school
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 36
districts from making the necessary modifications. In the Moody's credit agency report (2013),
the financial analyst found that charter schools are negatively impacting traditional public
schools' due to their inability to respond to declines in enrollment quickly. Political pressure
from parents and labor unions put compel superintendents and governing boards to keep schools
open despite drops in enrollment or poor academic achievement levels (Chokshi, 2013). The
Moody's report points to high-profile examples of districts not reducing costs despite large
enrollment declines such as in Philadelphia, Chicago, and Detroit. Similarly, the Los Angeles
Unified School District Independent Financial Review Panel (2016) in the Los Angeles Unified
School District suggested that the school district had failed to make budget reductions in
personnel despite the loss of enrollment that partly caused by charter school growth.
Innovative practices to compete with charter schools. School districts that have been
effective in responding to competition from charter schools have implemented innovative
practices to attract and retain students. It is debatable whether competition from the charter
school sector has had a widespread impact on traditional public schools. Linick and Lubienski
(2013) argue that while there may be many advantages for the students who choose to enroll in
charter schools, there is a limited impact that charter schools may have in other public schools,
particularly in shaping the types of improvement. Prior research from Bettinger (2005) asserted
similar findings in suggesting that charter school competition has no significant impact on test
scores of traditional public schools. Of course, there is also research that demonstrates the
contrary and concluded that the presence of charter schools has, in fact, caused improvement in
nearby traditional public schools (Maranto, 2006; Booker, Gilpatric, Gronberg, & Jansen, 2008).
Regardless of whether the presence of charter schools is, in fact, helping improve all schools,
particular programs or practices often lure parents to select appropriate educational options. An
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 37
organizational culture aimed at benchmarking and improvement can enhance organizational
performance (Clark and Estes, 2011). The literature demonstrates that school district leaders
have often instituted organizational initiatives to mitigate the impact of charter school growth in
their areas (Ericson et al., 2001; Linick & Lubienski, 2013; Ricciardelli et al., 2014). Table 5
summarizes the organizational influences that may impact the response to the growth of charter
schools by school district leaders, as well as how the assumed influences will be assessed in the
study.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 38
Table 5
Summary of Assumed Organizational Influences on Superintendents
Organizational Mission
The mission of the state’s education system is to “create strong, effective schools that
provide a wholesome learning environment through incentives that cause a high standard of
student accomplishment…” (California State Board of Education, 2017). The California
Department of Education (2017) states that “California will provide a world-class education
for students, parents, from early childhood to adulthood.”
Performance Goal
The purpose of school district leaders is to effectively manage the financial challenges posed
by the decline in enrollment in school districts caused by the growth of charter schools.
Assumed Organizational Influences Organization Influence Assessment
General perception of competitive
disadvantage to charter schools
Interviews
School district leaders are reluctant to make
necessary budget reductions in response to
lower attendance due to charter school
growth
Interviews
School districts seek to benchmark effective
practices and replicate innovative programs.
Interviews
Summary
This review of literature in this chapter summarizes broad themes related to the impact of
charter schools on traditional public schools. Charter schools have operated in California for
more about 25 years and now serve almost 10% of the state’s student population. The research
demonstrates some evidence of the negative fiscal impact on traditional public schools.
Furthermore, research indicates that the majority of superintendents believe that their school
districts are negatively impacted by charter schools. The literature is mixed on whether the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 39
presence of charter schools causes school district leaders to change their practices in the wake of
the competition. Lastly, this chapter summarized a number of knowledge, motivational, and
organizational issues that may impact a superintendent’s ability to respond to declines in
enrollment caused by charter school growth. The following chapter will present the methodology
construct for this project.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 40
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The goal of this project is to study examine the factors that influence school district
leaders’ response to the impact of the growth of charter schools. While charter schools have been
in existence for more than twenty-five years (California Charter School Association, 2016), the
dramatic growth of charter schools in some parts of California is a recent phenomenon (Kwong,
2015). School district leaders believe that the increase of charter schools in their area is having a
negative impact on their organizations (Kopetman, 2015). The stakeholder group of focus in this
study is a sample of school district superintendents in California. School superintendents are
responsible for setting the strategic direction of their organizations, making personnel decisions,
and proposing annual budgets. School superintendents are in a unique position to lead efforts to
respond to the growth of charter schools in their area. As such, this study will use a purposeful
sampling of this stakeholder group. It is important to study underlying influences and propose
solutions that might help school districts deal with the issues presented by the presence of charter
schools in their region. It is also critical to evaluate the impact of the competition on their
respective organizations.
The questions that guide this study are the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences facing
superintendents in leading their organizations in response to the increasing number of
charter schools?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to meet
those needs?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 41
Conceptual Framework
Maxwell (2013) defines a conceptual framework as a system of concepts, assumptions,
beliefs, and theories that inform research. A conceptual framework also referred to as a
theoretical framework, is viewed as a tentative theory of the phenomenon that is being
investigated and a way to justify a research study (Maxwell, 2013). Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
argue that all aspects of a study are affected by its theoretical framework. Maxwell (2013)
suggests that the conceptual framework is something that is constructed as opposed to being
found in the literature. The literature review in this study suggests numerous factors impact a
superintendent’s ability to effectively respond to the growth of charter schools in their school
district. The following framework is a synthesis of how the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences intersect this study.
This study asserts that the manner in which a superintendent responds to the growth of
charter schools determines how the competition impacts their respective school districts.
Superintendents need to possess the factual understanding of how the charter schools in their
geographic area are impacting their institution’s finances. Superintendents cannot be successful
in leading their organizations unless they first understand the factors that impact their school
districts (Benzel & Hoover, 2015). As the literature points out, superintendent actions and
responses have a direct correlation to student achievement for the students in their school
districts (Waters & Marzano, 2006). Given the evidence that many school districts leaders are
deeply concerned about the presence of charter schools and often desire policies to restrict their
emergence (Kopetman, 2015), the hypothesis of this study suggests that leaders who take
specific actions are more likely to be successful in mitigating the impact of the growth of charter
schools. Figure 2 is a visual representation of the cultural settings and models in a school district
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 42
that intersects with a superintendent's assumed knowledge and motivational constructs which
impact the organization's performance goal.
Figure 2. Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
As a leader of an educational institution, the superintendent’s possession of a concrete
vision and strategy to innovate in the presence of competition will influence the organizational
challenges that charter schools may present. Bird and Wang (2011) argue that the training
programs only provide limited guidelines for the practicing superintendent to adequately guide
them as to what actions should be taken to maximize student achievement. This study suggests
that one of the ways superintendents can effectively develop strategies to retain students in their
districts is to understand why the families are seeking to go to charter schools. The rationale for
Organization: School Districts
Cultural Settings and Cultural Models
• Reluctance to make necessary reductions in the
wake of lower enrollment
• Replicating effective practices to keep students in
districts
Stakeholders: Superintedents
Knowledge, Skills & Motivation
• Factual knowledge of understanding
the impact of charter schools on their
districts and why students may be
leaving school district
• Knowledge/skills to implement budget
strategies to deal with charter school
growth
• Motivation to balance the budget and
focus resources on strategies that
increase achievement
Stakeholder Goal
Develop and implement balanced
budgets that focus resources on
improving student achievement
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 43
the exodus of students to charter schools most often depends on the quality and makeup of their
local schools. Clark and Estes (2008) assert that a primary aspect of addressing organizational
issues is to benchmark effective practices and develop a plan to address gaps in performance.
Superintendents who take decisive actions to address students leaving their school district, the
performance gap, in this case are more likely to be successful in dealing with the presence of
charter schools in their region (Kopetman, 2015).
In addition to the knowledge and motivational factors that impact the ability of
superintendents to effectively respond to the competition, organizational issues such as political
resistance to budgetary reductions can hamper efforts to strategically target resources. Many
school districts have failed to adjust their budgets and staffing levels despite the loss of
enrollment due to charter schools (Los Angeles Unified School District Independent Financial
Review Panel, 2015). School district leaders are often reluctant to propose budgetary reductions
due to pressure from labor unions and other stakeholders who will resist personnel and
programmatic changes (Bifculo & Reback, 2014; Choskhi, 2013). A superintendent’s ability to
understand how to respond to a decline in enrollment coupled with the motivation to make
changes within a school district may impact how the organization adapts to changes that may be
necessary to mitigate the impact of competition.
Methodological Framework
This project employs a mixed method data gathering and analysis. School districts
current efforts to respond to the growth of charter schools will are assessed using interviews,
literature review and content analysis. Research-based solutions will be recommended and
evaluated in a comprehensive manner. This study will utilize Clark and Estes’ (2008) analytical
framework for evaluating the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 44
performance in the respective school districts. Figure 3 is a visual representation of Clark and
Estes’ gap analysis process for addressing organizational performance issues.
Figure 3. Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Process
Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis process utilizes several different types of approaches
to gather and analyze data. Research studies can apply qualitative methods such as observations,
surveys, interviews, document analyses, and focus groups; quantitative methods such as surveys;
and mixed methods, which combine qualitative and quantitative methods. This study is a
qualitative case study and includes collecting interview and document data. Data analysis
consists of an analysis of qualitative data and descriptive from the quantitative information.
Assessment of Performance Influences
Table 6 is a summary of the assumed influences that impact a superintendent’s response
to a decline in enrollment caused by the growth of charter schools in their region. The table
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 45
includes a delineation of whether the assumed influence is derived from learning, motivation,
and organizational theory or if the assertions originate from the general research literature.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 46
Table 6
Sources of Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences.
Assumed Influences on Superintendent Response to Decline in Enrollment
Source Knowledge and Skills Motivation Organizational Barriers
Learning,
Motivation, and
Organizational
Theory
Superintendents must
possess the procedural
knowledge on how
charter school growth
is impacting their
school district.
Superintendents must
have the declarative
knowledge of why
students are leaving
their school district.
Superintendents must
develop clear and
concise performance
goals for their school
districts.
Superintendents must
have the self-efficacy
to believe their
organizations can
effectively compete
with charter schools.
Superintendents must
be motivated to focus
resources on strategies
that will result in
improvements in
student performance.
The general perception
of a competitive
disadvantage to charter
schools.
Research
Literature
Superintendents must
have the ability to
benchmark gaps in
performance or
programmatic
offerings as compared
to charter schools in
the area.
Superintendents must
be motivated to lead
efforts to make the
budget and
programmatic changes
in response to the
decline in enrollment.
Superintendents will be
motivated focus
strategies to retain
enrollment if they
believe they are losing
highest achieving
students from their
school district.
School district leaders
are reluctant to make
necessary budget
reductions in response
to the decline in
enrollment.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 47
Knowledge Assessment
Table 7 describes the three assumed knowledge influences related to a superintendent’s
ability to respond to the decline in enrollment. The table includes a description of how these
assumed influences were assessed through the use of the document analysis and interviews.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 48
Table 7
Assumed Knowledge Influences and Proposed Assessments.
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Influence Assessment
Superintendents must possess
the knowledge on how charter
school growth is impacting their
school district. (P)
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked how the increase in
charter schools has impacted the finances of their
school district.
Superintendents must
understand why students are
leaving their school district. (P)
Document Analysis:
Review school district Local Control Accountability
Plan (LCAP) to determine what parent feedback (if
any) has been in the stakeholder feedback section.
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked if they survey families
who leave the school district as to why they are
leaving. Superintendents were also asked if they have
evidence on what the factors have led to the decline
in enrollment.
Superintendents must have clear
and concise performance goals
for their school districts. (D)
Document Analysis:
Review school district LCAP for goals about
increasing achievement and addressing attendance.
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked what performance goals
have been developed and how those relate to the
district’s decline in enrollment.
Superintendents must have the
ability to benchmark gaps in
performance or programmatic
offerings as compared to charter
schools in the area. (D)
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked if they have
benchmarked promising practices that may be
offered at charter schools in their area.
Knowledge types for each assumed influence are denoted using the following abbreviations:
(D) = Declarative; (P) = Procedural; (M) = Metacognitive
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 49
Motivation Assessment
Table 8 describes the two assumed motivational influences related to superintendents'
ability to respond to declines in enrollment in their school district. The table includes a
description of how these assumed influences will be assessed through the use of the document
analysis and interview.
Table 8
Assumed Motivational Influences and Proposed Assessments.
Assumed Motivation Influence Motivation Influence Assessment
Self-efficacy:
Superintendents must believe
their organizations can
effectively compete with charter
schools.
Survey:
Ask superintendents if they believe they have the
ability to retain students in their districts. If not,
determine what factors prevent them from doing so.
