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
/
Factors that may lead to an urban high school‘s outperforming status: a case study of an institution‘s achievement in the age of accountability
(USC Thesis Other)
Factors that may lead to an urban high school‘s outperforming status: a case study of an institution‘s achievement in the age of accountability
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
FACTORS THAT MAY LEAD TO AN URBAN HIGH SCHOOL‘S
OUTPERFORMING STATUS:
A CASE STUDY OF AN INSTITUTION‘S ACHIEVEMENT
IN THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY
by
José Ignacio Hernández
_______________________________________________________________
A Dissertation 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
December 2009
Copyright 2009 José Ignacio Hernández
ii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this to those individuals whose actions and direction have made me feel
alive. Their examples in living life by certain standards have not only provided me
with direction, but most importantly, have made me feel that I am so much more than
a heart beating in an encasement composed of basically dust and water! For that, I
am eternally grateful!
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This personal milestone would not have been possible without the wise guidance of
my committee chair and chief researcher, Dr. Stuart Gothold, nor the
recommendations and support of the dissertation committee members, Drs. Kathy
Stowe and Dennis Hocevar. Additionally, I gratefully acknowledge my heart-felt
thanks for the help of new and old friends, fellow educators, and the Architect of the
Universe.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ………………………………………………………………………. ...ii
Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………… ...iii
List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………. ...v
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………….. ...vi
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………...vii
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study ……………………………………………… ...1
Chapter 2: Literature Review …………………………………………………….21
Chapter 3: Methodology ………………………………………………………. ...41
Chapter 4: Findings …………………………………………………………… ...62
Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Implications ……………………….. ...117
References ……………………………………………………………………. ...127
Appendix A: Interview Questions …………………………………………… ...145
Appendix B: Survey of High School Administrators Regarding Student …… ...146
Engagement
Appendix C: Survey of High School Teachers Regarding Student ……………..149
Engagement
Appendix D: Documents ……………………………………………………... ...152
Appendix E: Observation Log ……………………………………………….. ...153
Appendix F: High School Survey of Student Engagement ………………….. ...154
Appendix G: Guide to Calculating Dropout Rates …………………………… ...158
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: CVHS Growth Information ………………………………………... ...13
Table 3.1: API Information and Rankings for CVHS ……………………………52
Table 4.1: Percentage Teaching with an Emergency Credential ………………...74
Table 4.2: STAR Test Scores - % Proficient and Above of Students Tested … ...79
Table 4.3: Disaggregated Data - Comparison of HSSSE Students: National and...85
CVHS Respondents
Table 4.4: Comparison of Demographics …………………………………….. ...85
Table 4.5: Means Comparison: Cognitive/lntellectual/Academic Engagement ...86
Table 4.6: Means Comparison = Social/Behavioral/Participatory Engagement ...88
Table 4.7: Means Comparison - Emotional Engagement ……………………......89
Table 4.8: Hours Spent in a Typical Week: Reading and Studying for Class …....91
Table 4.9: Comparison of Mean Scores: ―Hours Spent Per Week‖ …………... ...92
Table 4.10: Hours Spent in a Typical Week: Doing Written Homework …….. ...92
Table 4.11: Comparison of Mean Scores ……………………………………... ...92
Table 4.12: ―I put forth a great deal of effort when doing my school work‖ ….. ...94
Table 4.13: Comparison of Mean Scores ……………………………………... ...94
Table 4.14: Assigned Reading Hours / Week (In percentages) ………………...101
Table 4.15: Assigned Writing Assignments …………………………………. ...106
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1: Current Research on Student Engagement …………………………...42
Figure 3.2: 2004 Accountability Progress Report ……………………………. ...47
vii
ABSTRACT
This mixed-methods case study investigated factors that may contribute to
the outperforming status of an urban high school. Urban high schools are possibly
more challenged than ever before in preparing students for a 21
st
century economy
(Orfield et al, 2006). In this context, success for California urban high schools is
measured, in conjunction with other factors, by ranking 3 to 4 deciles above other
similar public comprehensive high schools. However, other questions remain
regarding the extent to which students‘ own involvement in their learning influences
an outperforming high school‘s success.
Even with diminished resources the case study school has outperformed
similar schools due to existing factors contributing to the rise its academic
performance index (API), a measure largely prompted by the federal No Child Left
Behind legislation and an important effectiveness indicator. Five years ago the urban
high school in this case study was ranked by the California Department of Education
(CDE) as a 5 on a statewide rubric where 10 is considered the highest score. On
another similar but different state measure, one comparing similar schools‘ indicators
where one school is compared to 100 other institutions sharing key characteristics,
the case study school scored higher. In 2007 the school raised its statewide rank to a
6 and its similar schools rank to a 9. This case study researched factors possibly
explaining this case study school‘s outperformance, including:
viii
Quickly identifying students scoring at levels below proficient
Utilizing innovative curricular strategies by reworking the school day and
implementing a strong scientifically-proven intervention curriculum and
support technology
A culture composed of caring stakeholders (i.e., highly qualified teachers,
visionary leader, involved parents and support staff) who hold students
accountable.
1
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
The notion that youth from disadvantaged backgrounds lag behind others in
achievement is encapsulated in Coleman‘s finding from his 1966 report, Equality of
Educational Opportunity:
Schools bring little influence to bear on a child‘s achievement that is
independent of his background and general social context; this very lack of
an independent effect means that the inequalities imposed on children by
their home, neighborhood, and peer environment are carried along to become
the inequalities with which they confront adult life at the end of school. For
equality of educational opportunity must imply a strong effect of schools that
is independent of the child‘s immediate environment, and that strong
independent effect is not present in American schools.
Current research furnished by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES,
2007) on graduation rates in American high schools, especially among impoverished
minority youth (Woods, 1995), has brought to light important questions about the
need for secondary institutions to improve their instructional practices in order to
raise graduation rates. Related to such poor graduation rates, other questions have
surfaced about how well our schools are preparing our students for 21
st
century
challenges (Kushmann, 2000; Stecher, 2004; Finn, 1993). Undoubtedly having a
workforce prepared for the 21
st
century is an important national interest,
consequently educators and policy-makers must start by asking: What is happening,
or not happening, at high schools that are experiencing high and dramatic dropout
2
rates? Logically, the answers to those and other related questions should grant us a
better understanding of the current nation-wide problem of low graduation rates.
Some research suggests that among the factors contributing to lower
graduation rates is a phenomena behavioral scientists are unable to fully explain: the
general decline in students‘ engagement with the learning process as they grow older
(Kushman, 2000; Brewster & Fagan, 2000; Guglielmo, 2006). Research has
consistently shown that dropout rates decrease and graduation rates increase among
students, regardless of race, ethnicity or socio-economic class, when students feel
connected to their schools, and to the adults who create that important connection
between themselves and learning, often referred to in the field as ―student
engagement‖. Conversely, graduation rates decrease with a lack of engagement
(Woods, 1995; Finn, 1993)
Background to the Problem
Given our system of schooling, each state is responsible for its own
educational system. Nonetheless, states have to honor federal mandates in order to
receive federal funding. As such, a basic understanding of federal expectations in
the era of accountability is arguably more important than ever before. No Child Left
Behind (NCLB), is one such critical mandate requiring that the achievement gap be
closed among varying student populations. One problem that arises from individual
state control of education, is that no national ―blueprint‖ exists for solving problems
in education; nor are there assurances that citizens in different parts of the country
receive the same level or quality of education (Elmore, 1997).
3
A unique dilemma has resulted from state controlled education (despite
federal mandates); it is that dropout rates are difficult to assess on a national level, as
each state has different definitions of what even constitutes ―dropping out‖ (Institute
for Educational Standards, 2004). In fact, the numbers of methods meant to calculate
the body count of youth who don‘t graduate are varied and confusing and don‘t lend
themselves to producing a collective sense of validity about the problem at large.
For example, as a way of illustrating the problems endemic to calculating dropout
rates, the Common Core of Data (CCD) notes that ―…event dropout rates provide a
measure of the percentage age of students who drop out of school in a single year.
Other dropout rates have been developed for other purposes.‖ (Institute of
Educational Statistics, 2008) The NCES has also published several such rates (see
Appendix G) including status and cohort dropout rates. Status dropout rates report
the percentage of the age of individuals in a given age range who are not in school
and have not earned a high school diploma or equivalency credential, irrespective of
when they dropped out. These rates, as has been suggested by some researchers, can
be used to study general population issues connected to decreased educational
attainment issues prevalent within certain minority populations of young people
(e.g., see Laird, DeBell & Chapman, 2006). Cohort dropout rates are designed to
measure the percentage age of students in a given cohort or class who drop out over
a period of time (e.g., see McMillen, 1997).
In the last few years, the National Governors‘ Association (NGA) began
discussion about standardizing graduation requirements for all states (2005), and the
4
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) is also promoting a standard
definition of the broadly used term ―graduation rate‖. One of the persistent problems
with assessing graduation rates nationally, and the corresponding issue of dropping
out, is the lack of uniformity of compensatory secondary education laws found from
state to state. Obviously, without consistency in these basic concepts, given the era
of accountability, institutions do not have any consistent or systemic ways of
determining the reform efforts needed to improve graduation rates.
NCLB created the need for states to measure the performance level of their
schools beyond merely the uneven, and sometimes unsupported, graduation / dropout
rates. As guided by NCLB legislation, each participating state has developed
individual indicators for its secondary schools largely based on high school students‘
performance on examinations developed by the state to determine general
proficiency in core academic areas. The state boards of education provided high
schools with instructional roadmaps, or standards, of material given throughout
students‘ tenure at their schools. In time the measurement assessments of these
curricular directives became known as high stakes examinations. The resulting
ranking of public high schools called into question how instruction was being
delivered and to what degree students were involved in their own academic success
(Pretti-Frontczak, 1999).
State policymakers, guided by federal guidelines, developed rubrics by which
to calculate a school‘s effectiveness in teaching its students the common curriculum
in core academic areas, which were divided into the academic standards that all
5
students were expected to know at determined levels of proficiency. However,
besides establishing the level of knowledge and skills students should possess upon
graduation, a parallel concern by those involved in reforming schools was the
preoccupation of also reducing dropout rates, persistently higher in urban areas
among minority students than in other parts of the state (Pinkus, 2006; Ogbu, 1990;
Orfield, 2005).
Although the factors determining the status and the steps by which schools
are ranked are described in greater detail in Chapter 2, it‘s important to bear in mind
that policymakers, educators, and other stakeholders were provided data about the
performance of students that by and large depicted a picture of many schools not
meeting the challenges of readying a new generation of students for post-secondary
pathways, whether it involves college admission or moving into a work environment.