Value:
Superintendents must be
motivated to focus resources on
strategies that will result in
improvements in student
performance.
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked if the school district has
modified any of its practices as a result of the decline
in enrollment. What factors have been a catalyst for
potential changes?
Value:
Superintendents will be
motivated to focus strategies to
retain enrollment if they believe
they are losing the highest
achieving students from their
school district.
Interview:
Superintendents were asked if there is evidence of
high-achieving students leaving to attend charter
schools. If so, has this caused any change in school
district practices as a result?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 50
Organizational Assessment
Table 9 describes the two assumed organizational influences related to superintendents'
ability to respond to declines in enrollment in their school district. The table includes a
description of how these assumed influences will be assessed through the use of the in-person
interviews and analysis of key documents.
Table 9
Assumed Organizational Influences and Proposed Assessments.
Assumed Organizational Influence Organizational Influence Assessment
Cultural Model:
General perception of competitive
disadvantage to charter schools in
their region.
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked to describe how
they believe current laws and regulations impact
their ability to compete with charter schools.
Cultural Setting:
School district leaders are reluctant to
make necessary budget reductions in
response to the decline in enrollment.
Interviews:
Superintendents were asked if they have made
any programmatic reductions as a result of a
decline in enrollment.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus in this study consist of school district superintendents
representing eight school districts within the state of California. The term “superintendent”
includes individuals appointed by the respective school governing board to serve as the chief
executive of the organization. The leaders of the school districts are in a unique position to set
the direction and vision of the educational institutions (Kassebaum, 2011).
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 51
Data Collection
This study utilizes a mixed-methods approach to assess assumed knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors that influence superintendents' response to charter school growth. In-
person interviews and document analysis are used as the method of collecting data in this study.
The research uses a sample case study approach defined by Maxwell (2013) as the process when
the “researcher states a general question about a broad population, and then selects a particular
sample from the population.” While the research question has implications for a broader
population, the sample will also be purposeful in that it will seek to identify school districts that
have been specifically impacted by the growth of charter schools. Merriman and Tisdell (2016)
advise that to begin a purposive sampling, a determination of selection criteria is essential in
choosing the people or sites to be studied. In developing a sampling and recruitment strategy, the
most important criteria are to select districts and superintendents that have significant impact and
experience with the growth of charter schools. The recruitment strategy sought to secure a
sample that is diverse in regional representation as well as the size of the school district.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants must be a school district superintendent. The conceptual
framework and research questions of this study focus on superintendents.
Criterion 2. Participants must be a superintendent who serves in a school district where
charter schools are operating within their geographical boundaries. To access the impact and
response to charter schools, an evaluation of school districts impacted is necessary.
Criterion 3. Participants must be superintendents who serve in a school district where
enrollment has declined over the previous five years. Charter schools are operating throughout
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 52
the state, but the effects will be more visible in school districts where student enrollment has
declined.
Interview Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
Interviewing superintendents provided the best opportunity to evaluate how the assumed
influences that may impact the response to charter school growth by school districts. Merriman
and Tisdell (2016) suggest that an interview is necessary when we cannot observe behaviors. The
interview allows us to enter into another person's perspective (Patton, 2002). In this qualitative
study, the perspectives of the superintendents are critical to deciphering the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that impact their responses to the growth of charter
schools. The study assessed eight superintendents in school districts impacted by charter school
growth. The purposeful sample allowed for in-depth data and analysis while still providing a
representative cohort from around California. Dexter (1970) suggests utilizing interview as the
preferred tactic of data collection when it will get more data at less cost than other tactics. The
participants were selected from an initial document analysis to identify school districts that have
experienced significant charter school growth and declines in enrollment. Regional
representation and the size of the school district were also considered when selecting the sample.
Interviews
The interview protocol was designed to provide an in-depth examination of school
districts superintendents perspective on the impact of the growth of charter schools as well an
analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that may impact a school
district leader’s ability to respond to the consequential decline in student enrollment. The
literature related to conducting interviews advises that careful consideration must give to the
structure (Pattton, 2002) and questions need to be couched in a familiar language (Merriam &
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 53
Tisdell, 2016). As such, the interview protocol included questions that were open-ended, and
each included additional probing questions that were used with the data collected. The formal
one-hour interviews were all held in the respective offices of the superintendents. Appendix A
contains the interview protocol that was used during the interview.
Document Analysis
The second source of data for this study is an analysis of key public documents. These
documents included statewide enrollment data and Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP)
required under California law. Patton (2002) suggests documents are valuable "not only because
of what can be learned directly from them" but also as a stimulus for paths of inquiry that can
only be pursued through collection methods such as interviewing. The public documents allowed
the researcher to identify potential participants for the interview by identifying school districts
that have experienced charter school growth in the area. The LCAPs identified school district
goals and programmatic objectives.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
This study utilized various strategies to ensure the credibility and trustworthiness of data
collected. First, anonymity and confidentiality were strongly emphasized with all research
participants. The confidentiality of data collected from participants was emphasized in all
correspondence to help encourage participants to express their genuine opinions and
perspectives. Triangulation in this study consisted of comparing topical themes from the
interviews and document analysis to ensure consistency across the differing data collection
methods. The researcher also engaged in reflexivity to identify and address any personal bias that
may be at work in the data collection and analysis processes. Maxwell (2013) suggested
researcher bias as one of the most important threats to the validity of qualitative research.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 54
Providing an up-front explanation of potential researcher bias will allow readers to understand
key context related to how the researcher may have been influenced in the interpretation of data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Validity and Reliability
Reliability refers to whether the results of a data collection instrument are consistent and
stable over time, while validity is a measure of accuracy (Creswell, 2014). According to Fink
(2013), measurement instruments considered reliable are shown to consistently measure the same
construct each time, and instruments that are valid accurately measure the intended construct.
This study is using a custom-developed interview protocol. To help establish reliability and
validity, the interview protocol was pilot tested with some two superintendents who were not
part of the research study.
Summary
Chapter three has presented the methodological framework for examining the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences on the ability of superintendents to respond to the
decline of enrollment in their respective school district. The proposed mixed-methods approach
provided in an in-depth inquiry. The quantitative review of public documents also provides
insight to enrollment trends, the fiscal health of the school districts, and ability to gauge the
performance goals of the organization. The in-person interviews of superintendents provided a
qualitative insight of the influences facing school districts. In chapter four, the school district's
performance goals will be assessed using results from the document analysis and the in-person
interviews. Chapter five will then explore the findings of the research study and describe
research-based performance recommendations to assist school districts leaders to respond to the
decline in enrollment caused by the growth of charter schools.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 55
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this study is to analyze the factors that facilitate or hinder a school district
superintendent's ability to respond to the growth of charter schools effectively. The stakeholder
group of focus in this study is a sample of school district superintendents in California. School
superintendents are in a unique position to lead efforts to respond to the growth of charter
schools in their area. As such, this study used a purposeful sampling of this stakeholder group.
The literature shows that most school district leaders around the state believe that the increase of
charter schools in their area is having a negative impact on their respective schools (Kopetman,
2015). The participants in this study echoed the concerns in documented in the literature that
charter school growth is financially impacting school districts through the loss of enrollment. As
such, it is important to study underlying influences and propose solutions that might help school
districts deal with the issues presented by the presence of charter schools in their region.
The questions that guide this study are the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences facing
superintendents in leading their organizations in response to the increasing number of
charter schools?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to meet
those needs?
During this study, two distinct forms of data were collected to validate the assumed
causes. A document analysis of public information from the California Department of Education
was used to help identify school districts that have experienced charter school growth. The data
was used to help identify potential participants in this study. Subsequently, qualitative data was
collected in the form of interviews. The data collection methods sought to evaluate the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 56
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that affect a school district leader’s ability
to respond to issues related to the growth of charter schools. The results listed in this chapter
have been organized by the categories of assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
causes. Tables have been added, where relevant, to provide a visual analysis and representation
of the data.
Participating Stakeholders
Eight school district superintendents were interviewed for this study. The anonymity of
participants is maintained throughout the study. However, basic demographic information of the
superintendent was collected during the interviews as well as information about their school
district that is publicly available. For the interviews, each of the eight interviewees is referred to
throughout this chapter as “superintendent +” or “S+” with the corresponding interview number
(i.e., S1). The classification allowed for differentiation of quotes pulled from the interviews and
inserted under corresponding influencers. Table 10 summarizes the superintendents who were
interviewed for this project. The specific enrollment of school districts was kept general to
protect the of anonymity of the particular participants.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 57
Table 10
Participating Stakeholders
Participant Years as Superintendent District Enrollment
S1 7 More than 10,000
S2 5 Less than 5,000
S3 4 More than 25,000
S4 7 Less than 2,500
S5 11 More than 10,000
S6 6 More than 25,000
S7 3 More than 25,000
S8 4 More than 7,500
Definition of Validation
Each of the influencers discussed in this chapter has identified gaps that were validated,
partially validated, or not validated based on the data presented. A validated gap is one where
50% or more of the responses agreed, or there was evidence that the influencer impacted the
superintendent’s work. The influence was determined to be partially validated when the data
showed some evidence affecting the superintendents, but there was not overwhelming consensus.
An influence was determined to be not validated when based on the responses, the vast majority
of the participants concluded that the influence cited in the literature was not affecting their
ability to lead their organizations.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 58
Results
Table 11 summarizes the results of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that were validated or partially validated as organizational barriers impacting a
superintendent’s ability to lead their school district in the midst of charter school competition.
Table 11
Summary of Results of KMO Influences
Type Knowledge Validated
(Yes, No or
Partially)
Procedural Superintendents often lack the skills to manage the
fiscal impact of the growth of charter schools
Yes
Factual Superintendents do not understand why students are
leaving
Yes
Motivation
Self-Efficacy Superintendents did not believe they can effectively
lead their schools in a manner that retains students.
Partially
Expectancy-Value Superintendents were not motivated to lead change in
their school districts
Partially
Organizational
Cultural Model Superintendents did not believe they could effectively
compete with charter schools because of structural
disadvantages
No
Cultural Setting Superintendents are reluctant to make necessary
budget reductions despite declining revenue
Yes
Cultural Model Superintendents failed to benchmark effective
practices and programs
Partially
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 59
Results for Knowledge Influences
Using the aforementioned data collection tools, the assumed factual and procedural
knowledge influences were examined. The interview protocol utilized questions related to factual
and procedural knowledge outlined in the Clark and Estes (2008) framework. The questions were
directed to the participants in a semi-structured interview in a manner aimed at understanding if
the knowledge and skills highlighted in the literature were critical influencers that affected their
performance. The interview results demonstrated that a number of performance gaps exist with
the school district leaders who participated in this study. The results of the knowledge section
showed a general agreement among the participants that many superintendents who enter the
profession may lack the operational skills to lead their organizations in challenging times. The
interview data also suggested that many of the superintendents in this sample are not taking steps
to understand why students are leaving their school district.
Knowledge Influence #1: Skills to manage the fiscal impact of charter schools. The
interview data collected validated the assertion that many of the superintendents lack the skills to
manage the fiscal impact of the growth of charter schools. The majority of participants discussed
the challenges of lacking the knowledge to handle the fiscal challenges of the superintendency
and noted that many of their colleagues might not be prepared for the challenges of the position.
The perspectives from the interview participants are consistent with the literature which noted
superintendents could not be successful in leading their organizations unless they are grounded
in the factors that impact the finances of their school district (Benzel & Hoover, 2015).
A number of the participants suggested that superintendents are often promoted to jobs
without the fiscal expertise to manage their district’s operations and finances. Superintendent 4
noted the following:
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 60
I think the biggest challenge is not having the expertise and knowing that they weren't
always doing a good job for kids. Especially when it comes to dealing with operational
and fiscal issues. The job of superintendent is often very different than working as an
instructional leader or principal.
Superintendent 2 articulated a similar sentiment as well as some frustration about fellow
school district leaders, “We're doing all this crap, and the state just throws the money at us and
say, "Good luck." Then they put it in the hands of board members and the superintendents that
don't have that expertise.” Superintendent 5, a county superintendent, noted the challenges of
overseeing school districts with leaders that don’t possess the knowledge to manage the fiscal
challenges of the job:
It was frustrating to see principals who would step right into the superintendent role and
not know what they were doing with financial issues. The biggest struggle in our county
was probably having leaders not having the expertise in those small districts. We were
always trying to help them.