During the first decade of the 21
st
century in California, measures have been
established so as to better understand the dropout rate as defined by the NCES. The
CDE has directed state school districts to track and report the numbers of students
who enroll into the 9
th
grade but do not receive a diploma with their classmates in
the 12th grade. Additionally the CDE tracks and reports how effectively schools are
teaching their students by reviewing performance rates on key assessments. The
results are published in a report known as the Accountability Progress Reporting
(APR) system. It contains, among other things, results of schools‘ assessments
resulting in scores for the Academic Performance Index (API) and the Adequate
6
Yearly Progress (AYP); assessment calculations performed at the state level (i.e.,
API) and progress according to federal guidelines (AYP).
While states were given purview over deciding their standards and measures
for their performance, the federal government added further effectiveness measures
and guidelines through requirements contained within parts of laws connected to
sums of educational funding. The assessments given to students attending California
institutions are part of a category constituting the state‘s integrated accountability
system intended to triangulate the collective progress, or lack thereof, in teaching
students necessary skills and content for 21
st
century demands (CDE, 2006).
Statement of the Problem
Regardless of which definitions are utilized for reporting the annual dropout
and graduation rates, there is an emerging amount of irrefutable data that American
high schools are failing to educate a large percentage of adolescents, especially from
impoverished backgrounds.
If California and the nation are to maintain their status of economic
relevance, then the current evidence that points to the need for improving the manner
by which urban secondary institutions educate students from mostly poor minority
communities is warranted. Clarity about uniformity and accuracy in describing the
nation‘s graduation crisis in California, the most populated state, will undoubtedly
impact other states to follow NGA reporting guidelines. While it is true that all 50
states‘ governors have agreed to a compact set to go into effect in 2010-11,
addressing the uniform reporting of graduation and dropout rates, too much latitude
7
within the document could prolong accurate reporting. After all, it was just in 2005
that the Civil Rights Project of Harvard University reported the trend in California by
administrators to underestimate the dropout problem. The reality is that urban
schools were not reporting their graduation data accurately (Orfield, 2005). The
aftermath is that California schools have since been scrutinized more closely using
the four-year cohort graduation rate by federal AND state officials. The increased
attention has led to greater confidence in the contention that some urban schools
have indeed improved in providing interventions generating authentic improvement.
(Alliance for Excellent Education, 2007).
In installing an array of assessments for students, California policymakers
and educators felt that a clearer picture of gaps in the state‘s educational system
would then better inform further efforts targeted to continually improve the delivery
of instruction as well as increasing the impact of efficiently placed resources. To
some degree, credit for the heightened scrutiny and the resulting reform is due to
efforts by the architects of the change legislation known as NCLB. Arguably this
legislation has had the greatest impact of all federal mandates meant to improve this
―nation at risk‖. For example, it leverages federal support of education by mandating
laser-like attention to the quality of schools by exposing the knowledge gaps in sub-
groups of students through an array of assessments. The result is snapshots of both
satisfactorily performing schools and, more importantly, schools not performing
effectively. This exposure of institutions that sre not performing adequately, referred
to as program improvement (PI) schools in need of greater attention and resources,
8
provides officials at local, state and national levels opportunities to place decreasing
resources strategically thus fostering the chances for future gains. These strategic
reforms in PI schools were intended to produce results; chief among them was
raising the graduation rates (Corrales, 1997; Darling-Hammond, 2004; Elmore,
2001).
Regretfully, the dropout rate remains at alarming levels. The dropout figures
generated by the Alliance for Excellent Education --- an agency working closely
with the NGA, estimated that an alarming 1.23 million American high school
students failing annually to receive a high school diploma (2007). This subsequent
―brain drain‖ by the 1.23 million dropouts adds to increasing rates of lost
productivity and the loss in revenue to the economy made by the wages earned by a
well-prepared workforce. As the level of scrutiny broadens, and educational
landscapes change from state to state, a national ―snap shot‖ of each states
educational health, prompted by federal mandates and other factors, is emerging.
Not surprisingly, part of the scenario includes the national phenomenon of
lower achievement rates among students attending urban institutions versus the
achievement of students enrolled at rural institutions. Researchers have also found
that differences exist in the achievement rate between youth attending schools in
rural areas and those enrolled in urban schools. In short, because schools in urban
settings tend to be larger and have student bodies with greater proportions of
economically disadvantaged students, these factors tend to turn effect the larger
urban schools‘ achievement test scores (Bickel, 2001).
9
Educators and non-educators alike are undoubtedly able to apply the minimal
logic needed to understand the possible relationship of a non-engaged, disconnected
student who has dropped out of high school and the increased risk of involvement in
criminal activity. These young people, often driven to a life of crime because of
narrowed options, create additional loss to society calculated both in real dollars and
in the loss of opportunity dollars. That is to say, the community loses the
contributions that would have been made by productive citizens to the general
economy. Thus one major problem examined by this study was the condition
affecting levels of student engagement as students‘ progress through our school
systems, and to examine those possibly interrelated factors that impact the status of
outperforming urban high schools.
Purpose of the Study
All students are meant to graduate from high school in order to meet goals
expressed in economic terms expressing the readiness of workers in a 21
st
century
context. Additionally, research has shown a connection between adult individuals‘
level of general satisfaction with their lives and an earning trajectory highly
influenced by their attained level of education (Croninger, 2001; US Census Bureau,
2007).
The purpose of this study was to determine what factors contributed to the
outperformance of an urban high school in a community adjacent to Los Angeles and
possessing at-risk factors describing an urban clime. Urban schools, in general, face
greater risk factors working against improving graduation rates. Of particular
10
interest was whether student engagement played a role in the achievement status
attained by an outperforming urban high school. Although this area has been studied
in general, questions about possible connections between student achievement and
levels of engagement in California urban outperforming schools remain.
As such, a group of researchers from the University of Southern California
(USC) embarked upon gathering data regarding possible factors connecting student
engagement and achievement at various urban secondary institutions. The team of
researchers was composed of doctoral candidates, each of whom was interested in
the general topic but nevertheless was also free to maintain a particular emphasis.
This study was a result of collaboration with this team of researchers inasmuch as
extensive dialog and decision-making within the group provided needed clarity.
The research team engaged in examining all the various characteristics
described in the literature and on the CDE website that would be relevant to the
research aim described by the two guiding questions. The researchers reviewed and
discussed the literature on urban high schools meeting the profile elements of the
units of analysis. A discussion emerged about different terms that would best
encapsulate the type of schools studied in this thematic dissertation effort. After
considerable reflection and discussion with the professors from USC‘s Rossier
School of Education, the term ―outperforming‖ emerged as the agreed-upon term
best serving a needed interpretive function in the process of analyzing the data
connected to the phenomena of the performance of chosen urban institutions. By
consensus, the team agreed that ―high-performing‖ was a term more closely aligned
11
to a separate distinct category of schools less descriptive of those selected by most of
the research team members. Therefore, for purposes of this study the term
―outperforming high school‖ refers to a secondary institution located in an urban
setting and performing better, as measured by API scores, than one hundred other
similar schools as identified by the CDE.
The term ―urban‖ was also qualified as referring to a metropolitan area where
evidence of risk factors associated with densely populated metropolitan areas were
also risk factors affecting students enrolled at the case study schools. Similar schools
are categorized into sets of 100, all of which share enough characteristics to be
comparable in their effectiveness with students of similar demographic backgrounds.
The team of researchers agreed that an outperforming institution had to also
have attained a level of effectiveness measured by important existing indicators. One
such marker is the adequate performance indicator (API), a measure of a school‘s
success in raising its effectiveness. Consequently an outperforming high school must
have demonstrated success in producing API scores of at least two or more deciles
above other similarly positioned schools. A decile in this case refers to the
mathematical reference of ―10‖ within a context of institutions sharing important
characteristics as determined by the CDE‘s similar characteristics index (SCI). So if
a set of similar schools is composed of 100, then a decile delineates bands of 10
schools and creates a ranked hierarchy composed of 10 bands (or a total of 100
schools, 10 in each band) This definition of an ―outperforming institution‖ was
agreed upon by the research team after discussing research associated with urban risk
12
factors (see for example Finn, 1993; Rauth, 2006; Balfanz, 2006) and further
informed by the state‘s already existing system of defining similar schools (e.g.,
SCI). These terms are more fully discussed in chapter three.
Specifically, team members selected to research urban high schools with
track records of consistently remaining at least two deciles above similar schools on
achievement indicators contained within the CDE‘s list of SCI. The SCI identifies
schools located within similar bands based on statistical information due to shared
characteristics on annual performance exams such as API scores and the
demographics of students served (CDE, 2006). As urban settings present the greatest
risk factors in raising graduation rates (a condition supported by graduation and
dropout rates), the research team concluded that outperforming high schools chosen
from the SCI list held the greatest opportunities for answering the guiding research
questions.
After some group reflection and discourse on the effectiveness of urban high
schools within the Los Angeles area, the group identified some high schools that
were effectively serving sub-groups of students facing the greatest odds of not
receiving high school diplomas: those youth who come from impoverished settings
and who are from minority backgrounds. The cohort arrived at consensus that urban
schools would be chosen based on two criteria; 1. An outperforming urban high
school; and 2, One serving a level of at least 40% socioeconomically challenged
youth.
13
The comprehensive urban high school, City of the Valley High School
(CVHS) selected for this study has a track record of beating the odds, as noted by its
status as a school with a state-wide ranking of 5, but with a similar schools ranking
of 9 -- significantly ahead of the pack by four decile points. The approximately 2,500
student body is largely composed of students from three racial/ethnic groups, Latino
(48.5%), African American (23.5%), and White (22.2%). Each of the sub-groups are
demonstrating improvement, including the API. The growth rates of these sub-
groups has served to push the high school to a level four deciles above similar
schools. For example African-Americans improved from two years to last year by an
approximate 4.5%; Latino students raised their score by almost 1%; and, White
students gained an almost 2% growth.
Table 1.1: CVHS Growth Information
API 2007 Growth
= 704
2006 Base
= 693
2006 Statewide
Rank = 5
2006 Similar
Schools Rank = 9
African
American
684 655 Growth = 29
Latino 674 668 Growth = 6
White 766 751 Growth = 15
The CVHS graduation rate in the 2005-06 school year was at the level of
83.1%; this beat the school‘s district‘s 74% and the county‘s 77% rates. CVHS
14
came very close to matching the state‘s rate of 83.3%. (accessed on January October
8, 2007 on the the CDE‘s website, cde.ca.gov)
Research Questions
Unlocking the key to the factors leading to this school‘s outperforming status
were guided by the following two research questions:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in a
outperforming urban high school?
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in an
outperforming urban high school?