The responses from the three superintendents reflect the perspectives from most of the
participants. The lack of fiscal and operational knowledge appears to be more prevalent in the
small to mid-size school districts. Participants from the larger school districts noted that they
were able to rely on budget officials with extensive experience who provide support to the
superintendent in making critical fiscal decisions. Interestingly, most of the participants did not
acknowledge that they lacked specific knowledge or skills to be effective in their position but
made assertions of their fellow superintendents. For example, the county superintendent in the
sample argued that many of the superintendents in his region get promoted to become a
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 61
superintendent very quickly from school site positions without any experience managing large
systematic challenges.
The superintendents also indicated that a lack of fiscal and operational knowledge would
make it more difficult to deal with the challenges of continued charter school growth. The
perspective of the superintendents is also consistent with the literature stating that it is difficult to
prioritize resources with the goal of increasing student achievement if the leader does not fully
grasp the true fiscal impact of charter schools in their region (Benzel & Hoover, 2015;
Ricciardelli et al., 2014). The evidence from the literature and the data collection demonstrate
that school district superintendents believe their organizations are losing revenues as a result of
the increasing number of charters schools attracting their students. The majority of the
superintendents in this sample acknowledged background and experience are critical when a
school district leader is in a position where they must work with their respective school board
and the broader community to prioritize funding and target it in a way where the limited
resources increase achievement. In summary, it is evident from the data that many
superintendents throughout the state would benefit from more training and additional resources
to manage many of the operational leadership challenges they confront in their roles.
Knowledge Influence #2: Superintendents need to understand why students are
leaving. The interview data coupled with a lack of evidence from the document analysis indicate
that many of the superintendents are not taking the necessary steps to understand why students
may be leaving their school districts. The literature suggested that district leaders who took
actions to collect data on why their students were leaving their schools were often in a better
position to respond to the competition (Kolawski, 2011). School district leaders who understand
why families may be leaving their school districts are better prepared to lead efforts to
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 62
implement programs that could raise achievement and dissuade families from electing to attend a
charter school in their region. The interview data also demonstrated that superintendents often
make assertions about why students are leaving their school districts, but the assumptions are not
necessarily grounded in specific evidence collected from families in their communities. The
document analysis, used to triangulate the interview data, showed little evidence of
organizational goals for any of the school districts aimed at collecting data on why students may
be leaving their respective school districts. One superintendent in the participant sample made a
specific claim regarding why students had left his school district but proceeded to admit that he
didn't find much value in trying to gather data to substantiate the assertions. Similarly,
Superintendent 6 claimed the decline in enrollment was primarily caused by the rise in cost of
housing in his region, although available public data on housing prices did not seem to confirm
the assertion. The following response from S6 is one of the assertions made in the interviews:
Students are not leaving to attend charter schools. They are primarily leaving because the
cost of housing has surged in the region. I don’t believe most of those families are ending
up in charters. Families are generally happy and content here. More often than not, we
can’t do much when we lose students.
Over the course of the interview, Superintendent 6 was also asked if they had made any effort to
collect data on why students are leaving but noted that "no one responds to surveys" and it is not
worth the effort. It should be noted that the perspectives shared by S6 were different than some
superintendents who cited evidence that understanding why families leave their school districts is
an organizational priority. S1 described his school district’s efforts in this regard:
We have a central enrollment facility so when people dis-enroll we have a survey we ask
them to take. It's actually one of our parent advisory committees that asked that we start
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 63
doing that. Then even [the school district] will follow up with some of those folks with
direct phone calls.
Superintendent 2 described the efforts of his school district and discussed how as a member of a
smaller community, it is critical that they understand what might drive students away.
We've lost a hundred students over the last four years, that concerns me because I take it
personally, so I actually looked at every kid that left my district myself. I want to know
where did they go? They have to tell us where they go so we can send their files. I really
believe that we can't figure out what to change if we don’t understand what is driving
them away.
Another superintendent discussed efforts on understanding the school district
community’s needs before families leave to a charter school or another educational alternative.
S3 described a practice that originated as a result of the school district’s efforts to stem the
enrollment loss as charter schools grew in her school district.
I've started a practice of organizing focus groups with 50 moms at a time. Dads are
obviously welcomed too but the marketing centered around mothers. I want to hear, what
are the hopes, what are the fears of my community and then we'll build it from there. And
then I can say to the community; this is what I heard. Why wait until they are gone before
trying to figure out what they wanted.
The superintendents who have prioritized efforts to collect data or engage their
community have learned valuable lessons on what may be driving away their families. Of the
superintendents who acknowledged efforts in collecting data from families, the majority cited
school safety as a reason families are seeking an educational alternative. For example, S3 leads a
large urban school district and discussed the fact that many of the families who depart her
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 64
schools believe a charter school will offer a safer educational environment for their children.
Another prevailing theme that was discussed was an underlying perception that the charter
schools are offering a superior academic experience as compared to the education they receive in
the traditional public schools. Of the four superintendents who cited a perception of a superior
academic environment, it is not surprising that all of them dismissed that notion and argued that
the "charter school" denomination often is perceived by the community as better regardless of
academic results.
While there was some evidence of superintendent prioritizing efforts to collect data on
why students may be leaving, the assumed performance gap of many superintendents not
knowing why families are leaving was validated. Despite the best practices highlighted in this
section, a significant number of the superintendents could not describe specific efforts to collect
perspectives from in their community. The lack of evidence in the school district LCAPs is also
troubling as state law requires school administrators to engage their respective community
stakeholders on an annual basis. The superintendents who prioritized efforts to understand why
their families had departed also argued that they are in a better position to serve their
community's needs due to hearing directly from families in their school district.
Results for Motivational Influences
The interview results also sought to validate the assumed motivational influences found
in the literature. The survey utilized questions related to a superintendent's self-efficacy and the
expectancy value of potential actions to respond to charter schools. The interview sought to
identify motivational barriers to a superintendent's efforts to lead their organization in the wake
of charter school growth. The interview data was consistent with the assumed motivational
influences found in the literature. The results from the motivational influence questions showed
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 65
that many superintendents do not believe they can directly influence a family's decision to stay in
their school district. Additionally, the data also showed that while most superintendents are
motivated to implement changes to effectively compete with a charter school; some school
district leaders demonstrated little evidence of innovative practices in their schools.
Motivational Influence #1: Superintendents must believe they can effectively lead their
schools in a manner that retains students. Only four of the eight superintendents believed they
had a personal impact on a family's decision to leave their school district. Half of the
superintendents believe they have a critical role in leading efforts to recruit and retain students
but were hesitant to assert that any of their direct actions can persuade a family’s decision. As a
result, a motivational barrier suggesting that superintendents did not believe they can effectively
lead their schools in a manner that retains students was only partially validated. The literature
presented evidence that effective school district leaders should possess a strong self-efficacy and
a belief that it is possible to retain their students by implementing innovations in their
organizations (Ericson & Silverman, 2001; Booker, Gilpatric, Gronberg, & Jansen, 2008). A lack
of a strong self-efficacy by a superintendent is an apparent organizational barrier to leading
efforts to retain students in their school district. S8 is one of the district leaders who did not
believe their actions had a direct correlation to retaining students.
I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about that. A family’s decision to leave is going to be
very personal despite what I do or even what specific programs I implement. Most
families are going to leave regardless of what we do or don’t do.
S6 delivered a similar message in arguing that their influence to retain students is limited:
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 66
I can accomplish a lot of things as superintendent, but I can’t control what every family
wants to do. If a family believes a charter school is better, it is going to be hard to change
their mind and keep them in the school district.
As noted, half of the participants were adamant that they can lead the school district in a
manner that impacts a family's decision to stay in the school district. Superintendent 1 was one of
the individuals who shared that belief and noted the following:
Ultimately, I am in charge of putting the individuals at our schools who are going to most
impact that decision. I believe that the better I do in selecting highly effective school site
leaders, the more successful this school district is going to be in keeping students here.
One of the superintendents believes that the motivation to connect with every family is much
stronger in his smaller school district. S4 offered the following:
If every principal and teacher takes the time to connect with every family in our school
district, I guarantee it has an impact on the families in this community. I believe the
charter schools do a good job at this and I believe that I can create a culture where that is
expected here.
Based on the interview data in this sample, the superintendents from larger school
districts were inclined to believe they have less influence on the retention of students. Most of
the superintendents in smaller school district believed that their specific actions or those of the
employees make a big difference in their communities. This is not surprising given some of their
responses about collecting data on why families may be leaving. The superintendents from
smaller communities tended to believe that personal connections often build a connection to the
schools. As a result of the mixed perspectives from the superintendents, the assumed influence
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 67
that superintendents lack the self-efficacy that they can retain students was deemed to be
partially-validated.
Motivational Influence #2: Superintendents must be motivated to implement change.
The interview data demonstrated that some of the superintendents who participated in this study
might not be motivated to implement organizational change in their school district. As a result,
an assumed motivational performance gap was partially-validated. Expectancy-value theory
(Eccles, 2009) suggests that even if a person believes they can successfully perform a task, their
engagement and persistence will depend on whether they have a desire to perform an activity. A
number of the superintendents in this study indicated that it was necessary for individuals in their
capacity to see specific value in taking actions that could potentially retain students. The
interview data also seemed to indicate that when superintendents believe their actions would
make a difference, they expressed a stronger willingness to engage in specific change strategies.
One example of this theory in practice is derived from S7 when discussing his motivation to
create an independent studies program to compete with charter schools in their area directly:
We opened a brand-new school this last year for those kids that are completely
disillusioned by seat based instruction. We're probably the first district to do this in a
non-charter setting. I pulled a principal out a couple of years ago, and I said, " We need to
do this because if we don't do something, we are going to lose this kid." I have never
been more motivated to make something happen after seeing that is helping retain some
of our students.
On the other hand, Superintendent 6 was very adamant in his frustration when discussing
the lack of effort from many of his colleagues in the school system who are reluctant to try
different strategies. S6 stated, "we can’t keep doing things the way we always have, we are done
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 68
if we do.” S5, who serves as county superintendent of schools, also discussed displeasure of in
the apathy of some of the school leaders he oversees:
The charters created some competition that could be helpful. Some of the superintendents
who grew up in that system try to do something because they know it may cost them their
jobs if they don't. Unfortunately, most of them bitch and moan about charters setting up
near them but don't seem motivated to do anything different.
It is evident that a superintendent’s motivation to lead specific initiatives was often
dictated by whether they found value in the activities. While most of the school districts in the
study have suffered from declining enrollment in their regions according to statewide data, the
document analysis showed that a number of school districts have been effective in slowing the
trend. Across the interviews, superintendents 1 and 7 articulated the most enthusiasm for their
efforts to change practices in their school districts with the goal of improving achievement and
retaining students as a result. Both of the superintendents spoke effusively about their motivation
to try innovative practices. For example, S1 stated that he devoted a lot of time and energy to
activities such as collecting data, gathering student perspectives, and trying to model some of the
lessons he has learned from other effective schools around the state because he believed that was
the best way to inform his district's practices.
Unfortunately, many of the superintendents in the sample did not express the same
enthusiasm or motivation to implement efforts to change their traditional practices. In fact, there
was an underlying sentiment that many of the programs that charter schools institute would not
be successful or feasible in their traditional school districts. While most of the superintendents in
the sample did not personally acknowledge a lack of motivation, a considerable number of them
discussed the lack of effort many of their colleagues in other school districts demonstrate. For the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 69
aforementioned reasons, this study concludes that a lack of motivation to lead change is a barrier
for several of the superintendents in this project and may be an issue for many school district
leaders across California.
Results for Organizational Influences
The interview questions also sought to validate the organizational influences cited in the
literature that could impact a superintendent’s ability to respond to charter school growth. Clark
and Estes (2008) state that even when a requisite level of knowledge and motivation exist at an
institution, performance problems may persist in preventing an organization from reaching its
goals due to a misalignment of resource allocation, internal processes, and friction related to
organizational culture. The data collection revealed that while there was some consistency with
the organizational influences outlined in the literature, not all of the research themes were
validated by the interview data in this study. For example, the responses from the interviews
were not necessarily consistent with survey data cited in the literature that suggested the
existence of a pervasive culture where school district leaders believe that they are at a
competitive disadvantage with charter schools. Conversely, the data demonstrated that
superintendents are often reluctant to make necessary budget reductions despite declining
revenue. Lastly, the interview responses also suggest that many superintendents failed to
benchmark effective practices and programs.
Organizational Influence #1: Perception of a competitive disadvantage to charter
schools. While the participants discussed several variables that make competition with charter
schools difficult, they did not believe that a competitive disadvantage prevented them from
effectively competing to retain students in their school district. For this reason, the assumed
influence arguing that school districts cannot compete with competition from charter schools was
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 70
not validated with the interview data. The superintendents in this sample confirmed that they do
not believe the competitive playing field is level but stopped short of suggesting that their school
districts could not effectively work to retain students. Superintendent 3 offered the following
perspective when responding to the question regarding her perception of advantages charter
schools may possess but disagreed they are at a disadvantage:
I think that I'm envious of the agility that a charter school has. They don't have all the
bureaucracy that we have. I would say that to me is the one strategic advantage, the
agility to drive change very quickly in a small setting. It is harder for a district like mine
to do that but I certainly do not think we are incapable either.
S2 noted that charter schools in his area offer financial incentives that a traditional school system
will never be able to match.
There are a couple of charter schools that offer better incentives than us. A big charter
school that's gaining steam is Inspire because they're giving parents $1,500 bucks. That's
their thing. I'll give you $1,500. You can use it on anything you want…on special
curriculum or supplies, they can just turn in the receipts or go to the school…Even with
all of those advantages, I know I can attract a better set of principals and teachers that are
more prepared.
The two additional themes that consistently were highlighted in the interviews as distinct
advantages for charter schools were the presence of an appointed school board and their
flexibility in personnel decisions. Superintendent 7 summarized the differences in school boards
in a manner that was consistent with the perspectives of almost every superintendent who
participated in the study:
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 71
One of the biggest differences between us and charter schools is that they appoint their
board, and it's not an elected board. And I say that with all due respect to my board but
this is a game changer. When you have an elected school board, you don’t always have
all of the board members buying into your vision. It is completely different to have
individuals who are making decisions which are not always thinking about getting
reelected or running for a different office.
All eight superintendents also pointed out that charter schools typically have much more
discretion to make personnel changes and do not always have to abide by the restrictive human
resources protections offered to teachers by California law in traditional public schools. Below is
an excerpt from S2 which is consistent with the perspective of all of the participants in this
sample:
Probably the biggest piece around that is just their ability to deal with staff. As much as I
like our union leadership and what we've done, there are still some teachers we have that
are ineffective. The amount of time and energy it takes to deal with problem teachers.
When I was principal, I had to write up a teacher 33 times. Eventually, he got a
negotiated settlement and moved to a different school. This would never happen in a
charter school!
Despite the strong opinions on advantages charter schools possess, the prevailing perspective
was that the superintendents could lead in a manner that provides quality education to their
students regardless of the lack of comparable flexibility. S3 offered the following perspective
which was shared by a majority of the participants.
The charter schools can do a lot of things that we cannot because of more restrictive laws
and regulations. Then again, we usually have the advantage of better pay for our teachers,
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 72
better benefits, newer facilities. Do I want some of the flexibilities charter schools to
enjoy? Absolutely! Do I think we should just pack up because they have certain
advantages? Not at all. I am here in this system for a reason. I think most of the people in
this school district feel share my feelings.
Based on their responses, the participants in this study believed that charter schools
benefit from some of the differences in the legal structure they operate in. Interestingly, many of
the superintendents spoke of these differences as variables that would make it easier to lead
effective organizations. For example, S6 discussed how this district’s student achievement would
likely be higher if he didn’t have to make the political concessions to his union and to board. S7
argued that the classroom instruction would likely improve with added flexibility in personnel
decision in her traditional public schools. While none of the superintendents directly articulated
the particular point, many of the statements suggest that they believe that many of the practices
in charter schools benefit students. This perspective is noteworthy because some of these same
superintendents also believe that charter school growth should be curtailed due to the impact on
their traditional schools.
Despite the acknowledgment of numerous advantages, the superintendents all dismissed
the notion that they are unable to effectively compete with charter schools because of the legal
and structural differences. The uniformity in perspectives on the questions related to this
assumed influence is compelling in light of many of their responses to the questions related to
their motivation to lead change. The interview data suggested that there is a lack of motivation to
implement change in a number of the school districts. Despite some potential inconsistencies in
the responses, the school district leaders in this study unanimously believed that they could be
effective in competing with charter schools in their communities.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 73
Organizational Influence #2: Superintendents are reluctant to make budget reductions.
The participants in the interview validated the perspective found in the literature (Chokshi, 2013,
Los Angeles Unified School District Independent Financial Review Panel, 2016) that proposing
and implementing budget reductions is challenging despite decreased revenue as a result of
lower attendance. The superintendents noted that it is difficult to consolidate programs or schools
because declining enrollment usually does not impact the school district in a concentrated
fashion. Additionally, the school district leaders discussed the reluctance of school board
members and the pressures from labor unions and community groups to realign their resources in
the wake of decreased revenues. The struggle to make budgetary reductions often leads to an
inability to align the allocation of resources with the goals and priorities of the organization.
Most of the superintendents had experience in making reductions or closing schools’ due
to enrollment loss, and almost all of them indicated that the success of those efforts is contingent
on the type of relationship they share with the labor unions in their school district. When
responding to the question of how the school district has responded to declining trends,
Superintendent 4 offered the following:
It is not easy to simply close a school down when you are losing a few kids from different
parts of the school district. It would be one thing if they were all leaving from the same
neighborhood but it rarely works that way. We usually lose a few from one school and
some from another school. What people often miss is that is not like we can simply
combine the schools and go on our way. This is not even mentioning the politics of
trying to close a school down.
The perspectives of S4 were consistent with the argument that was made in the Moody’s report
(Chokshi, 2013) that discussed why school districts like Detroit and Cleveland were struggling to
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 74
respond to the growth of charter schools in their region. Superintendent 1, who runs a mid-sized
suburban school district, offered a similar perspective.
On paper, the financial decisions look simple. Reduce the number of employees and
consolidate schools and your problem is solved. It just doesn’t work that way. First of all,
it is never easy to consolidate because we usually lose students from across the school
district. Two, there is the community, and then there is the union. Where you find the
union, you will usually find a number of the board members.
The topic of closing schools as a result of declines in enrollment also came up in a number of the
interviews. Superintendent 8, a superintendent with experience in multiple school districts,
discussed how complicated that process could be even when the numbers dictate reductions.
In my last district where I was a deputy, we had a school where the majority of the
community had essentially abandoned a low performing school. The enrollment had
dropped so drastically that the school should have been closed. Many of those students
ended up in charter schools or neighboring districts. Even though the school was
underperforming and was not financially sustainable, the board did not approve the
closure due to pressure from the union and the community. We eventually did consolidate
the students and closed the school, but it made the leadership very gun-shy about
proposing further school closures.
Another underlying theme that came up in every interview as influencing the ability of a
superintendent to make changes was the relationship with their respective labor union partners.
In fact, the issue of relationships with their collective bargaining partners was a larger
organizational influence that vastly impacted their ability to respond to charter schools and be
effective in many respects. The following is an example of how Superintendent 7 explained why
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 75
their collective bargaining partners, primarily the teachers’ union, increase their reluctance to
make systematic changes in the wake of reductions in student enrollment.
The union often holds on to the status quo even when it is not in their best interest to do
so. As superintendent, it is difficult when you have a union who is not serious about
being a partner. Too often, we have to wait until the problems get at the tipping point
before we can do anything about it. I've tried to get my union president to see the road
ahead, but they make it clear they will hold the line. If they cooperate with the
administration too much, they will often get replaced as well.
While S7 did not offer a specific example of the teachers' union inhibiting organizational change,
superintendent 4 discussed the union's reluctance to create a full-day kindergarten program
which could have attracted more families to their school district. According to S4, the teachers'
union wanted to reopen the contract and asked for further concessions in return for the school
district moving all elementary schools to full-day kindergarten. The union argued that the change
was a modification in working conditions and should be negotiated. The school district
ultimately scaled back their plan to implement full-day kindergarten.
A review of the LCAPs from the participant’s school districts showed minimal evidence
of strategic reprioritization of resources in the wake of lower revenues. While all of the school
districts represented in this study have experienced declines in student enrollment, the fiscal
impact could be masked by subsequent years of increased funding from the state. In other words,
while every district in the sample is theoretically losing revenues due to decreased student
enrollment, the impact has been somewhat offset by more overall funding going to education in
California. With few exceptions, the superintendents have not been forced to make reductions as
of yet due to students leaving their school districts to attend charter schools. Despite that fact, the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 76
majority of the superintendents acknowledged that it is difficult to make reductions even when
they are necessary to balance their budgets or to strategically redeploy resources to better serve
the students who remain in their school district.
Organizational Influence #3: Culture of benchmarking effective practices. All of the
superintendents interviewed in this sample acknowledged the value of benchmarking effective
practices, but some of the leaders were more specific in discussing their efforts to research and
replicate innovative practices. The assumed organizational barrier of many superintendents
failing to benchmark effective practices was also validated in this study. The literature showed
how many school district leaders have often instituted organizational initiatives with the goal of
mitigating the impact of charter school growth in their areas (Ericson et al., 2001; Linick &
Lubienski, 2013; Ricciardelli et al., 2014). These practices are consistent with the organizational
theory that argues that leaders should benchmark performance against industry leaders and close
the performance gap (Clark and Estes, 2006). While a few of the superintendents were adamant
and enthusiastic about their efforts to identify best practices and strive to close the gap in their
districts, other superintendents simply did not show evidence of similar activities. It should also
be noted that no evidence of efforts to benchmark or innovate was expressly cited in the school
district LCAPs as organizational goals. Consistent with other responses in the interviews, many
of the superintendents believed that many of their fellow superintendents were not doing
everything in their power to utilize lessons from promising practices in other schools.
Nonetheless, the examples of the participants in this sample cited measures to investigate and
potentially replicate programs that may attract students and improve student achievement serve
as a promising practice that can be utilized in other schools.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 77
Superintendent 4, the leader of one of the largest school districts in the study, discussed going
directly to charter schools with the goal of learning what they are doing better than her schools.
I try to regularly walk those classrooms. I want to see what they are doing. You'd be
surprised that most charter school leaders aren't trying to keep their work a secret. I just
don't think people in the traditional schools often ask to see. I have friends who run
charter schools across the state and around the country. Whenever I get the chance, I try
to get in there and see what is working. I don't always think what they are doing is better
than anything we have but I am constantly wanting to see what the draw is.
Superintendent 1, the leader from a school district who has been successful in recouping
some of the enrollment they had lost over the last decade (California Department of Education,
2017), discussed his efforts to research and implement innovative practices. The superintendent
believes that school district efforts to apply the lessons they have learned have been a big reason
for their success in stemming the tide of students leaving the school district.
I realized that the best school in Los Angeles is not a school on the West Side in Malibu
or Brentwood, it is the KIPP charter school in Boyle Heights. As an educator, it would be
irresponsible not to try to figure out what they were doing down there. I was impressed
with their parent engagement efforts, their willingness to offer flexibility to their teachers
in instruction. We have taken some of those lessons and started applying that here.
Superintendent 7 believes the biggest lessons to be learned from charter schools is how
they market to and recruit families. Marketing of traditional public schools was an issue that
consistently came up as a deficiency of public-school leaders. Despite S5's motivation to bring
the same entrepreneurial organizational attitude to his school district, he notes that the charter
schools have been less willing to help. S5 stated, "I've wanted to learn what they are doing on the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 78
marketing end, how they are doing it and they have not returned any of my calls." A number of
the other superintendents discussed a desire to close the gap in recruitment efforts but cited a
lack of resources as barriers to aggressively pursuing those initiatives. Despite the evidence of
district leaders attempting to create cultures where they benchmark effective practices, two of the
superintendents noted that this continues to be a persistent gap amongst traditional schools. S5,
who sits on a statewide advisory committee that makes recommendations on charter petitions,
shared the following:
Some of these superintendents come up, and I don't think they have a leg to stand on,
because here's a charter school that's offering your child can learn two different
languages, and if your district doesn't offer that, then you know what? That charter school
has a right to be there.
Superintendent 4, the county superintendent in the group, reiterated a theme discussed early
when responding to a question about what type of benchmarking was occurring in his county.
They are just doing the same things they have always done. There is a lot of examples of
practices that could be successful here, but you have to try to be innovative. More often
than not, I just see these guys doing the same things they have always done and
complained about the fact that the charters are taking their kids.
It is evident from the interview responses that superintendents who have put forth the
effort to investigate best practices believe their organizations are more effective due to those
efforts. Many leaders have attempted to institute a culture where their organizations aim to assess
what is working in charter schools and traditional public schools with records of success. These
examples of benchmarking effective practices also serve as a practice that can be modeled in
other school districts. Unfortunately, there were too many of the interview participants who did
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 79
not demonstrate explicit evidence of what they are doing to learn from others. The lack of
evidence, coupled with the prevailing perspective amongst the superintendents that many of their
peers are failing to create cultures of inquiry is the rationale for validating the assumed
performance gap in this study.