Significance of the Study
A review of the extant literature in the field reveals that there is very little
research on student engagement or whether a connection may exist between higher
levels of learning and the degree to which students in high schools are engaged in
their education. This is especially true in regards to those secondary schools that are
outperforming other similar school in urban areas. Correspondingly, this study is
significant because it focuses on an urban high school with a high proportion
minority student population.
Ultimately the aim of this study was to provide insight as to the factors that
are possibly connected to the school‘s status as an outperforming comprehensive
senior high school in comparison to other comparable institutions in California. The
importance of gathering information related to urban secondary schools in Southern
California is heightened by economic concerns over the readiness of a workforce
15
expected to support the maintenance and growth one of the world‘s top regional
economies.
Summary of Methodology
The methodology used in this study was that which is applicable and obtains
in a qualitative case study. This approach was utilized to provide for details from the
viewpoint of the participants in this study, as well as to closely examine the relevant
patterns that emerged between student engagement and student achievement in an
outperforming high school. Such a case study approach is methodologically ideal
when a holistic, in-depth investigation is needed (Yin, 2003). Four data collection
instruments were used in this study (document reviews, surveys, interviews, and
observation summaries) to illuminate those themes that best described the
phenomena being studied.
Limitations and Delimitations
The following limitations and delimitations obtain in this study:
Limitations
1. The number of participants who volunteered to participate in the study
created an inherent limitation.
2. All aspects of the study cannot be generalized to other schools or school
districts.
3. This study being inherently qualitative, suggests that the findings of this
study may be subject to interpretations other than the ones presented here.
16
Delimitations
The following delimitations applied to this study:
1. The case study was delimited to the duration of the study.
2. The case study was delimited to a single, outperforming, urban high
school in Los Angeles that met the criteria of outperforming and urban as
set by the researchers in the doctoral thematic dissertation group.
3. The case study was delimited to the research instruments, developed by
the researchers in the doctoral thematic dissertation group that focused on
school practices and student engagement.
Definition of Terms
Academic Performance Index (API) --- a measurement in California of
academic performance and progress of individual schools. API scores range from a
low of 200 to a high of 1000. The statewide API performance target for all schools
is 800. A school‘s score of placement on the API is designed to be an indicator of a
school‘s performance level and is calculated annually by the California Department
of Education, primarily based on the CST and CAHSEE tests (California Department
of Education, 2006).
API Target ---Ultimately 800 is the final target API for all California schools
based on a scale of 200 to 1000. However, until a school reaches, and maintains an
800-plus API, an institution is judged by a system on a two-year cycle that generates
a first year ―base‖ and a ―growth‖ score in the second year. The CDE expects
schools scoring under the 800 final target to implement improvement efforts aimed
17
at reaching the second year growth score (effectively becoming the base for the
following year. (CDE, 2007)
Deciles – The ranking of schools into groupings where the CDE divides the
lists of schools into a ―curve‖ marked from 9 to 100 and broken down into bands, or
―deciles‖ (CDE, 2007)
Four Frames --- A means by which to understand the elements inherent in an
organization that influence the operation of that organization. These ―lenses‖ were
created by Lee G. Bolman and Terrence Deal and are divided into the following
perspectives: structural, symbolic, political, and human resources.
High School Survey of Student Engagement – An instrument developed by
Indiana University ―to document, describe, and monitor student engagement in
educationally purposeful activities in secondary schools nationally‖ (Accessed on
June 10, 2007 at http://ceep.indiana.edu/hssse/html/about.htm).
Learning Community – A separately defined learning community unit within
a larger school environment working towards increased academic achievement
through a focus on personalizing the instructional process.
No Child Left Behind --- Federal legislation originally generated during
President Johnson‘s tenure as one of the measures aimed at waging the war against
poverty by providing schools where impoverished students were extolled in high
numbers with access to additional resources. In 2001 the legislation was re-
authorized by President G.W. Bush to further federal efforts aimed at improving the
nation‘s schools. According to the U.S. Department of Education website: ―NCLB
18
is based on stronger accountability for results, more freedom for states and
communities, proven education methods, and more choices for parents.‖ (accessed
on March 1, 2008 from www.ed.gov/nclb/overview).
Outperforming Urban High School--- A secondary school located within a
larger city (i.e., among the 10 largest in California) that is exceeding academic
performance of like or similar schools, when ranked by an academic indicator such
as the Academic Performance Index (API). by at least two deciles above similar
schools having a minimum of 40 % and above free and reduced lunch student
eligibility.
Program Improvement – Under No Child Left Behind legislation, schools are
given a period of time in which to improve the school‘s API. Growth, or
improvement, is based on meeting targets calculated using a two-year cycle. If
within that cycle, the school does not meet its growth target two years in a row, the
school is placed in ―program improvement‖ as it is considered underperforming by
not meeting its growth targets. The school is then included for ―targeted assistance
by the district and state (CDE, 2007)
Resiliency – Persistence in overcoming barriers that might otherwise
challenge achieving learning outcomes. The concept of resiliency may apply both to
teachers and students (Marzano, 2000).
School Culture – Shared values of a learning community‘s stakeholders most
characterized by what Fullan declares is ―the way we do things around here‖ (2001,
p. 8)
19
Student Engagement – Students‘ involvement with school as measured by
―psychological investment in effort directed toward learning, understanding, or
mastering the knowledge, skills, or crafts that academic work is intended to
promote‖ (Newmann, 1993; Wehlage & Lamborn, 1992, p. 12). For this study,
instrumentation developed by Indiana University was used to survey student
opinions. The survey is geared so as to measure three areas of student engagement:
academic, participatory, and emotional. Each dimension informs a type of
relationship that may exist between students and their institution.
Urban – A large city environment having a high density of population within
a geographic area. This term has within it an embedded idea that the population in
an urban environment is not homogenous, but instead is comprised of a wide range
of racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic and socio-economic factors
Organization of the Study
Following is the organization of this study:
Chapter 1 describes the importance of understanding the connection between
high school student achievement and student engagement. Chapter 1 also presents
the background to the problem, the significance of the study, the methodology
utilized, as well as providing other pertinent information that guides this study.
Chapter 2 is a literature review that highlights the important field research
that pertains to the aims of this study.
Chapter 3 presents the methodology employed by the researcher to produce
the case study of the outperforming urban high school. This chapter describes the
20
why and how of the data collected. It includes information on the conceptual
framework, a description of the instruments, the procedures for collection of data,
and the lenses used to analyze the data.
Chapter 4 presents the findings resulting from the use of the instrumentation
described in chapter 3.
Chapter 5 presents the conclusions, discussion of this case study, and
implications for future research.
21
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The research study looks at programs and practices in an urban high school
that is considered to be doing better than other urban high schools similar to it based
on student population, urban setting, socio-economic factors, graduation rates, test
scores, etc.
Reform Efforts
Due to the increasingly dismal reports regarding increasing dropout rates,
decreasing national test scores, the collective public‘s attention focused a critical eye
on the improving the ways in which to make schools more accountable. School
districts across the nation have sought ways to redesign their institutions through the
invention and implementation of reform models and designs. Historically, students in
urban high schools have underperformed academically in comparison to their
suburban counterparts. Nonetheless, some urban high schools have achieved
significant gains. It is unclear what contributes to high performance in the schools in
urban settings. In an attempt to turn failing schools around, a number of reform
efforts appeared on the horizon seemingly to the rescue during the 1980s and 1990s.
One nationally recognized reform plan was embraced by City of the Valley
USD largely during the 1990s (personal communication with an assistant
superintendent on November 7, 2007). This reform effort was not ―formulaic‖ per se.
rather it was couched more as a road map of guiding principles was developed
22
largely through the work of Ted Sizer in the 1980s from Brown University and
characterized by a continuous action research model where ―essential‖ beliefs are
embedded in a school‘s improvement efforts.. Still evident in the school‘s culture are
the basic tenets of the ―Coalition‖ ideology ---inherent in the 10 principles:
1. Learning to use one's mind well
2. Less is More, depth over coverage
3. Goals apply to all students
4. Personalization
5. Student-as-worker, teacher-as-coach
6. Demonstration of mastery
7. A tone of decency and trust
8. Commitment to the entire school
9. Resources dedicated to teaching and learning
10. Democracy and equity
The Coalition of Essential Schools (CES) was not a rigid model of school
reform. The chart below was adapted from factors that Coalition schools were to
consider. The CES‘s ―Common Principles‖ were intended for schools to shape their
own reform efforts—including curriculum and instruction. Although instructional
techniques and methods of scheduling classes were recommended, no specific
changes were mandated.
A leading notion was that teachers facilitated learning in a guided process;
students are encouraged to construct their own understanding of the curriculum.
23
Additionally ―constructivist‖ pedagogy places the responsibility for acquiring
understanding in the hands of the students, thus holding them, not their teachers,
more accountable for learning through acts of applied effort (Sizer, 1984; Herman,
1999).
The influence of CES is found in the emphasis of making learning relevant
and meaningful through, for example, a connected curriculum, or one in which the
subjects were grouped in a thematic, related fashion. The intent is to raise student
engagement by making learning both relevant and rigorous, while sustaining a sense
of meaningfulness. At its reformist core, the CES philosophy emphasizes a personal
approach to learning. It is therefore a model where ―mentoring‖ replaces a teacher-
centered model. CES schools, growing from 12 in 1984 to 600 in 2007 (accessed on
January 22, 2008 from ceschangelab.org), are typically ones that have either been
created or re-configured into new small high schools.
It was only after the federal government‘s increased involvement vis a vis
NCLB mandates that the era of school accountability shifted to calculations of
factors that included high stakes tests‘ results and adequate teacher subject specific
preparation among a list of other requisites. The federal government‘s increasing role
in deciding issues involving the funding of states‘ school districts is a telling
indicator of the degree in the shift of control in the age of NCLB accountability.
Prior to the current school measurement indicators, schools‘ accountability was
judged in ways that rarely looked at student assessment scores.
24
Historians, researchers, economists, and educators refer to the period of time
after the publication of A Nation At Risk, during the 1990s, as a turning point. During
this period of time the federal government‘s interest in the level of performance of
public schools and states‘ educational policies governing intervention in school
improvement was markedly heightened. A turning point for interested parties was
the Reagan administration‘s reluctance to fund singular states‘ education programs,
preferring instead to proffer ―block grants‖ thus increasing states collective
motivation for establishing educational funding priorities (Verstegen, 1990; Borman,
2002; Cotton, 1996; Darling-Hammond, 2004).
The CDE, as did other states‘ departments of education, moved to improve its
public schools by employing changes to school financing that created a climate of
uncertainty about how schools were to continue as they had prior to the ―New
Federalism‘s‖ emphasis on the redirection of educational funding provided to states.
Previous to the funding shifts prompted by increasing federal oversight,
accountability for California public schools was generally measured by the
effectiveness of handling financial management matters responsibly and for
complying with local, state and federal guidelines (EdSource Online, 2008).
No Child Left Behind
NCLB requires that the CDE maintain a system of vigilance as to the
progress the state‘s schools are making in meeting academic performance
benchmarks. The CDE has created an Accountability Progress Report system which
25
incorporates the state‘s own measurement guidelines, the API, that relates to the
federal AYP requirement.
It must be noted that while CVHS is eligible to be considered within the
category of Title 1 eligible, the districts Board of Education, the body ultimately
responsible for designating a school as one where Title 1 funds would be provided
financial support has not voted to designate the school as such. Nevertheless, the
school must meet the same benchmarks as Title 1 schools.
This federal legislation was originally passed by Congress in 1965 as part of
President Johnson‘s effort to facilitate improving the condition of disadvantaged
students in K-12 schools by funding professional development activities and provide
instructional materials, educational resources, and parental involvement support
(Public law 89-10, 79 Stat 77, 20 U. S.C.ch 70). Original federal support has
changed in significant ways. Under No Child Left Behind, schools that qualify for
Title I funding (which provides federal assistance when forty percent or more of a
school's student population qualify to receive free or reduced cost meals) are
mandated to increase student performance as measured by the state's standards for
accountability. Additionally, NCLB focuses on improving the areas of reading and
math scores by requiring the use of instructional strategies that have scientifically-
based research supporting the contention of the program's effectiveness.
Furthermore, the NCLB law requires every state to measure the extent to
which all students have highly qualified teachers (USDE, 2004). NCLB highly
qualified teacher criteria are grouped into two categories by levels.
26
1. Teachers at the Elementary level (grades K-5 and 6 when it is a self-
contained classroom)
2. Teachers of Secondary Grade Levels--Middle and High School (grade 6
when it is structured as having departmentalized classes and grades 7-12)
The NCLB highly qualified teacher requirement applies to all teachers
that teach in the core academic areas of: English, Language Arts,
Reading, Mathematics, Science, History, Civics/Government, Geography,
Economics, Foreign Languages (World Languages), Art--Visual Arts,
Theatre, Dance, Music (General, Choral, Instrumental.
A good body of evidence connects a school‘s effectiveness in raising student
achievement to increasing the percentages of highly qualified (HQ) teachers in the
school‘s faculty. Haycock (1998) cites a number of studies in Good Teaching
Matters: How Well-qualified Teachers Can Close the Gap. The article suggests that
content knowledge along with associated academic vocabulary, generally rich in
important conceptual lexicon, are important enough to consider how assignments of
teachers are decided upon in generating an effective master schedule. Indeed,
Haycock makes the point that, in general, the most-impacted urban high schools
usually serving poor and minority youngsters, are systemically yaight by teachers
with the least content knowledge (1998).
The educational landscape after NCLB created a new era characterized by
assessments to determine how effectively a school is readying its students for the
stage in their lives after high school. In the brochure, A Guide for Californians,
27
published by EdSource (2005), the new official measures for gauging a school‘s
performance are calculated including the following assessments:
California Standard‘s Tests
California High School Exit Exam
California Achievement Tests (e.g., CAT/6)
Spanish Assessment of Basic Education (e.g., SABE/2)
California Alternate Performance Assessment
California English Language Development Test (CELDT)
A key distinction between the emphasis in the two assessment areas, as noted
on the EdSource Online website, is that while NCLB emphasizes attainments made
by students in a given year to measure a school‘s effectiveness, California districts
tend to use the results of assessments to stress improvement. Nevertheless in theory
the measures of accountability, whether guided by federal guidelines or state-based
reform tenets, are shared as common precepts, including the following commonly
found at both state and federal levels:
standards that spell out what students should know and be able to do;
assessments to measure progress toward those standards;
strategies for building the capacity of educators to help their students
meet higher expectations;
rewards when students and schools meet or exceed standards; and,
clear consequences when they fail. (EdSource Online, 2008)
28
Yet what is not clear is whether it is necessary for outperforming urban high
schools to not only raise student performance but as part of their effort also factor in
the need for students to be engaged in the improvement process. The research is not
clear about the effect factor of students‘ level of engagement on school effectiveness
measures, especially in regards to urban California institutions (Rosenthal, 2007;
Kuh, 2007).
This engagement factor in post-secondary career pathways may be influenced
by the student‘s previous experiences at the secondary educational institution.
Educators and policymakers understand that school-to-career pathways will
invariably involve more and more youth seeking additional training and knowledge
development. The heart of the matter is readying young people for life after high
school. Generally a diploma indicates preparedness to move forward in following
some pathway for productive post-secondary involvement in a career or higher
education course. The significance, and interest by the federal government, for youth
to be prepared to join the larger society is conveyed, for example, in the 1994
School-to-Work Act enjoining high schools to provide additional educational
opportunities for youth to establish future options for employment or educational
options after high school graduation.
Accountability in California
The California Department of Education has set forth an ambitious
declaration of purpose in the shaping of student performance in high school.
Education Code section 51228 is quite clear about its view of the purpose of high
29
school - it states: Each school district maintaining any of grades 7-12, inclusive shall
offer to all otherwise qualified pupils in those grades a course of study that provides
an opportunity for those pupils to attain entry-level employment skills in business or
industry upon graduation from high school. Districts are encouraged to provide all
pupils with a rigorous academic curriculum that integrates academic and career
skills, incorporates applied learning to all disciplines, and prepares all pupils for high
school graduation and career entry (California Senate Bill 1229, 2003).
The age of accountability impacted California‘s own projects for improving
student achievement. On October 13, 2004, California Secretary of Education, Jack
O‘Connell, pointed out in a press release the following about the ―new‖
accountability:
I continue to believe that California‘s own accountability system--the
Academic Performance Index is a fairer and more accurate measurement of
school performance. It makes more sense to measure schools on their
academic growth year to year, and target resources to schools showing the
least improvement, rather than designating schools passed or failed based on
whether they reached an arbitrary status bar.
Note that California‘s CDE measures progress in student learning using a
model employing ―growth‖ numbers, while the federal government uses a ―status‖
model. The difference is critical especially as the CDE continues to look at high
versus low performing schools. A growth model would take into account the degree
to which the students have moved from point A to point B; conversely, a status-
based system would only count those students who were at point B, with no
consideration of the ―distance traveled‖ (Elmore, 2003). It is more easily understood
30
how the underpinnings of measuring improvement (e.g., NCLB ranking measures).
draws much of its impetus from the economic impact related to future resources
defined by earning potential.
The value of knowledge, beyond the intrinsic, has recently been estimated by
the U.S. Census Bureau to be, on average, for young adults with a high school
diploma $28,645 annually; for college graduates, the average earnings rise to
$51,554 for a whopping average yearly income difference of $23,000 between the
two groups (2004). In using a ―growth‖ index, California is looking at specific
populations of students over time and determining if those student groups are
learning by analyzing their scores in a valued-added manner so as to better
understand school and individual gains. The CDE generated a ―white paper‖
(California Department of Education, 2004) in which this growth model approach ―is
defined as one that measures the academic success…solely on the basis of how much
student achievement improves.‖ The key provision of Public Schools Accountability
Act (PSAA, 1999) is the Academic Performance Index (API). This is calculated
using a scale that ranges from 200 to 1000 with the state goal for all schools to attain
800. The API, the key provision of Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA,
1999), using a scale that ranges from 200 to 1000, with the state goal for all schools
at 800, is indeed fairer. While it‘s noteworthy that California‘s growth in API from
2004 to 2005 (689 to 709, respectively) was 20 points, this was not enough to meet
the Federal AYP. The definition of growth, as used by Jack O‘Connell, differs
substantially from the measure utilized by Congress.
31
The California Department of Education has set forth an ambitious
declaration of the purpose of high school in shaping student performance:
Education Code Section 51228 is very clear about the purpose of high school:
Each school district maintaining any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, shall offer
to all otherwise qualified pupils in those grades a course of study fulfilling
the requirements and prerequisites for admission to the California public
institutions of postsecondary education. ...
Each school district maintaining any of grades 7 to 12, inclusive, shall offer
to all otherwise qualified pupils in those grades a course of study that
provides an opportunity for those pupils to attain entry-level employment
skills in business or industry upon graduation from high school. Districts are
encouraged to provide all pupils with a rigorous academic curriculum that
integrates academic and career skills, incorporates applied learning in all
disciplines, and prepares all pupils for high school graduation and career
entry.
The Center on Education Policy (CEP) produced a study entitled Wrestling
the Devil in the Details: An Early Look at Restructuring in California (Balfanz,
2006) tracked the steps of 271 schools that have gone beyond PI 5 (i.e., ―PI 5‖ refers
to going beyond 5 years without reaching target growth), while noting that in total
404 (2006) of the CDE‘s reported 7,940 (2005) regular elementary and secondary
schools were undergoing restructuring. With all of the reform efforts in available to
schools, it bares reminding that restructuring is a category and not a strategy.
Based on the CEP study, the most popular pathway for the schools, 76 %,
was ―undertaking any other major restructuring of the school‘s governance that
produces fundamental reform.‖ (p. 2). The second method of restructuring
undertaken in California is one in which the districts become the decision-makers for
their schools.. Nevertheless, the CDE expects districts to make decisions in
32
collaboration with their school sites. The option least utilized by schools in
restructuring, two percent, was to become charter schools.
As the United States‘ economy faced challenges from other areas of the
world, education policy makers looked to reports such as Nation At Risk and Goals
2000 to guide creating instructional guidelines that would produce a knowledgeable
work force. No Child Left Behind legislation not only amended the ESEA law
changing the existing educational landscape, but it sent ripples of accountability
strewn guidelines for all secondary schools.
Student Engagement
The problem of engaging youth is complex. The most prized assessment
measures for success is the rate at which students either promote to the next highest
grade level, or graduate from high school and successfully transition to life
(Emerson, 2003). However, a number of extant factors prevent youths, especially
those most at-risk youth, from developing the necessary relationships, or
personalization, to either academically promote to the next grade or graduate from
high school altogether. In a recent study by the Casey Foundation in Washington
and Oregon, The Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study, on adults who were former
foster youth, among the most vulnerable and most difficult to engage of all youth
groups, 56% received a diploma, 29% received a GED, compared to 82%, and 5%
respectively for the general population (Pecora, 2005).
Student engagement has been defined differently by different researchers.