Findings
The validation of many of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational performance
barriers impact a school district’s response to the charter schools. In addition to the assessment of
the assumed KMO influences, a number of additional organizational conclusions emerged in the
data collection. The following section summarizes a number of findings from the data collection.
Reasons for Students Leaving
While some of the superintendents in the sample discussed strategies to gather
information on why families in their school district might be leaving, it is clear that many of the
school district leaders do not have precise knowledge of why students are leaving and often
offered vague explanations on not attempting to collect better information. The superintendents
who have collected data from families who have left or are considering attending a charter
school have learned that many families depart due to a perception that the new school will be a
better learning environment. School safety was a consistent theme that superintendents who
collect data heard from their community. Additionally, school district leaders confirmed that
many of the families are leaving the traditional public schools due to a belief that the charter
schools will offer a better academic environment for their children.
Critical Relationship with Labor Representatives
An important theme that emerged in the interviews with the superintendents was the
importance of the superintendent’s relationship with their respective labor unions in leading
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 80
efforts to respond to charter school growth. The superintendents who expressed the most
confidence in their efforts to lead their organization all cited the importance of their relationship
with the labor union presidents. On the other hand, S6 leads the biggest district in the sample and
acknowledged that lack of “labor peace” was the most significant hurdle to dealing with all of
the organizations challenges including trying to implement new efforts to compete with charter
school growth. The perspectives from the superintendents are consistent with literature that
argues that labor-management collaboration has an impact on the effectiveness of school district
leadership (Rubinstein, 2017).
Failure to Pursue Statutory Flexibility
A majority of the superintendents who were interviewed acknowledged that many of the
flexibilities that California charter schools possess would benefit their ability to effectively lead
their organizations. Surprisingly, none of the superintendents discussed efforts to attempt to get
waivers from the California education code as authorized under current law. School districts can
currently petition the state board of education to waive most of the education code with the
exceptions of most statutes pertaining to health and safety codes, personnel decisions, and
collective bargaining (Cal. Education Code § 33050)
It is obvious that the limitations on human resource issues are one of the biggest concerns
for traditional public-school leaders, but that still leaves superintendents with a lot of latitude to
pursue budgetary and operational flexibility similar to what charter schools possess. The political
dynamics to obtain these waivers is not always simple, but superintendents should consider what
is possible under the current construct of the law.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 81
Marketing Traditional Public Schools
Superintendents consistently acknowledged having a lack of knowledge on how to best
market their schools and their programs to attract students. A majority of the participants cited a
lack of capacity in knowing how to best lead efforts to advertise their academic programs to
compete with charter schools. The superintendents acknowledge lacking the skills or capacity to
publicize the benefits of the organizations they are leading. The lack of knowledge in marketing
and advertising is impacting school districts’ ability to compete with charter schools who are
often utilizing aggressive recruitment efforts.
Little Evidence of Change
A prevailing theme across the interviews is the growth of charter schools in the respective
participant's regions have motivated a number of them to reevaluate their current practices.
While some of the literature on charter schools suggests that competition from charter schools is
not a catalyst to encourage change in public schools, many of the leaders in this study asserted
that presence of reputable alternatives is forcing them to analyze their practices. With that said,
the interviews also pointed out than many of them are not motivated to institute changes, and
others are not doing enough to modify the way they have traditionally conducted business.
Summary
This chapter presented data collected via interviews to assess the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences that impact a superintendent’s response to the growth of charter
schools in their region. Results of the project demonstrated a high probability that there are a
number of influences that are manifesting themselves as barriers affecting a superintendent's
ability to lead efforts to respond to the competition from charter schools effectively. The project
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 82
successfully validated or partially validated the likely existence of six of the assumed KMO
barriers that may inhibit the leadership of a superintendent.
The interview data demonstrated that many superintendents might not be doing
everything within their power and authority to lead efforts to make their school districts more
appealing to families in their community. While the responses demonstrated a number of
promising practices from the school district leaders, a number of the superintendents are blaming
charter schools for many of their problems without taking specific actions to mitigate the impact.
The following chapter offers recommendations and discusses potential solutions to mitigate the
impact of the validated organizational barriers.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 83
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter one of this study revealed a current problem in practice in California education:
many school districts are struggling to meet the challenges posed by the growth of charter
schools across the state. Specifically, chapter one outlined why this was a problem and why it is
important to find solutions to this problem of practice. Chapter two reviewed relevant literature
that highlighted the influencers that could affect a school district leader’s ability to respond to the
issues that result from the growth of charter schools. A review of the theoretical framework
presented by Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO model was also provided. Chapter three explained
the study design and methodology that was used to deploy this qualitative study. Chapter four
provided an analysis of the data collected and a summary of findings and results from the study.
The data was presented in the same order of knowledge, motivation and organizational
influencers that were described in the influencers table in chapter three. This chapter will provide
recommendations that mitigate the barriers to responding to the growth of charter schools. The
chapter will also provide a framework for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the
recommendations.
Organizational Context and Mission
This study focuses on public school districts in California. California authorizes more
charter schools than any other state in the country (California Charter School Association, 2015).
There are almost 1,900 charter schools operating in the state (California Department of
Education, 2017) with a population of more than 580,000 students which amounts to
approximately 9% of the statewide student population. Charter schools are located in 54 of
California’s 58 counties.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 84
This study analyzes the actions of school district leaders in response to the growth of
charter schools in a sampling of school districts throughout the state of California. Patton (2015)
argues that the power of qualitative research comes from purposeful sampling in information-
rich cases where one can learn a great deal about the issues of central importance. In this study,
the subjects come from a selection of school districts that have experienced growth in charter
schools in their respective area. According to the California Charter School Association (2015),
the Los Angeles region has seen the highest growth of new charter schools and the North Coast
and Bay Area of California have experienced the second highest growth in the state.
Organizational Performance Goal
The school districts in California have not collectively defined a specific organizational
performance goal as it pertains to charter schools, but it can be inferred that the foundational goal
of all school districts is to effectively provide instruction and services in a manner that improves
student achievement in their schools.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder group of focus in this study is school district superintendents from
California. Superintendent actions and responses have a direct correlation to student achievement
for the students in their school district (Waters & Marzano, 2006). School superintendents are
responsible for setting the strategic direction of their organizations, making personnel decisions,
and proposing annual budgets. School superintendents are in a unique position to lead efforts to
respond to the growth of charter schools in their area as well as implement instructional
programs to improve student achievement. As such, this study utilizes a purposeful sampling of
this stakeholder group.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 85
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
The superintendents in California have not collectively defined a specific organizational
performance goal as it pertains to charter schools, but it can be inferred that a goal of school
district leaders is to effectively manage the challenges posed by the decline in enrollment in
school districts caused by the growth of charter schools.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The goal of this project is to evaluate the response of school district leaders to the growth
of charter schools. The study also examined the factors that influence school district leaders’
abilities to respond to the challenges posed by the growth of charter schools. While charter
schools have been in existence for more than twenty-five years (California Charter School
Association, 2015), the dramatic growth of charter schools in some parts of California is a recent
phenomenon. As stated, school district leaders believe the increase of charter schools in their
area has an adverse impact on their organizations. (Kopetman, 2015). It is important to study
underlying influences and propose solutions that might help school districts deal with the issues
presented by the presence of charter schools in their region. It is also important to evaluate the
impact of the competition on their respective organizations.
The following questions guided this study:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences facing
superintendents in leading their organizations in response to the increasing number of
charter schools?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to meet
those needs?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 86
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The knowledge influences in Table 12 represent the list of assumed knowledge influences
and the status of validation based on an analysis of interviews and supported by the literature
review. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that without procedural, declarative, metacognitive, and
conceptual knowledge, goal attainment may be difficult as appropriate action may not be taken.
In other words, one must understand the problem before taking steps to correct it. Validating the
existence of knowledge barriers and understanding which types are involved is important to
accurately identify and propose adequate solutions to the barrier(s).
The interview results demonstrated that a number of knowledge barriers exist with the
school district leaders who participated in this study. The procedural knowledge influence that
was validated by the data collected through interviews is that superintendents often do not have
the necessary skills to manage the fiscal impact of the growth of charter schools. The
stakeholders’ lack of procedural knowledge to achieve their goal was revealed during informal
interviews with the superintendents and supported in the review of the literature. A lack of
procedural knowledge may impact the superintendent’s attainment of their stakeholder goal
(Clark and Estes, 2008). Specifically, superintendents may be unable to effectively prioritize
their efforts if they do not possess accurate knowledge of the how the growth of charter schools
is impacting them. The second knowledge barrier that was validated superintendents often do not
understand why students are leaving. As Clark and Estes (2008) suggest, procedural knowledge
increases when declarative knowledge required to perform the skill is available or known. The
declarative knowledge influence identified is that superintendents often did not understand why
students were leaving their school district. A principle asserted by Shute (2008) is that feedback
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 87
that is specific and timely enhances performance in goal attainment. As it relates to this project,
superintendents would benefit from obtaining feedback and data as to why families may be
seeking to leave their school district for a charter school.
Table 12
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause, Need, or
Asset*
Validated
Yes, No, or
Partially
Validated
(V, N, or
PV)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Superintendents often lack the
skills to manage the fiscal impact
of the growth of charter schools
(P)
Y Information helps
people identify
strategies or
procedures learned
in the past that can
be helpful in
particular situations
(Clark & Estes,
2008).
Provide
superintendents
additional
education on the
typical operational
and fiscal
challenges facing
school districts
Superintendents do not
understand why students are
leaving the school district to
attend a charter school (D)
Y The feedback that is
specific and timely
enhances
performance (Shute,
2008).
Provide
superintendents
with a job aid that
summarizes best
practices for data
collection from
district parents
*Inicate knowledge type for each influence listed using these abbreviations: (D)Declarative;
(P) Procedural; (M) Metacognitive
Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge is the understanding of the skills
and procedures involved with the task, including techniques, methods, necessary steps. The data
showed that superintendents often lacked the necessary knowledge and skills to manage the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 88
fiscal impact of the growth of charter schools. The superintendents interviewed often
exemplified strong beliefs and perspectives regarding how charter schools impact their
institutions, but they often demonstrated a lack of specific knowledge and skills related to
handling the fiscal issues they may be faced with as a leader. As a result, new superintendents
should be provided additional education regarding the fiscal and operational challenges they will
typically face on the job. According to Mayer (2011), effective observational learning is
achieved by first organizing and rehearsing modeled behaviors, then enacting them overtly
(Mayer, 2011). New school district leaders, especially those from small school districts, should
be provided the opportunity to develop the fundamental skills to handle many of the operational
challenges they face in their jobs.
Research suggests that superintendents cannot be successful in leading their organizations
unless they are grounded in the factors that impact the finances of their school district (Benzel &
Hoover, 2015). Clark and Estes (2008) assert that conceptual, theoretical, and strategic
knowledge and skills may help leaders handle unexpected challenges and problems. As it relates
to this problem of practice, a superintendent's capacity to understand why things happen and
what causes them to happen will prepare educational leaders to manage the operational
challenges of their job. Ricciardelli et al., (2014) exemplified this concept in surveying
superintendent's perspectives on charter schools when the researchers found that the knowledge
of the impact charter schools was critical to understanding how to respond to their growth.
Declarative knowledge solution. Krathwohl (2002) revised Bloom's taxonomy in the
manner that extends declarative knowledge to factual and conceptual categories. According to
Clark and Estes (2008), the information helps people identify strategies or procedures learned in
the past that can be helpful in particular situations. School district leaders may not be able to
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 89
develop strategies to attract and retain students if they do not possess knowledge regarding why
families are seeking alternative educational options. According to Shute (2008), feedback that is
specific and timely enhances performance. District leaders need to solicit information to the
extent possible as families are leaving their school districts. To close the gap in declarative
knowledge, superintendents should be provided with a job aid that summarizes best practices for
data collection from district parents. Without accurate information about the drivers causing
families to leave the school district, responding to the decline in enrollment will continue to be
difficult.
Superintendents typically have experience and relevant knowledge to implement
strategies to increase student achievement. If people do not need help practicing to implement a
strategy successfully, then information is all that is necessary to reduce uncertainty about how to
achieve a performance goal (Clark and Estes, 2008). Providing superintendents information that
highlights best practices for data collection for district parents is an appropriate strategy given
the assumptions often made by school district leaders. For example, Kolawski (2011) suggest
that superintendents often believe that students are leaving their school districts because of the
perception that charter schools are academically superior, but the interview data demonstrated
that many superintendents do not have factual data on whether those assumptions are grounded
in factual information. Implementing best practices on engagement with parents will give school
district leaders an accurate basis to develop effective strategies.