Jeremy Finn, for example, subscribes to a definition of student engagement as ―a
33
behavioral component termed participation and a psychological component termed
identification.” (Finn, 1993). For Finn, student engagement was viewed as elements
of a cycle begun in the primary grades and defined by behaviors including
attendance, and level of responsiveness to the teacher‘s direction. These
participatory behaviors were deemed foundations on which more complex
psychological factors would develop in the natural course of a child‘s cognitive
development. The High School Survey of Student Achievement (HSSSE)
instrumentation, an important element in providing ―student voices‖ to this study,
has been foundational in gathering information from across the United States about
how students engage in their learning and learning environment. It is a key piece in
capturing a range of school-related student attitudes, it seems appropriate to begin
with the definition of ―engagement‖ used by the HSSSE Project Office at Indiana
University‘s Center for Evaluation and Education Policy:
―Student academic engagement‖ refers to a series of educationally related
student behaviors or activities postulated as academically desirable, and such
that members of various student populations can report on the frequency with
which they participate in these activities. The more frequently an individual
participates in an activity, the more he or she is engaged in it.
―Academic engagement activities‖ are covered in more detail later. However, to
illustrate the concept, here are a few behaviors generally associated with
engagement:
1. Asking questions in class or contributing to class discussions
2. Preparing two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in
34
3. Working with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments
4. Not coming to class without completing readings or assignments
Implementation of reflective practices and resulting activities are intended to
improve student academic achievement in large public high schools. The federal
governmentrecognizes different strategies utilized for improving schools that include
structures such as freshman academies, multi-grade academies organized around
career interests or other themes, ―houses‖ in which small groups of students remain
together throughout high school, and autonomous schools-within-a-school, as well as
personalization strategies, such as student advisories, family advocate systems, and
mentoring programs (U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
Researchers (Klonsky, 1995; Cotton, 2001; Cushman, 1997) continue to
examine the causal relationship between a positive learning environment‘s culture
and the positive effect it has on student achievement. Essentially, size of the
learning environment creates conditions for success, especially when high
expectations and standards exist. Further, when the size of the learning environment
is reduced, the benefits become apparent
Students experience a greater sense of belonging and are more satisfied
with their schools (Cotton, 1996).
Crime, violence and gang participation decrease (Cushman, 1997).
Incidences of alcohol and tobacco abuse decrease and student attendance
increases (Klonsky,1998).
35
Dropout rates decrease and graduation rates and postsecondary
enrollment rates increase (Funk & Bailey, 1999).
Fewer discipline problems occur (Raywid, 2000).
Involvement by adults in students‘ progress has lead to positive outcomes
for students (Darling-Hammond, 1998).
Dropout rates tend to go down when students attend smaller learning
communities (National Governors Association and the Center for Best
Practices, 2006).
The research suggests that the more a learning community immerses itself in
reviewing its practices , the higher it promotes an environment where students‘
engagement with their learning tends to deepen (Kuh, 2002) . Unfortunately, as more
information about factors connected to improved effectiveness is assembled more
chunks of information also paint an alarming picture about the extent of the national
factors creating regional areas where risk factors are so predominant that some
educational researchers have coined the descriptive term ―drop-out factories‖
(Balfanz, 2007). According to Balfanz, a dropout factory is a school where no more
than 60 percent of entering freshmen complete their senior year. Nation-wide that
comes to an approximate 12 percent of all regular or vocational high schools (USDE,
2007). While ―dropout factory‖ is not likely to be a term any principal, parent,
teacher, or even community would be proud of, each of these areas shoulder some of
the responsibility for the term‘s genesis.
36
The complexity of turning around ―dropout factories‖ to ―diploma production
enterprises‖ involves closer examination of leading risk factors. It is generally
recognized, for example, that the highest concentrations of the nearly 1,700 failing
institutions are located in large cities in those areas mostly populated by minority
residents and strongly affected by high-poverty quotients (USDE, 2007). According
to a study conducted by the Educational Development Center (1996) approximately
160,000 students per day do not attend school because they fear some type of
physical harm will occur. In the aftermath of the violent acts perpetrated at high
schools across the nation, most dramatically contextualized by the murders at
Columbine High School in 1999, safety remains an important issue in fostering an
environment mitigating an array of factors typical of low-performing schools.
The brunt of the weight for turning around a low-performing school by
tackling challenges to the school‘s effectiveness, involving physical safety and
related mental health issues promoting a strong learning culture falls upon the
leadership‘s course of actions. In Marzano et al‘s book, School Leadership that
Works, among the 21 responsibilities of the leadership include the co-factors of
safety and culture (2005). In the case of creating a resilient school that sufficiently
beats the odds characteristic of dropout factories in favor of establishing a diploma
production enterprise, the leadership must accept its role as change agent (Marzano
et al, 2005). This is perhaps best encapsulated in the following: ―Culture is implicit
or explicit in virtually every theory and in the principles espoused by every
theorist...a natural by-product of of people working in close proximity, it can be a
37
positive or negative influence on a school‘s effectiveness. An effective leader builds
a culture that positively influences teachers, who, in turn, positively influence
students.‖ (p. 47).
The most promising strategies for improving failing schools involve early
intervention by caring adults (Finn, 1993a; Dev, 1997; Gehring, 2003). Fortunately
with the increase of knowledge about the complexities faced by youth in challenging
urban settings, there is also an increase in programs and strategies directed at
improving the learning experience for young people. For example, bullying by young
children, if unchallenged in early its stages has been closely connected to the
incidence of crime and dropout rates in older youth (Fight Crime: Invest in Kids,
2003). However, rigorously tested programs exist that are relatively inexpensive to
establish and have even shown to pay for themselves by a reduction in special
education costs and future crime reduction (2003). Of course implementation of
proven improvement strategies are decisions made when caring adults look at
relevant data (Marzano, 2003)
The New York Times reported that an American child drops out of school
every 26 seconds, totaling over a million dropouts per year and creating, according to
the president of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Allan Golston, one of the
highest dropout rates in the world (Herbert, 2008) Furthermore, Mr. Golston noted
that in contrast to peers in other parts of the world, American students‘ performance
worsens.
38
Bill Gates has noted that American high schools are obsolete. He explained
in the New York Times article that: ―I don‘t just mean that they are broken, flawed
or underfunded, though a case could be made for every one of those points. By
obsolete, I mean our high schools — even when they‘re working as designed —
cannot teach all our students what they need to know today.‖ (Herbert, 2008)
While some of our urban high schools may not have the proverbial ―magic
bullet‖ in order to solve all the risk factors that obsoleted the range of necessary
knowledge for the new world economic order, some strides are being made by urban
institutions in encouraging students to prepare for future challenges by taking the
important step of qualifying for a high school diploma. This study looks at the
factors that may add to our understanding of how to better prepare our least ready
population of high school youth -- those residing in urban settings.
Recent findings in the report Diplomas Count:Ready for What?: Preparing
Students for College, Carreers, And Life After High School (2008), support the point
that for even after graduating from high school, for a student to make a decent wage
in the United States, the Occupational Information Network (OINe, 2008) classified
jobs into five into ―zones‖. Each of these was classified using considerations such as
level of experience, training, education level, etc. The results pf the report estimated
proportions of adults nationally holding the types of jobs found in particular
remuneration zones, stating median incomes and average education levels. The
findings further create a snapshot of what is true of each state as regards the
proportions of adults nationally and in each who hold positions in the various job
39
zones. Also included in the reports were included the median incomes for the jobs in
the zones. In the middle, on a national level, a job in Zone 3 has a median income of
$35.672. The report also pointed to the trend of young people needing to complete
some level of college in order to make it to the finding a job in the middle-income
category in Zone 3 (EdWeek, 2008)
In short the report concluded that for young people to earn a decent wage,
they would need to graduate from high school with college ready skills. In 2007,
jobholders in Zone 3 were represented by the following statistics: 37 % held some
college training, while 26% had received bachelor‘s degrees. Moving up, the median
income in Zone 4 was $50,552, with 68 % of employees holding bachelors degrees.
In contrast, in the category of workers needing the least qualifications, a high school
degree or less, the median income was $12,638 year. Fewer than one in 10
employees in Zone 3 or higher had less than a high school diploma (EdWeek, 2008).
Clearly, a connection exists between the level of an individual‘s education an level
of education.
The body of research reviewed here draws connections with the education
level achieved by an individual and what that individuals may expect to earn. As
such, beyond earnings, there is also a cost to the larger economy when individuals do
not receive an adequate education (i.e., drop out of high school) resulting in higher
costs through the provision of social services and a smaller contribution (e.g., tax)
base. It makes perfect sense to judge a school‘s effectiveness through a set of
indicators, as proposed by the NGA and the NCES, including a standardized measure
40
for a graduation rate, which is currently not in place. The rate at which students
graduate may also serve as an indicator of engagement as some emerging research
(see for example Finn, 1993; Elmore, 2003; Balfanz, 2006) points to a possible
relationship between students‘ pre-graduation engagement and post-secondary career
success.
41
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the factors, including
those related to student engagement, which may have impacted student achievement
in an outperforming urban high school. The overall study was composed of
collective research, consisting of qualitative and quantitative case studies of 10
schools by a thematic dissertation group of doctoral students from the USC‘s Rossier
School of Education. Each member of the research team conducted an individual
mixed-methods case study of a particular urban outperforming or, in one case, of a
high-performing high school with the desired outcome of answering the research
questions and identifying relevant phenomenon.
This study was guided by the following two research questions:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in an out-
performing urban high school?
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in an
out- performing urban high school
Developing a Conceptual Model
A conceptual model was developed to illustrate the factors that have been
found to contribute to student achievement and, ultimately, to high-outperforming
high schools. The conceptual model was constructed to represent how the 10
42
researchers expected and believed the information found in the literature should fit
together. It also illustrated what is not yet known about the relationship between
student engagement and student achievement. Consequently, Figure 3.1 illustrates
the theoretical construct that guided this study.
The question marks on the Conceptual Model are important as they indicate
the questions yet unanswered by the current level of research on the extent students‘
engagement in their setting influence a school‘s level of performance and subsequent
statewide ranking.
The essential question is: To what degree, if any, must students be involved
in their education to be significant in the determining the institution‘s effectiveness?
The figure below illustrates unanswered elements in the landscape of current
research.
Figure 3.1: Current Research on Student Engagement
43
The Research Protocol
The 10 member research team met throughout a period of about 14 months;
as the entire group was divided geographically into two separate sub-groups (i.e., one
group generally met in Orange County while the other group met in Los Angeles
County, the groups would meet together to discuss and compare findings specifically
on predetermined dates with the lead investigator. It was during these general
meetings that important agenda items guiding the research studies were reviewed and
organized fundamental elements of the research project. These were also
opportunities for the lead researcher to brief the team on important gaps that needed
to be addressed at each individual setting.
The research team agreed to use the same steps in their analysis of data.
However, it was brought up early on in the discussing the goals of the study that, due
to mitigating factors, including the feasibility of using instrumentation that was
exactly the same at all locations, the team came up with instrumentation tools (e.g.,
separate but similar student surveys) that provided satisfactory levels of information
for the purpose of triangulation.
The Goals of the Study
The thematic dissertation group began earnest discussions in January 2007
about the state of the educational system in America, specifically with regard to
urban high schools. Needless to say, in reviewing both the field research and the
popular media criticisms of the K-12 public education system, the group was in
agreement that the state of education in America was highly dysfunctional and that
44
school completion rates were appalling. Additionally, as a group we were also
impressed by the fact that even in the face of multiple highly challenging risk factors,
many urban high schools across the nation were achieving their mission of
graduating students who either continued to higher levels of learning at post-
secondary institutions or to careers requiring a level of readiness for next steps in
their chosen field.
Although not all members of the research team utilized the full HSSSE
instrumentation in their individual case studies, the team found it critical to review
previous research provided by this survey. The analysis of HSSSE results, starting
from 2004 to 2007, served to better contextualize the purpose of the research: We
were adding to a deeper understanding about student attitudes and behaviors. Note a
reflection in a publication published by the office responsible for the surveys.
Published by the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy: ― Furthermore, less
frequently examined indicators, including students‘ level of engagement in high
school and preparedness for careers in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM), also indicate that high school reform is necessary and urgent
for the United States to remain competitive in the global economy‖ (Zapf, 2006). A
recent finding from the HSSSE addressed the usual areas of high school studies.
Researcher Yazzie-Mintz, director of the HSSSE Project at Indiana University
concluded that many American students in recent surveys have expressed boredom
with their schools.
45
The researchers used the survey results as an important window into the
factors inherent in the outperforming schools. The team proceeded to isolate which
factors might be shared by participating schools in the study. The development of
the protocol was mapped out by the entire group over the course of some weeks and
many e-mail ―discussions.‖
In taking a closer look at the HSSSE as a group, the researchers found that
the survey had also been used to compile systematic national data on educational
practices that identified student behaviors and accompanying school characteristics
and practices illuminated by the results of survey in their particular settings. The
team noted from researchers at CEEP that an undisclosed number of schools had
used their students‘ responses to improve that institutions effectiveness. The
researchers used information from the HSSSE inform their both similar and
divergent ways (i.e., tailoring the HSSSE survey process to address sampling issues).
The team noted the fact that the HSSSE results, though representative of the
opinions of over 300,000 students from across numerous states, it did not include a
significant sample of urban school districts, the group recognized the limitations of
the study in providing generalizeable information about the specific behaviors (i.e.,
levels of engagement) of students attending urban high schools in California. As a
matter of record, of the approximately 1,800-plus public high schools in California
(accessed electronically on February 23, 2008 on
http://www.edsource.org/sch_hig_hsprofile05.cfm), the HSSSE has been
administered to a relatively miniscule, less than 5 %, sampling of schools, suburban
46
and urban inclusive, in this most populated state as noted on a published list of
participating schools printed by the CEEP (2006).
The researchers felt that important data would be added to the growing body
of how students from different states and settings engaged with their respective
institutions. As states move to more uniform measures of their educational systems‘
effectiveness, the collected opinions stored in the national data base may provide
clearer information regarding the extremely complex relationship between student
engagement and student achievement (Yazzie-Mintz, 2007).
High schools are living organisms that can be better understood within the
frame of a conceptual framework that helps to create a grid by which to comprehend
the factors that may come into play. This came across very early as each of the
members of the study, at subsequent meetings, noted varying factors leading to their
particular site‘s raised status as an outperforming institution, supporting the point
that relatively little is known about any truly common connections between students‘
level of engagement and their school‘s effectiveness.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Overview of the School
City of the Valley High School is a medium-sized (approximately 2300
students) urban high school that uses a traditional academic calendar. Although it
receives no Title 1 funds, over 50% of its student body is eligible to participate in the
National School Lunch Program. While this school meets eligibility standards for
receiving federal Title 1 money, the district‘s board of education has not designated
47
CVHS as a Title 1 school. For the researcher, it is impressive that even without the
additional federal funding for which the school is eligible, the learning community
has nevertheless used whatever available funding to raise its effectiveness without
the benefit of Title 1 funding; thus the changes that created an outperforming school
has been through the efforts of innovative educators. During the 2004
Accountability Reporting cycle, CVHS met 24 of its 26 AYP criteria. The two
criteria measures not met were the lack of participation by English learners in two
tests: English Language Arts and mathematics.
Figure 3.2: 2004 Accountability Progress Report
It was chosen for this case study because it has a diverse population, and its school
profile fits well within the standards set of other urban high schools found in the state
of California and within the criteria generated by the study team.
48
CVHS was selected as a case study school because it is, in general, a
representative amalgam of student populations within Los Angeles County. Roughly
the largest segments of the student population can be divided into three groups:
Latino – 50%; African-American – 25%; White – 25%; and the remaining 5% are
primarily Asian and/or Pacific Islander. The state average for students participating
in the free and reduced lunch program is 51%, and at this school it was over 50%
(CDE, 2006). Indeed the demographics of the student body at this school comes
very close to other urban schools of this size. When all factors are considered by the
CDE, the case study school is out-performing other similar schools academically.
As such it is important to understand what strategies and/or factors contribute to
making the case study school achieve three deciles above its peer institutions.
The data collection for the study was guided by the steps and stages
developed by the research team and influenced by the desired outcome of answering
the research questions by means of a qualitative case study that produced a ―rich and
thick description‖ uncovering answers to the guiding questions, but also permitting
phenomena and emergent themes inform the research efforts (Gall, 1996).
Data was reviewed that was both qualitative and quantitative in nature. This
mixed-methods approach provided maximum opportunity to start with general
notions and then through the process of chunking information allowing general
themes to emerge more clearly The results of the data-collection was then used to
triangulate the findings and answer the research questions. Triangulation is the act
of bringing one or more than one source of data to bear on a single point; using
49
multiple methods in which different types of data provide cross-data validity may
decrease vulnerabilities to error (Patton, 2002). By triangulating the data I was able
to corroborate the findings for the research questions.
Documents
A contextual background could and should first be most easily created by
examining school documents creating a sense of the directions in which to further the
understanding by the researcher. Patton (1990) advocates a "paradigm of choices"
that seeks "methodological appropriateness as the primary criterion for judging
methodological quality." Examining a variety of documents would provide useful
guiding questions beginning with What do we need to know about student
achievement in a high performing urban school? (See Appendix)
Additionally, documents can easily present a fairly accurate picture about the
organization and its programs. As Patton has stated, documents ―provide the
evaluator with information about many things that cannot be observed. They may
reveal things that have taken place before the evaluation began‖ (Patton, 2002, p.
293). In the interest of triangulation of evidence, documents served to create a
needed springboard for identifying those schools serving the goals of the study.
The research team composed of 10 doctoral candidates from the University of
Southern California deliberated the process by which to select the case study
secondary institutions. In our discussion guiding thoughts emerged that helped to
narrow the field of secondary institutions that would add the greatest amount of data
to the growing body of knowledge about the reasons some impacted secondary urban
50
high schools, though faced with virtually the same kinds of challenges as other
similar schools (e.g., high concentrations of minority students, generally from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds, and higher dropout rates than schools in non-urban
areas). For the most part the majority of the researchers looked at databases made
available to the public on the CDE web site to identify schools that fit the desired
profile. The researcher chose a school that fit all of the specifications decided in
consensus fashion by the team.
The research team, as previously mentioned, chose urban schools that were
outperforming other similar schools by at least two deciles in the similar schools‘
API scores. The chart below helps to track the improvement trend made by this
school in the last few years. In fact, other district high schools were continually
querying CVHS administration and staff on innovative practices that might be
transferred to different secondary institutional sites (personal communication with an
assistant principal on October 12, 2007).
The urban school that was the subject of this study also demonstrated the
presence of factors that may lead to an outperformance status and that engage their
students. As such the study findings lead to the notion that a connection between a
student‘s level of engagement, and type of engagement, may affect the
outperformance status of an urban high school. The data is discussed along with
elements that characterize the current educational milieu of the case study school and
district. However, it must be noted that some of the research team members saw a
trend demonstrating that while school-specific factors were evident in supporting the
51
raised status of the school when compared to similar schools, two of the five Los
Angeles County-based researchers noted little connection. Even in deconstructing
engagement into three types -- participatory, emotional, and academic, two
concluded that student engagement did not directly impact their sites performance
status. On the other hand, the results for City of the Valley High School were quite
comparable to the high levels of each type of engagement level found in other
schools surveyed during the 2007-2008 academic year.
The researcher of this study used a mixed methods for the entire study;
nevertheless the qualitative case study approach proved fertile at uncovering the
phenomenon of an urban high school outperforming other schools having similar
characteristics including a student population, composed of generally high minority
student enrollment; a minimum of 40 percent and above eligibility in the National
School Free Lunch Program; and a CDE-determined similar schools rank at least two
deciles above its family of schools. The mixed methods approach for this kind of
study allows for maximum opportunities by which to determine the possible causal
relationships between factors (Gall et al, 1998). Multiple types of data were
examined and are presented here.
While the group of researchers understood that each school site would be
unique unto itself, the USC team identified sources and data gathering activities that
would lead to a fuller understanding of possible characteristics leading to each of the
learning community‘s superior ranking among similar schools.
52
Table 3.1: API Information and Rankings for CVHS
Recent (2007) API Information for CVHS
API: 2006-07
Base:
693
Growth Target:
5
API:
704
Actual ’06-’07
Growth: 11
Past CVHS Rankings and Targets
2006 Base API:
693
Statewide Rank:
5
Similar Schools:
9
‘06-‘07 Growth Target:
5
2007 API Target:
698
2005 Base API:
688
Statewide Rank:
5
Similar Schools:
9
‘05-‘06 Growth Target:
6
2006 API Target:
694
2004 Base API:
634
Statewide Rank:
4
Similar Schools:
8
‘04-‘05 Growth Target:
8
2005 API Target:
642
2003 Base API:
602
Statewide Rank:
3
Similar Schools:
7
‘03-‘04 Growth Target:
10
2004 API Target:
612
2002 Base API:
603
Statewide Rank:
4
Similar Schools:
8
‘03-‘04 Growth Target:
10
2004 API Target:
613
SOURCE: California Department of Education‘ DataQuest
The initial part of the investigation involved reviewing documents providing
background for CVHS. The documents reviewed included:
Student Handbook
WASC Report
Staff Handbook
Parent Handbook
Principal‘s Selected Policies
Governance Statement of Purpose
Mission Statement
School Calendar
53
Parent Organizational Documents (i.e., School-based Leadership
Minutes, Booster Club Statement of Goals, etc.)
Archived local newspaper articles
Additionally, the research team collaboratively conceived employing the
concept of verstehen research practices in which multiple realities are socially
constructed through individual and collaborative definitions of the situation, that
values are an essential component of the research process (Onwuegbuzie, 2000; Gall,
1996). Additional data was captured through the employment of instruments that
were both generated by the research team in gathering the opinions of the learning
community‘s adult stakeholders and surveys created by a project housed at Indiana
University.