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation influences in Table 13 represent the list of assumed motivation
influences and their validation status based on analysis of the interviews that is supported by the
literature review and the review of motivation theory. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that there
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 90
are three indicators of motivation in task performance – active choice, persistence and mental
effort. Active choice is whether an individual chooses whether or not to engage in a task.
Persistence is continuing to pursue a goal in the face of distractions, and mental effort is seeking
and applying new knowledge to solve a novel program or perform a new task. The data suggests
that some superintendents lack the mental effort to be confident in their ability to retain students
and often failed to make an active choice to lead efforts to implement effective strategies. As
indicated in Table 13, the motivational influences were validated and had a high priority for
impacting the stakeholders' goal. Table 13 also shows the recommendations for these influences
based on theoretical principles.
Table 13
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence: Cause, Need,
or Asset*
Validated
Yes, No,
Partially
Validated
(Y, N, PV)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Superintendents are not
confident in their ability to
lead efforts to prevent
students from leaving to
attend charter schools.
(self-efficacy)
PV Learning and motivation
are enhanced when
learners have positive
expectancies for
success. (Pajares, 2006)
Provide
superintendents
with information
and examples on
ways in which
fellow leaders have
been successful due
to their efforts
Superintendents are not
motivated to implement
organizational change
and often attribute reasons
for loss of enrollment to
factors other than their
own organization’s
performance.
(Attributions)
PV Provide feedback that
stresses the process of
learning, including the
importance of effort,
strategies, and potential
self-control of learning.
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2009)
Provide
superintendents
targeted support
services to review
strategies and
analyze accurate
causes of
enrollment loss in
school district
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 91
Self-Efficacy Solution. The data suggest that some superintendents are not confident in
their ability to lead efforts to prevent students from leaving charter schools. All of the
superintendents believe they have a critical role in leading efforts to recruit and retain students,
but half of the participants were hesitant to assert that any of their direct actions can specifically
persuade a family's decision. Pajares (2006) suggests that learning and motivation are enhanced
when learners have positive expectancies for success. As such, the recommendation is to provide
superintendents with information and examples on ways in which fellow leaders have been
successful due to their efforts.
Superintendents must believe that their leadership can have an impact on a family's
decision to attend or stay in a particular school. Self-efficacy is improved when individuals are
provided with opportunities to observe a credible, similar model engaging in behavior that has a
functional value (Pajares, 2006). Similarly, Pajares (2006) also advises making it clear to
individuals that they are capable of accomplishing what is being taught or capable of performing
a task. From a theoretical standpoint, it would appear that providing information and examples of
methods in which fellow superintendents have been successful would prove beneficial in
increasing the confidence of the participants.
Attributions Solution. The data suggests that some superintendents are not motivated to
implement change and often attribute the loss of enrollment to factors other than their own
organization's performance. In the interviews, school district leaders rarely attributed the loss of
enrollment to a lack of organizational performance. Anderman & Anderman (2009) states that
providing feedback that stresses the process of learning, including the importance of effort, are
good strategies to improve motivation. The recommendation is to provide targeted support
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 92
services to superintendents to review strategies and provide feedback to discern accurate causes
of enrollment loss in the school district.
Anderman & Anderman (2009) suggest that motivation and performance are enhanced
when participants attribute success or failure to effort rather than ability. To address motivation
performance gaps due to attribution, the theoretical literature suggests providing feedback that
stresses the importance of effort and strategies (Pintrich, 2003). Similarly, Anderman and
Anderman (2009) stress the practice of providing accurate feedback that identifies the skills or
knowledge the individual lacks, along with communicating that skills and knowledge can be
learned. From a theoretical perspective, it would appear that providing feedback will help
superintendents link organizational performance to their specific efforts.
Organization Recommendations
The organizational influences in Table 14 represent the complete list of assumed
organization influences and their validation based on the most frequently mentioned organization
influences to achieving the stakeholders’ goal during informal interviews and supported by the
literature review and the review of organization and culture theory. Clark and Estes (2008)
suggest that organization and stakeholder goals are often not achieved due to a lack of resources,
most often time and money, and stakeholder goals that are not aligned with the organization’s
mission and goals. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) propose two constructs about culture –
cultural models or the observable beliefs and values shared by individuals in groups, and cultural
models, or the settings and activities in which performance occurs. Thus, both resources and
processes and cultural models and settings must align throughout the organization’s structure to
achieve the mission and goals. Table 14 also shows the recommendations for these influences
based on theoretical principles.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 93
Table 14
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence: Cause, Need, or
Asset*
Validated
Yes, No, or
Partially
Validated
(V, HP,
PV)
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
School district leaders are
reluctant to make necessary
budget reductions in response
to lower attendance due to
charter school growth.
Y Organizational
effectiveness increases
when leaders monitor
and evaluate the
effectiveness of all
aspects of their
organization and use
valid and reliable data
to drive decision-
making (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Organizational
effectiveness increases
when leaders ensure
that employees have
the resources needed to
achieve the
organization’s goal
(Clark & Estes, 2008)
Utilize Local
Control
Accountability
Plan (LCAP)
planning process
to align the
allocation of
resources with the
goals and
priorities of the
organization
School districts fail to
benchmark effective practices
and replicate innovative
programs
Y It is important to set
goals with concrete
indicators, identifying
the industry leaders,
and computing the gap
towards achieving
similar levels of
success (Clark & Estes,
2008).
Develop school
district Local
Control
Accountability
Plan (LCAP) goal
to benchmark
programs offered
by neighboring
charter schools
that are attracting
students
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 94
Cultural settings solution. The data show that some school district leaders were reluctant
to make necessary budget reductions in response to lower attendance due to charter school
growth. Clark and Estes (2008) suggest that organizational effectiveness increases when leaders
ensure that employees have the resources needed to achieve the organization's goal (Clark &
Estes, 2008). School districts may struggle to meet their financial obligations if they fail to adjust
their budgets and personnel numbers in the wake of lower revenues due to a decline in
enrollment. For this reason, superintendents should utilize their Local Control Accountability
Plan (LCAP) process to align the allocation of resources with the available revenues on an
annual basis.
Bifulco and Reback (2014) argue that the fiscal impacts to school districts could be
mitigated if leaders reduce costs by making personnel reductions or closing schools as
enrollment declines. A 2013 Moody's credit agency fiscal report also found that charter schools
are negatively impacting traditional public schools due to a school district’s inability to respond
to declines in enrollment quickly. If school district leaders make difficult decisions and make
necessary reductions commensurate with declines in enrollment, the fiscal difficulties can be
mitigated. As such, the literature supports the recommendation of utilizing the LCAP process to
align and prioritize school district resources.
Cultural models’ solution. The data also suggest that school districts often fail to
benchmark effective practices and replicate innovative programs. Clark and Estes (2008) argue
that it is important to identify industry leaders and compute the gap towards achieving similar
levels of success. In the case of school districts attempting to retain students, it is important to try
to replicate programs that may be motivating families to attend charter schools. Specifically, the
recommendation is for superintendents to establish an organizational goal of benchmarking
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 95
programs that have been effective in raising student achievement and consequently attracting
families in other schools.
Benchmarking and replicating effective practices from charter schools or other successful
schools may stimulate innovative practices at traditional public schools. The literature argues
that an organizational culture aimed at benchmarking and improvement can enhance
organizational performance (Clark and Estes, 2011). The literature also demonstrates that school
district leaders have often instituted organizational initiatives to mitigate the impact of charter
school growth in their areas (Ericson, et al., 2001; Linick & Lubienski, 2013; Ricciardelli, et al.,
2014). Taking lessons from effective practices may help mitigate some of the impacts of the
growth of charter schools in specific areas. Table 15 summarizes the knowledge, motivational,
and organizational recommendations discussed in this section.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 96
Table 15
Summary of KMO Recommendations
Construct Recommendations
Knowledge Provide superintendents additional education on the typical operational
and fiscal management challenges facing school districts
Knowledge Provide superintendents with a job aid that summarizes best practices
for data collection from district parents
Motivation Provide superintendents with information and examples on ways in
which fellow leaders have implemented successful strategies
Motivation Provide superintendents targeted services to review strategies to discern
and to analyze accurate causes of enrollment loss in school district
Organizational Utilize Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) planning process to
align and prioritize the allocation of resources with the goals and
priorities of the organization
Organizational Develop school district Local Control Accountability Group (LCAP)
goal to benchmark programs offered by neighboring schools that are
attracting students
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
To ensure that the recommendations presented in this study achieve their intended
objectives, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) is utilized.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006) discuss four different levels of evaluation of training or
intervention: Level 1 is initial reactions; Level 2 refers to learning the important information,
Level 3 moves to transferring the learning to critical behaviors in the workplace, and Level 4
focuses on outcomes. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
takes the four levels and indicates that evaluations should work in reverse, with more time and
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 97
effort being placed on levels four and three, rather than levels one and two. The model suggests
that evaluation plans start with the goals of the organization and work backward and that, by
doing so, the "leading indicators" that bridge recommended solutions to the organization's goals
are both easier to identify and more closely aligned with organizational goals.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The purpose of school districts is to operate their local system of education in a manner
that facilitates academic achievement for the students they serve. One of the missions of a school
districts leader is to effectively manage the organizational challenges that arise, such as
responding to the decline of enrollment and consequential reduction in resources caused by the
growth of charter schools. This project analyzed the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
barriers that impact a school district's ability to respond to the competition. The proposed
solution, a comprehensive set of on-the-job supports, an emphasis on reflection and feedback,
and a targeted focus on specific goals, should improve school districts strategies to retain
students and mitigate the impacts of the rise of charter schools. The recommendations set forth
will largely be administered to superintendents through a series of formal training, workshops,
and personalized consulting. In the following section, the four levels will be presented in the
order in which they should be considered during the planning phase of the program, in reverse
order from Level 4 to Level 1 (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 16 shows the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators in the form of
outcomes, metrics, and methods for both external and internal outcomes for California school
districts. If the internal outcomes are met as expected as a result of the recommendations, then
the external outcomes should also be realized.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 98
Table 16
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. School district
enrollment will improve
The school district's enrollment
will increase from current
levels.
Collect annual data from the
school district and California
Department of Education
2. Revenue generated by
average daily attendance
will increase
Distribution of revenue to the
school district from annual
adoption of the California State
Budget
Collect annual data from county
office of education and
California Department of
Education
3. Improved perception
of the school district
from parents and
community at-large.
Improved ratings on parent and
community surveys.
Regular administration and
assessment of student, teacher,
and parent climate surveys
4. Improvement of
academic programs
offered to students
The quality of programs offered
by school district comparable to
charter school options
Annual benchmarking of school
district programs
5. Student achievement
will improve
The school district rankings will
improve on the California
Dashboard
Assessment of statewide
accountability data
Internal Outcomes
5. Superintendents
exhibit improved
understanding of why
families leave the school
district
Increased data from parents as
they leave the school district
Assess survey or interview data
from parents as they leave
school district
6. Superintendents
exhibit increased
confidence in ability to
retain students
Positive results on survey
questions.
Compare annual survey results
of superintendents
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 99
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the superintendents who are leading the
respective school districts. The first critical behavior that must be demonstrated as a result of the
integrated plan is that superintendents will create strategic plans aimed at retaining students in
their school district. As a result of the plans, superintendents will operationalize efforts to
implement specific strategies to lead efforts to compete with the charter schools. Among those
strategies, superintendents will engage will parents and community stakeholders to determine
why students are leaving their school district. An additional behavior is that superintendents will
investigate and learn from other educational programs that have proven to be successful at
charter schools and other traditional public schools. As a result, the superintendents will
reprioritize available resources and implement specific programs and strategies that could
improve student achievement in their school district. A final critical behavior is that
superintendents will enlist other stakeholders in their organization’s communities to develop
cooperative approaches to respond to charter school growth. The specific metrics, methods, and
timing for each of these outcome behaviors appear in Table 17.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 100
Table 17
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for New Reviewers
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Superintendents
will create strategic
plans aimed at
retaining students
in their school
district
Specific goals in
Local Control
Accountability Plan
(LCAP)
LCAP stakeholder
assessment
Annually
2.Superintendents
will implement
specific strategies
to lead efforts to
compete with the
charter schools
Annual update of
LCAP
LCAP stakeholder
assessment
Annually
3. School district
officials will
engage parents to
assess needs and
perspectives.