Surveys
The team of researchers from the University of Southern California relied on
the specific sense of engagement, the attitudinal factors, which the HSSSE addresses
in analyzing the responses of those high school students who have taken the survey
(e.g., the High School Survey of Student Engagement Project). These survey results
were secondary data available from HSSSE surveys administered by school officials
– the instrument is found in the Appendix (A).
The surveys developed by the Thematic Dissertation team consisted of
instruments given to students, teachers, administrators, and other important
stakeholders at the school. The surveys, beyond the HSSSE, contained questions
54
that could be easily used in triangulation of the resultant student responses from the
results of the HSSSE (see Appendices A – F).
A tool for noting special elements in the natural setting was developed for use
by the team researchers to make note of details of possible value in the triangulation
of concepts contributing to the analysis of emergent themes important to the steps
outlined by Cresswell (2003). The researcher distributed an informational flier to
teachers whose names appeared on a list provided by one assistant principal in
response to the researcher‘s request to be given direction regarding educators who
represented varying levels of experience.
Analysis
Bolman and Deal‘s four organizational frames (1997) provided the main
basis for understanding the school‘s ideological and foundational ideas. Each of the
data from the observations and interviews was used to add richer and thicker
understanding in interpreting the underpinnings of the urban institution as it moves
to validate its improvement efforts through demonstrable high school improvement
efforts. A fuller analysis of data collected is more fully discussed in Chapter 4.
Nonetheless the following information provides a snapshot of steps taken in
capturing important background information serving as a preface to the deeper
analysis presented later.
For this mixed methods study of an out-performing urban high school it was
imperative to study the culture of the school by direct observation, or as Creswell
(2003) explains ―the natural setting‖ is where the essential detail that informs the
55
study is found. The mixed methods approach best fit the means by which to find
answers for essential questions about the factors most influential in determining the
urban school‘s prominent status. Where these elements due to the institutions‘
reform efforts or due to other unique factors identified by educational researchers?
Where the strategies used by an urban school faced with declining enrollment and
loss of substantial ADA instrumental to raising the school student achievement
through a process of personalization as suggested by some educational researchers?
Only a mixed-methods research approach could provide the ―thick and rich‖
description needed to better tell the story of the urban high school (Herlihy & Quint,
2006; Marzano, 2003; Herman, 1999).
Interviews
The USC researchers created interview questions for each stakeholder group.
These interview questions served as a springboard for understanding the full
―snapshot‖ of the case study school. These interview questions served as a starting
point for the researcher in examining phenomena that emerged in the course of
events during the case study. The interview questions were intended for basically
two distinct audiences: administrators and faculty. Although most questions were
very similar, some questions were targeted to the particular group being interviewed.
The researcher attempted in the beginning to establish a calendar of research themes
that would be guided by desired outcomes for each of the visits to the school site.
Each time a tool kit was carried by the researcher consisting of notebooks, pens,
camera, and recording device. The data was meant to be collected in an established
56
manner keeping in mind that, per Creswell, data is first to be collected, then prepared
for analysis employing various means so as to arrive at a deeper understanding and
subsequent interpretation of that collected.
Interviews with the stakeholders were of two basic types: some interviews
were scheduled for particular time slots, (these were usually with administrators and
staff having duties governed by specific time frames); other information gathering
sessions emerged as individuals (not so constricted by the school‘s bell schedule)
found pockets of time to sit down to answer some questions. A few interviews were
even a result of being passed along in a chain-like fashion prompted by one
stakeholder recommending another as a good source of information on a particular
topic. In total four administrators were interviewed, six teachers. five classified
staffers, three parents, and one alumnus.
Interviews were ―tagged‘ generally using three codes; one coding element
was color, another was an alphabet letter, and the last was using a number. Each
type of code referred to a stakeholder category, area of research, and possibly the
question to which that particular stakeholder referred during the interview.
The most accessible group to interview was the five administrators. The time
each interview lasted depended upon outside factors having to do with
accomplishing daily duties or unexpected situations arising from the decisions that
drop up during an average day. The general purpose was to uncover factors the
administrative team applied to create a culture of success. Generally, the
administrators were prone to point to a high level of communication amongst
57
themselves and the visionary qualities of the principal to create ―roadmaps‖ to
improving the school‘s success.
Although formal appointments were made with the administrative staff, the
information gathered for the interviews happened on a piece-meal basis. Answering
the researchers questions were best accomplished while in motion, in contrast to
finding a quiet time in an out-of-the-way spot.
Data Collection and Steps in the Analysis Process
The thematic dissertation group felt that Creswell six steps to data analysis
furnished the most efficient and precise means by which to examine the data and
obtain the fullest level of engagement with the captured data. Using this systematic
approach, the deepest interpretation to the research could be obtained. Cresswell‘s
steps involve:
1. Identification, Organization & Preparation
2. Reading and Review for a General Sense
3. Chunking‖ of information for Specification of Purpose
4. Generating Descriptions & Themes – Collection of Data
5. Analysis & Interpretation of Data
6. Reporting & Evaluation of Findings
After background information was gleaned from studying the individual
school‘s documents, various tailored surveys were distributed to sample important
stakeholder groups: faculty members, administrative team, and the student body/
Students were surveyed using instrumentation developed by Indiana University‘s
58
High School Survey of Student Engagement. In light of the fact that students were
never interviewed directly, the instrumentation, the HSSSE, developed by Indiana
University‘s Center for Evaluation and Education Policy (CEEP) was the first
contact with ―live‖ information about actual student stakeholders, and the results
were used to give voice to the important student perspective. All other information
sources were from aforementioned school documents, publicly available
information, and interviews with adult stakeholders.
For the case study, data was collected to better understand the extent to which
varying levels of engagement were influenced by the efforts of the school in creating
an environment of continual achievement despite the decreasing enrollment, and of
the school efforts in general. As suggested by Creswell (2003), data was ―chunked‖
in order to better organize the coding and analysis of the captured data. The
instruments were developed by the thematic dissertation group from the University
of Southern California consisting of two teams of researchers; one composed of
students living outside the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area, and the other team
living in or close to central Los Angeles. The groups first met in the winter of 2006
and continued to meet throughout 2007.
Each of the instruments was developed by one of the two groups then
introduced to the entire research team at regular meetings for discussion and further
refinement. A key element the research team used was Indiana University‘s HSSSE
Project. The work begun by Indiana University on student engagement contained
lots of material about students‘ behaviors and opinions regarding teenagers who were
59
generally not from impacted urban high schools. While the HSSSE data had
generated important information on a number of attitudes and influences addressing
student achievement including factors like school environment, attention to
homework, and level of communication with teachers, and time utilization in and out
of school, the survey of high school students had not addressed essential questions
about the high performance of urban high school students.
The team of researchers from the University of Southern California hoped
that the information provided from researching the selected California urban high
schools would add meaningful information serving to deepen and enrich information
to the body of knowledge already captured by the national database by Indiana
University‘s CEEP. The group was especially conscious that information about
outperforming California urban high schools would be an especially important
contribution to CEEP‘s data collection.
Although this national longitudinal project has captured HSSSE student
responses which totaling over 300,000 youth responses from across the United
States, most of the data has been collected from non-urban secondary institutions in
over 25 states, with virtually none from urban California high schools (Center for
Evaluation & Education Policy, 2007).
The thematic dissertation research team studied those elements that enabled
students in some urban schools to perform at higher levels than peers in similar
settings, and to further understand to what degree student engagement was fostered
by higher performing secondary institutions.
60
Qualitative research methods can be used to provide a thick understanding of
any phenomenon about which little is currently known. Conversely, this method can
also be used when much is already known about the phenomenon to gain a new
perspective or to gain more in-depth information that may be difficult to convey
quantitatively (Strauss and Corbin, 1990). Furthermore, ―qualitative methods permit
inquiry into selected issues in great depth with careful attention to detail, context,
and nuance; that data collection need not be constrained by predetermined analytical
categories contributes to the potential breadth of qualitative inquiry‖ (Patton, 2002,
p. 226).
In the case of this research project, one of the main characteristics of the
qualitative research approach is that it allows the researcher to focus on the intensive
study of specific instances, what Gall has called the specific cases, of a phenomenon
(Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003). Gall et al believe that a case study is an ideal
methodology when a holistic and in-depth investigation is needed. Case studies are
designed to bring out a myriad of details from the viewpoint of the various
participants, from varying subject positions, by using multiple sources of data. The
aforementioned process of triangulation is the means by which intrinsic or
participant biases may be overcome that may arise from single method, single-
observer, single-theory studies (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). According to Gall et. al
(2003) ―Some case study research aims to provide explanations for the phenomenon
that were studied. We refer to these explanations as patterns, meaning that one type
61
of variation observed in a case study is systematically related to another observed
variation.‖ (p. 440).
Consequently, rather than using large samples or following research
procedures planned at an earlier stage, the researcher was less rigid in following the
research protocols established earlier by the research team. The decision by this
researcher to examine factors at the school in different order than previously
mutually agreed upon by the entire researcher team were prompted by situations ripe
for capturing data at opportune moments.
Indeed case study methods are more flexible in their approach, involving an
in-depth and often longitudinal examination of a single instance or event. In
qualitative research, the most appropriate sampling strategy, according to Merriam,
is ―non-probability‖ (Merriam, 1998). Trochim (2006), also agree that purposeful
sampling can be very useful for situations where data may be harvested in the most
time efficient manner. Therefore, this qualitative case study utilized a purposeful
non-probability sampling method.
As part of this research design, the results of the schools High School Survey
of Student Engagement were used as secondary data to define the parameters of
student engagement. the high school environment (Marzano, 2003). Additionally, the
secondary educational learning community creates a culture of achievement when it
puts in place means by which to examine its data and address the findings. The only
way to accurately judge whether the institution was employing best practices was
62
through a process of triangulation involving examining data from various sources
and observing the school in action in the natural setting (Creswell, 2003).
For the purpose of this study, engagement of students in their studies is one
framed by the concept of any relationship the students collectively have with their
learning environment. In general there has not been a lot of research about the
relationships between secondary students and their schools. However, as the
relationships of students to the achievement status of the school is not a linear, one-
dimensional framework, it was critical to look at the whole environment.
Subsequently, the research team examined as many contributing factors, not the least
of which were the activities and attitudes of adult stakeholders, to understand how
the engagement factor of urban high school students played out in the real world of
the selected urban high schools.