Number of
stakeholder meetings
Ratings on parent
surveys
Assessed in LCAP
development
Annual survey
Annually
4.Superintendents
will investigate and
learn from other
educational
programs that have
been proven to be
successful at
charter schools and
other traditional
public schools.
Number of visits and
meetings with
educational leaders
outside of their school
district
Discussion at school
board meeting
Throughout the
school year
5. Superintendents
will reprioritize
available resources
and implement
specific programs
and strategies
aimed at improving
student
achievement
Superintendent’s
proposed budget
Public dissemination of
the budget plan
Annually
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 101
6. Superintendents
will enlist other
stakeholders in
their school district
community to
develop
cooperative
strategies
Number of meetings
with labor leaders and
other community
leaders
Deliberate outreach to
identified stakeholders
to meet regularly
throughout the year
Throughout the
school year
Required drivers. Superintendents require support from the entire
school system organization to help achieve the stakeholder goal. It is important that all
employees in the system buy-into the organizational strategies required to mitigate the impact of
charter schools. Rewards should be established for the achievement of performance goals to
enhance the organizational support of new initiatives. Table 18 shows the recommended drivers
to support critical behaviors.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 102
Table 18
Required Drivers to Support New Reviewers’ Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide superintendents and
school district employees
factual information
regarding the impact of
charter schools on their
district
Ongoing 1, 2, 3, 5, 6
Provide superintendents
information that
summarizes best practices
for data collection from
district parents departing
the school district
Annually 4
Provide superintendents a
job aid that compares the
details of programs offered
at successful schools with
suggested necessary steps to
implement effective
programs
Annually 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Encouraging
Fellow or retired
superintendents will
validate school district
efforts and provide
alternative strategies
Annually 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Rewarding
Public recognition of
improvements in student
achievement data and
increases in student
enrollment
Annually 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Monitoring
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 103
The school board will
review strategies and
provide feedback for
accurate causes of
enrollment loss in the
school district
Annually 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Utilize Local Control
Accountability Plan
(LCAP) planning process to
align the allocation of
resources with the goals and
priorities of the
organization
Annually 1, 2, 6
Organizational support. In addition to the efforts of superintendents, school board
members, senior administrators, and union leadership will play a critical role in achieving the
stakeholder goal. Superintendents require the organizational support to increase capacity to
manage the challenges presented by the growth of charter schools.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions, most notably the
stakeholders will be able to:
1. Create an emphasis on implementing innovative programs.
2. Engage labor partners to work cooperatively to face district challenges
3. Deconstruct the decision-making process for reprioritization of resources.
4. Design job-aids on parent engagement for school district leadership.
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved with a
program that provides superintendents the necessary information and training to make critical
decisions while providing best practices that could help retain students in their school districts.
The stakeholders, school district superintendents, will be provided a broad range of information
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 104
and resources to assist them in leading their respective school districts. The program is blended,
consisting of discussions with experienced practitioners through targeted assistance and a face-
to-face application delivered through a workshop at the annual superintendent symposium.
Organizations such as School Services of California (SSC) are equipped to provide the targeted
assistance discussed in this program. The workshops and job-aids will be provided by the
Association of California School Administrators (ACSA), which organizes an annual
professional development superintendents conference.
During the asynchronous training, superintendents will be provided a job aid and
information on how similar school districts are confronting similar challenges. The job aids will
be demonstrated in writing, and key terms will be defined with examples and non-examples.
The workshop will be provided in person but will also be made available via video recording to
superintendents not present. Additionally, a resource page will be developed by ACSA
specifically for the purpose of providing superintendents resources to address this problem of
practice.
Components of learning. Based on the Kirkpatrick (2016) New World Model, there are
five components involved in Level 2 learning: knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and
commitment. Table 19 lists the evaluation methods and timing used for incorporating the
learning components essential for goal attainment. As such, Table 19 lists the evaluation
methods and timing for these components of learning.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 105
Table 19
Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(is) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks during workshop
discussion
During the training
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Demonstration of application during
breakout session discussions
During the training workshop
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Observation of superintendent’s public
statements and actions demonstrating that
they see the benefit of strategic changes
Throughout the school year
Facilitated discussions/meetings to access
the value of implementing innovative
measures
During discussions with peer mentors and
workshops
Confidence “I think I can do it on the
job.”
Discussion of potential strategies during
workshop
During the workshop
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Commitment to development new strategic
strategies
At conclusion of training
Level 1: Reaction
Learner reactions from the training are important to assess training effectiveness at
promoting engagement and relevance to the learner’s job. Kirkpatrick (2016) suggests taking
strategic pauses during the training to assess learner feelings about the training. These reactions
are useful to adjust training to cover topics in more detail or make an effort to increase
engagement by making the information more meaningful to the learners. Table 20 lists the
methods and timing used to assess superintendent reactions to the training.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 106
Table 20
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Observation of participants
During the training
Survey of evidence to assess engagement
End of the day of workshop
Relevance
Survey questions to assess relevance End of workshop and training
Training evaluation form At conclusion of workshop and training
Customer Satisfaction
Survey questions to assess satisfaction After dissemination of project
Training evaluation form At conclusion of training
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. After completion of the training at
the annual superintendents’ conference, staff will collect data about the start, duration, and
completion of modules by the participants. The data will indicate the engagement with the
course material. The workshop facilitator will administer brief surveys requesting the participant
to indicate the relevance of the material and their overall satisfaction with the content and
delivery of the training. For Level 1, the instructor will conduct periodic brief pulse-checks by
asking the participants about the relevance of the content to their work and the organization,
delivery, and environment. Level 2 will include checks for understanding using games or
competition among groups in responding to questions and scenarios drawn from the content. An
example of the survey template is included in Appendix B.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 107
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately four weeks
after the implementation of the workshop or targeted assistance, and then again at 16 weeks, staff
from the superintendents association will organize a focus group with individuals who
participated in the workshop in order to gauge the participant’s perspective, satisfaction and
relevance of the training (Level 1), confidence and value of applying their training (Level 2),
application of the training and the support from the organization they are receiving (Level 3), and
the extent to which their performance has been impacted (Level 4). An example of the focus
group protocol template is included in Appendix C.
Data Analysis and Reporting
Because the training is provided annually by ACSA, with the potential of offering
additional targeted assistance on an individual basis by organizations like School Services of
California, reporting data will be critically important for participants that have yet to participate
in the workshops and training. Results from the surveys will be shared with the ACSA planning
committee. The data will be shared during the quarterly superintendents meeting after the
collection of the delayed focus group. Based on the information collected, the superintendents’
planning committee will be asked for recommendations on modifications to the training and
workshops.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study stopped short of quantitatively validating to what extent charter schools are
fiscally impacting school districts. While the literature and the interview data both suggest that
charter schools are a major fiscal impediment to traditional public schools, limited research is
available since the adoption of the Local Control Funding Formula in California. Further
research on the quantitative fiscal impact of charter schools is necessary to validate many of the
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 108
perceptions in the field. Additionally, a promising practice study that analyzes effective practices
that have been adapted from charter schools and implemented in traditional public schools would
be beneficial. Specific research analyzing the barriers to implementing charter school programs
in traditional public schools would also be valuable. Superintendents often believe that many of
the programs offered at charter schools may not be practical in traditional schools' due to the
difference in legal requirements. A study validating these claims would be valuable to the field
of research.
Conclusion
Current educational and political trends suggest that charter schools will continue to grow
in California. While there is strong evidence that losing students to charter schools impact the
budgets of traditional public-school districts, this study suggests that education leaders can take
actions to mitigate the impact. This study concluded that many superintendents might not be
doing everything within their power to take innovative and creative actions to retain students.
Increased attention to developing the knowledge and skills to manage the challenges
superintendents face and prioritizing efforts to understand school community needs will benefit
the leaders. Clark and Estes (2008) argue that motivation is typically the biggest barrier to
implementing organizational change. The recommendations proposed in this project are aimed at
increasing a leader's active choice, persistence, and mental effort in making the necessary
changes that are often necessary. Lastly, school districts would all benefit from utilizing their
existing planning process such as the LCAP to analyze organizational needs and develop specific
goals aimed at retaining students and increasing academic achievement. Superintendents
arguably have among the most challenging leadership jobs in the public sector. The additional
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 109
training, education, and resources that are recommended should improve the superintendent's
leadership capacity.
Using the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick, 2016) as the framework for the
planning, implementation, and evaluation of the recommendations for the organization allows for
a comprehensive approach to the information and training portion of the solution. The model
facilitated the method to address the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers to
effectively responding to the growth of charter schools. Although the training does not
address all areas necessary to implement the comprehensive organizational changes, it does play
a critical role and should assist to mitigate the impact of the growth of charter schools in the
respective school districts. Given that the recommendations originate with the empirical and
theoretical literature, the assumption is that validated influences discovered by this project exist
within the entire school system. Determination of success will be measured through the
realization of the goal, improvement in student achievement and a consequential increase in
student enrollment in the respective school districts.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 110
References
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2009). Attribution theory. Education. com, 23.
Arsen, D. D., & Ni, Y. (2011). Shaking up Public Schools with Competition. School
Administrator, 68(7), 16-19.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.
Benzel, B. L., & Hoover, K. E. (2015). The Superintendent and the CFO: Building an Effective
Team. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bettinger, E. P. (2005). The effect of charter schools on charter students and public
schools. Economics of Education Review, 24(2), 133-147.
Bifulco, R., & Reback, R. (2014). Fiscal impacts of charter schools: lessons from New
York. Education, 9(1).
Bird, J. J., & Wang, C. (2011). Authentic leadership and budget-building: Superintendents reveal
origins, strategies, and connections. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15(3),
143.
Blume, H. (2015) Charter School Expansion could reshape LA Unified. The Los Angeles Times.
Nov. 12
Booker, K., Gilpatric, S. M., Gronberg, T., & Jansen, D. (2008). The effect of charter schools on
traditional public school students in Texas: Are children who stay behind left
behind?. Journal of Urban Economics, 64(1), 123-145.
Booker, K., Zimmer, R., & Buddin, R. (2005). The effects of charter schools on school peer
composition.
Budde, R. (1988). Education by Charter: Restructuring School Districts. Key to Long-Term
Continuing Improvement in American Education.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 111
Buddin, R. J., & Zimmer, R. (2005). Is charter school competition in California improving the
performance of traditional public schools?. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Buenrostro, M. (2016). Charter Schools in Focus, Issue 1: Managing the Petition Review
Process. California Schools Board Association.
California Charter School Association (2015). 2015-16 New California Charter Schools Fact
Sheet. Retrieved from:
http://www.ccsa.org/blog/2015-16_NewSchools_CA_FactSheet__.pdf
California Department of Education (2016). California Assesment of Student Performance and
Progress: Test Results for English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics. Retrieved
from:http://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/SB2016/ViewReport?ps=true&lstTestYear=2016&lstTestT
ype=B&lstCounty=&lstDistrict=&lstSchool=
California Department of Education (2017). Charter Schools Currently Sorted by Charter
Number. Retrieved from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/cs/ap/rpt.asp
Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-
analysis. Review of Educational research, 64(3), 363-423.
Chokshi, N. (2013, October 15) Charter schools are hurting urban public schools, Moody’s says.
The Washington Post.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
Cowen, J. M., & Winters, M. A. (2013). Do charters retain teachers differently? Evidence from
elementary schools in Florida. Education, 8(1), 14-42.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 112
Cremata, E., Davis, D., Dickey, K., Lawyer, K., Negassi, Y., Raymond, M., &
Woodworth, J. (2013). National charter school study. Center for Research on Education
Outcomes, Stanford.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
Davis, T. M. (2013). Charter school competition, organization, and achievement in traditional
public schools. education policy analysis archives, 21, 88.
D'Arcy, M., & Richman, N. (2013). Moody's: Charter schools pose greatest credit challenge to
school districts in economically weak urban areas. Investor Service, Moodys.com.
Davis, T. (2013). Charter School Competition, Organization, and Achievement in Traditional
Public Schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(88) Retrieved [date], from
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1279
Dee, T. S & Fu, H. (2004) Do charter schools skim students or drain resources? Economics of
Education Review, 23 (3) 259-271.
Eccles, J. S. (2007). Families, Schools, and Developing Achievement-Related Motivations and
Engagement.
Eckes, S. E., Fox, R. A., & Buchanan, N. K. (2011). Legal and policy issues regarding niche
charter schools: Race, religion, culture, and the law. Journal of School Choice, 5(1), 85-
110.
Edwards, B., Perry, M., Brazil, N., & Studier, C. (2004). Charter Schools in California: An
Experiment Coming of Age. EdSource.
Ericson, J., Silverman, D., Berman, P., Nelson, B., & Solomon, D. (2001). Challenge and
Opportunity: The Impact of Charter Schools on School Districts. A Report of the
National Study of Charter Schools. ED Pubs, PO Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 113
Farrell, C., Wohlstetter, P., & Smith, J. (2012). Charter Management organizations an emerging
approach to scaling up what works. Educational Policy, 26(4), 499-532.
Frankenberg, E., Siegel-Hawley, G., Wang, J. (2010). Choice without Equity: Charter School
Segregation and the Need for Civil Rights Standards. Los Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights
Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles at UCLA; www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu.
Friedman, M. (1955). The role of government in education. Rutgers University Press.
Fuller, B. (2003). Education policy under cultural pluralism. Educational Researcher, 32(9), 15-
24.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Garcia, D. R. (2010). Charter schools challenging traditional notions of segregation. The charter
school experiment, 33-50.
Gleason, P., Clark, M., Tuttle, C. C., & Dwoyer, E. (2010). The Evaluation of Charter School
Impacts: Final Report. NCEE 2010-4029. National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance.
Grodin, J. R., Salerno, M. B., & Shanske, D. (2015). The California State Constitution. Oxford
University Press, USA.
Gross, B., & Lake, R. (2014). Special education in charter schools: what we’ve learned and what
we still need to know. Seattle, WA: Center for Reinventing Public Education.
Hill, P. T., Angel, L., & Christensen, J. (2006). Charter school achievement studies. Education,
1(1), 139-150.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 114
Hess, F. M. (2001). Whaddya mean you want to close my school? The politics of regulatory
accountability in charter schooling. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 141-156.
Hess, F. M. (2004). Revolution at the margins: The impact of competition on urban school
systems. Brookings Institution Press.
Hoxby, C. M. (2001). How school choice affects the achievement of public school students.
Choice with equity, 150.
Hoxby, C. M. (2003). School choice and school productivity. Could school choice be a tide that
lifts all boats?. In The economics of school choice (pp. 287-342). University of Chicago
Press.
Kassebaum, Z. G. (2011). Satisfied Superintendents: A Case Study (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kolderie, T. (1990). The states will have to withdraw the exclusive. Typescript. St. Paul, MN.
Center for Policy Studies.
Kopetman, R. (2015, December 30). Anaheim Union wants a freeze on charter schools. The
Orange County Register.
Kowalski, T. J., McCord, R. S., Peterson, G. J., Young, P. I., & Ellerson, N. M. (2011). The
American school superintendent: 2010 decennial study. R&L Education.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1995). Expert problem solving: Evidence from school and
district leaders. SUNY Press.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 115
Linick, M., & Lubienski, C. (2013). How Charter Schools Do, and Don't, Inspire Change in
Traditional Public School Districts. Childhood Education, 89(2), 99-104.
Los Angeles Unified School District Independent Financial Review Panel (2015) Report of
Independent Financial Review Panel. November 10, 2015 retrieved from:
http://home.lausd.net/pdf/Independent%20Financial%20Review%20Panel%20Report.pdf
Lubienski, C. (2005). Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and
unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of
Education, 111(4), 464-486.
Lubienski, C., & Lubienski, S. T. (2006). Charter, private, public schools and academic
achievement: New evidence from NAEP mathematics data (Vol. 16). New York: National
Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Maranto, R. (2006). The Perfect Is the Enemy of the Good: A Critique of John Merrifield's
Critique of Public Charter Schools. Journal of School Choice, 1(2), 131-141.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation methods
(3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mayo, K. W. (2014). Legal Aspects of Charter School Oversight: Evidence from
California. Fordham Urb. LJ, 42, 671.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage
publications.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 116
Milliman, S., & Maranto, R. (2009). Educational renegades: Dissatisfied teachers as drivers of
charter school formation. Journal of School Choice, 3(2), 138-162.
Ni, Y. (2009). The impact of charter schools on the efficiency of traditional public schools:
Evidence from Michigan. Economics of Education Review, 28(5), 571-584.2.
Ni, Y., & Arsen, D. (2010). The competitive effects of charter schools on public school
districts. The charter school experiment: Expectations, evidence, and implications, 93-
120.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative research & evaluation methods
(3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
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
Reed, S. & Rose, H., (2015). Charter school spending and saving in California. Journal of School
Choice, 9(3), 407-445
Rubinstein, S. A. (2014). Strengthening Partnerships: How Communication and Collaboration
Contribute to School Improvement. American Educator, 37(4), 22-28.
Rotberg, R. I., & Rabb, T. K. (Eds.). (2014). Climate and history: studies in interdisciplinary
history. Princeton University Press.
Ricciardelli, B.A, Cummins, C., & Steedman, P. (2014). Superintendents’ Perceptions of Charter
Schools in the Context of a Competitive Educational Marketplace: Charter Schools, their
Impact on Traditional Public Districts and the Role of District Leadership. (Doctoral
dissertation, Boston College. Lynch School of Education).
Schellenberg, Z. C. (2015). " Creaming" Students in the Charter School Admission Process: a
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 117
Case Study of Admission Practices in Charter Schools (Doctoral dissertation, University
of Southern California).
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 78(1),
153-189.
Steedman, P., Cummins, C., & Ricciardelli, B. A. (2014). Examples of Innovations in
Traditional Public Schools that are Influenced by Competition from Charter Schools:
Charter Schools, Their Impact on Traditional Public Districts and the Role of District
Leadership (Doctoral dissertation, Boston College. Lynch School of Education).
Waters, T. J., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School District Leadership That Works: The Effect of
Superintendent Leadership on Student Achievement. A Working Paper. Mid-Continent
Research for Education and Learning (McREL).
Wigfield, A., Byrnes, J. P., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Development during early and middle
adolescence. Handbook of educational psychology, 2, 87-113.
Zimmer, R., Gill, B., Booker, K., Lavertu, S., Sass, T. R., & Witte, J. (2009). Charter schools in
eight states: Effects on achievement, attainment, integration, and competition (Vol. 869).
Rand Corporation
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 118
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Introduction
• Express appreciation for the participant’s willingness to participate in the research study
and thank them for their time.
• Briefly describe the project purpose.
• Explain that they can stop the interview at any time or skip any question they wish.
• Explain that their responses are anonymous and I will not be using any identifiers in the
research report. I will not attribute anything said to a specific person, nor will I discuss
what they said, or include any identifiable characteristics in writing or in discussion.
General Questions
1. Please give me a general overview of your school district and the community it serves
(demographics, enrollment, etc).
o How long have you served in your current capacity as superintendent?
o Have you served as a superintendent in other school districts?
2. What do you consider to be the biggest accomplishments in your time as superintendent?
o What do you believe has been the biggest factors that have led to those
accomplishments? Please provide any specific examples that may come to mind.
3. Can you please describe some of the biggest challenges your school district currently
faces?
o What are the school district plans to address these challenges?
4. How you would describe the state of your district’s finances?
o What do your multi-year fiscal projections look like?
Impact of Charter Schools
5. Like many parts of the state, the data shows that your district has experienced a decline in
enrollment. In your opinion, what factors have influenced this trend?
6. How has the decline in enrollment impacted your school district budget?
o What are the programmatic changes you have had to make as a result of the reduced
enrollment?
7. The data also shows that your region has experienced a growth of charter schools. How
has the presence of charter schools impacted your school district?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 119
Knowledge Influences
8. What do you believe has led to the growth of charter schools in your region?
o Is there any evidence to point to the growth in this region?
9. What do you think has led some families in your community to enroll in the charter
schools?
o Have you been able to formally or informally assess families when they leave?
10. Has the district developed any specific plans to mitigate the decline in enrollment?
o Have any of the plans been outlined in the district LCAP?
11. Has the school district investigated what types of programs the charter schools in your
area are offer?
o Have any of those programs been replicated in the school district?
Motivational Influences
12. In your opinion, do you believe there is anything you can do as a superintendent to
prevent families from choosing to attend a charter school?
o If not, what factors prevent you from doing so?
o If so, then what?
13. Has the growth of charter schools resulted in your school district doing anything
differently as a result of the competition?
o What are the factors that led to those changes?
14. Do you have a sense of the demographics of the students who have been most likely to
leave the school district?
o Have they been high achieving students or low-achieving? Students who are low-
income? Ethnicity?
Organizational Influences
15. How do you believe the current laws and regulations governing charter schools impact
your school district’s ability to effectively compete with them?
16. Can you describe a strategy (if any) used to attract students or keep students in the school
district?
o How effective was it?
o What other strategies, if any, have been more successful?
17. What do you see as the major obstacles in trying to compete with the emergence of
charter schools in your region?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 120
Other
18. Is there anything else that I didn’t ask that you would like to add or expand upon?
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 121
Appendix B
Superintendent Survey #1
This survey is to assess the effectiveness of the recent workshop “Responding to the Growth of
Charter Schools”. This survey is specifically looking to learn what factors assisted and hindered
your learning and general feelings you have about the session you completed. Responses to the
questions are critical to improve any deficient areas and/or provide additional information that
may have been omitted inadvertently.
Level 1: Engagement
1. The course increased my understanding of how to evaluate the fiscal impact of charter
schools
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree
2. The course increased my understanding about best practices in responding to the growth of
charter schools
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree
Level 1: Relevance
3. I have been able to apply what I learned in the course to my job
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree
4. The information provided in the course was relevant to my job
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree
Level 1: Customer Satisfaction
5. The course was a good use of my time
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 122
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree
Level 2: Learning
6. The course increased my knowledge about types of strategies to respond to charter schools
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree e) Strongly disagree
7. The training helped me understand how to retain students within my school district
a) Strongly agree b) Agree c) Neither agree nor disagree d) Disagree e) Strongly disagree
Open Ended Response:
9. Please, identify ways to improve the training:
RESPONSE TO GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 123
Appendix C
Focus Group Questions for Delayed After Training
Level 1: Reactions
1. How did you feel about the training you attended?
2. Did you find the workshop was helpful?
Level 2: Learning
3. What did you learn as a result of the workshop and training?
Level 3: Behavior
4. Please explain how your strategies or actions have changed since the workshop?
5. Have you reached out to other stakeholders (i.e. labor partners) since the training?
6. Please describe your parent engagement activities in the last six months?
7. Please, identify ways to improve the training:
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The underrepresentation of Latinas as K−12 school district superintendents: an evaluation study
PDF
Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Barriers to gender equity in K-12 educational leadership: an evaluation study
PDF
Eliminating the technology equity gap for students through parent support at home: an evaluation study
PDF
The role of higher education in bridging workforce skills gaps: an evaluation study
PDF
Examining the faculty implementation of intermediate algebra for statistics: An evaluation study
PDF
The implementation of data driven decision making to improve low-performing schools: an evaluation study of superintendents in the western United States
PDF
Improving conditions for innovation in magnet and charter schools
PDF
Creation and implementation of a comprehensive active shooter/safety plan: a promising practice study
PDF
Knowledge, motivation and organizational influences impacting recruiting practices addressing the gender gap in the technology industry: an evaluation study
PDF
What teachers in a high-performing high school need to effectively manage workplace stress: an evaluation study
PDF
The Bridge Program and underrepresented Latino students: an evaluation study
PDF
A gap analysis of homeless student school attendance in a large urban school district
PDF
Implementing organizational change in a medical school
PDF
Implementation of strategies to address the fiscal impacts of declining enrollment on school resources: an evaluation study
PDF
A qualitative examination of the methods church leaders use to increase young adult attendance in Christian churches: an evaluation study
PDF
Supporting women business owners: the Inland Empire Women’s Business Center: an evaluation study
PDF
The happiness design: an innovation study
PDF
Trending upward: an evaluation study of teacher practices in serving special needs students in a public high school
PDF
Student engagement in online education: an evaluation study
Asset Metadata
Creator
Zazueta, Edgar S.
(author)
Core Title
Response to the growth of charter schools in California school districts: an evaluation study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
03/14/2018
Defense Date
02/28/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
charter schools,gap analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,superintendents
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Picus, Lawrence (
committee chair
), Cash, David (
committee member
), Franklin, Greg (
committee member
), Ott, Maria (
committee member
)
Creator Email
ezazueta@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-485168
Unique identifier
UC11268529
Identifier
etd-ZazuetaEdg-6109.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-485168 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-ZazuetaEdg-6109.pdf
Dmrecord
485168
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Zazueta, Edgar S.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
charter schools
gap analysis
superintendents