Summary
The researcher chose to examine data provided by an outperforming urban
high school to uncover perceived factors that contribute to the status of the
institution, ranking 4 deciles, above other similar schools. The research protocol,
one designed collaboratively with participation by all 10 members of the thematic
dissertation cohort, was presented along with brief mention of elements (i.e.,
participants, insights, situations mitigating following the intitial data collection
pattern). With few exceptions, the protocol was followed as designed by the research
team.
63
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
The following section summarizes the findings of the study and provides an
analysis of the data. This study examined an outperforming urban secondary
institution in order to better understand perceived factors contributing to greater
effectiveness as compared to other similar schools. This study investigated factors
that may lead to outperforming status by an urban high school and that may then
contribute to the positive student achievement results at that site. As noted earlier in
this study, this high school has made significant strides in meeting the demands laid
out by state and federal benchmarks. However, this outperforming urban high school
may also be employing strategies impacting students positively in areas having to do
with attitude and willingness to meet academic expectations. Research continues to
suggest, that as students grow older they tend to engage less fully in their own
learning (Brewster & Fager, 2000). Furthermore, a growing body of research about
urban youth provides support for the contention that urban teenagers increase the
odds against them, and that high schools in large metropolitan settings become what
some researchers call ―dropout factories‖. This could be the topic sentence for this
whole section – consider this, and cut out anything not necessary.
The methodology for collecting data for this study was generated by a team
of researchers. The team produced a general ―road map‖ flexible enough to meet
both the main needs of a mixed-methods research approach and applicable to high
64
schools located in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The road map was useful in
clarifying questions needed in forming the foundational conceptual framework and a
shared body of knowledge creating a springboard from which to begin data
collection.
City of the Valley High School is situated at the foot of the Sierra Madre
Mountains in Southern California and is an urban four-year comprehensive public
high school. Its diverse student population of approximately 2600 includes Latinos
(43 percent), African Americans (25 percent), Asians/Filipinos (6 percent), and
whites (26 percent, the majority of whom are of Armenian descent). In the 2007-08
school year, 42 percent of the CVHS students participated in the National School
Lunch Program, a key indicator in determining eligibility for additional services
assisting students from financially impacted households. The CVHS is one of four
comprehensive secondary institutions in a district that serves students of all ages,
64.2 percent of whom receive free/reduced priced meals, from three distinct
communities comprised of diverse racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds.
The study was guided by the following questions:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in a
outperforming urban high school?
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in a
outperforming urban high school?
65
What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in an outperforming
urban high school?
FINDING 1.1: A history of reform efforts at the school, guided by constructivist
practices, has supported a culture of stability among teachers, continual
improvement in the classroom, collegiality amongst stakeholders, and learning
community resiliency contributing to academic performance.
Researchers consistently reiterate that effective schools are ones where there
is a culture conducive to student learning. CVHS as an institution has been involved
in school reform since 1989 when it first formally moved to inform instructional
practices through alignment with outside efforts, namely those movements created
by public and private organizations to assist schools in restructuring. The timing of
its move to become more effective is significant as it was among an initial set of
institutions to decide to revisit its practices in the aftermath of A Nation at Risk
(1983). This federal report, which used the term ―restructuring‖ in discussing
implementing new school structures aimed at improving student achievement, on the
state of the nation‘s schools is informally accepted by many education researchers as
the impetus beginning of the era of the school reform movement.
Notably CVHS‘s efforts to improve are marked by important occurrences.
One was a partnership in 1995 with the Annenberg Institute‘s National School
Reform Faculty Project. In this effort, the partnership aimed to improve classroom
instruction by using video taping as a tool to accomplish various goals: enhance
collaboration among teachers; a means of tracking student achievement; and a
66
strategy for promoting the use of professional development portfolios (Nichols,
1987). Then in 1996, eight teachers at the school formed the first Critical Friends
Group in the district. They reported that this practice helped them all improve their
teaching. "At first I would pick my best class, where I felt most secure, to be
observed," admitted one algebra teacher. "Now I take more risks and look forward to
a realistic response." where they regularly share their observations with each other.
The school‘s efforts in improvement of student learning reform resulted in
national attention. In 1996 the USDE cited CVHS‘s Graphic Arts Academy as an
exemplary case study in the area of school-to-work initiatives. The Graphic Arts
Academy is a school-within a-school resulting from a partnership with both the
Printing Industry Association of Southern California and the local community
college.
The culture at CVHS was influenced by reform principles from an
organization headquartered at Brown University‘s Office of Educational Research
and Improvement (OERI), Department of Education, which in turn provided key
support to an agency called The Coalition of Essential Schools. Like other Coalition
schools, CVHS embraced constructivist practices in its academic improvement based
on research conducted by Dr. Ted Sizer. In general, the constructivist view
advocates that teachers:
use cognitive terminology such as "classify," "analyze," "predict," and
"create."
encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative.
67
use raw data and primary sources, along with manipulative, interactive,
and physical materials.
allow student responses to drive lessons, shift instructional strategies, and
alter content.
inquire about students' understanding of concepts before sharing their
own understanding of those concepts.
encourage students to engage in dialogue, both with the teacher and with
one another.
encourage student inquiry by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions
and encouraging students to ask questions of each other.
seek elaboration of students' initial responses.
engage students in experiences that might engender contradictions to their
initial hypotheses and then encourage discussion.
allow wait time after posing questions.
provide time for students to construct relationships and create metaphors.
nurture students' natural curiosity through frequent use of the learning
cycle model. (Sizer, 1997).
In the 1990s, CVHS along with six other Southern California schools
participated in sending school teams to the University of Southern California in order
to develop initial action plans and to create support groups known as critical friends
groups (accessed on March 10, 2008 from Los Angeles Coalition of Essential
68
Schools‘ web site, www.ces-la.org/history). As a Coalition institution, CVHS
pursued its restructuring by aligning itself to the following ten principles:
1. Learning to use one's mind well
2. Less is more, depth over coverage
3. Goals apply to all students
4. Personalization
5. Student-as-worker, teacher-as-coach
6. Demonstration of mastery
7. A tone of decency and trust
8. Commitment to the entire school
9. Resources dedicated to teaching and learning
10. Democracy and equity
There was consensus among some stakeholders that the school‘s
outperformance was more a product of the working relationships than merely
implementing scientifically proven curricular material. One teacher who began his
career at CVHS in the late 1970s, and even had children graduate from the school,
noted that a key element of the high quality of the relationships within teacher ranks.
He remarked: ―I would not have stayed here this long nor had my own kids gradate
from here had it not been because of the good people that work here.‖
Successful implementation of effective practices depends on the continued
presence of a knowledgeable and stable faculty (Fullan, 1991). A culture conducive
to maintaining high expectations for students is partially attributable, according to
69
Bailey et al (2006), to an environment produced from complex elements including
perceptions over time, expectations, motivation and behaviors. The researcher noted
that over half of teachers interviewed expressed a belief in the school‘s effectiveness
in providing an adequate high school education. Further probing produced responses
by interviewees that their having weathered past turbulent and trying times has
created a special bond among stakeholders. Some research connects educator
resiliency, born from enduring environmental unpleasantness, to higher levels of
student engagement (Louis & Marks, 1995). This learning community‘s past has
helped create resiliency among teachers at the institution serving to perpetuate the
belief that CVHS is an institution of high expectations for student achievement.
One such difficult time fostering resiliency among adults at CVHS occurred
in the 1970s when debates surrounding school busing and desegregation in the
CVUSD culminated in court intervention. Dramatically this review and decision on
the district‘s efforts in providing educational equity was played out by no less than in
the nation‘s highest court, the Supreme Court (Gray, 1995). Without doubt, such
taxing and demanding experiences may deplete and/or distract the mission of
educating young people. However, behaviorists have also noted positive bi-products
resulting from adversity (Wagner, 1995, Marzano et al, 2005; Darling-Hammond,
2002). Research by Little (1990) connects increased collaboration among educators
with enhanced teacher resiliency. Wagner (1995) supports the contention that a
resilient ―can do‖ culture amongst teachers exists to the benefit of student enrollees.
70
Commitment to maintaining an environment of outperforming educational
described earlier by one veteran teacher whose own children attended and graduated
from CVHS was supported by other adults comprised of 11 classified and
certificated staff members. All claimed to share confidence in the school‘s ability to
deliver high quality instruction. This belief was supported by the fact that they all
either currently had their own children attending the institution or had had children
graduate from there.
Factors contributing to stakeholders‘ satisfaction with the school‘s
environment can also be gleaned by noting educator stability and parental approval.
According to the CDE‘s web site (accessed December 26, 2008), most of the
teachers at CVHS, 85.4 %, are fully credentialed. Additionally the teacher attrition
has fallen within the last five years; previously the school was losing an average of
15 to 20 teachers per year (personal communication by one main office staff
member). Now the teacher attrition rate is closer to about five to eight per year
(personal communication with the office manager on November 14, 2007). With less
teachers leaving, teachers new to the profession are helping to move the school
closer to the district, county and state averages for fully credentialed teachers of
91.2%, 93.0%, and 95% respectively. Yet at the same time CVHS teachers have the
highest average of experience in years of teaching at 13.8%, in contrast to the
averages for the district, county, and state that are 12.2%, 12.3%, and 12.8%
respectively (accessed on CDE‘s DataQuest on December 27, 2008).
71
These numbers speak to an environment at CVHS that is at once infused by
new teachers seeking a place within a learning community having a solid foundation
of experienced faculty. Even with a modest sampling of 20 schools identified as
similar to CVHS, the median teacher experience was 11.6 years. Within the band of
experienced educators at CVHS are those who actively mentor both formally and
informally newer members of the faculty. The new stability of the faculty must also
be considered a factor in the effectiveness of the school (Marzano, 2005).
Marzano (2006) also notes extensive research that suggests that a culture
fostering higher interaction among stakeholders includes parental involvement
typified by communication channels that provide opportunities for parents to respond
to school-to-home communications. The CVHS‘ parents who were interviewed
expressed satisfaction with the numerous opportunities offered to their children as
well as opportunities to communicate personal and collective concerns with the high
school‘s adults. One parent explained that the family was very happy with CVHS: ―
I‘m more happy to have my daughter at this school than the one closest to our house,
because this school cares about my child succeeding…I e-mail her teachers or
administration whenever I have questions, and they get back to me!‖ Another parent
proffered: ―I have two children at CVHS. My son will be graduating in June [2008]
and my daughter is a sophomore. I have been very happy with the level of instruction
that they have received. They are both taking honors and AP level classes. Their
teachers have been very dedicated and challenging. Both of my children are in the
music program which gives them something to belong to in a large school.‖ While
72
students in the City of the Valley school district are guaranteed placement in their
neighborhood school, parents are given the additional option of enrolling their
children at other schools which they feel best fits the academic and developmental
needs of their children. Regardless of the open enrollment policy, 94.6% of students
at CVHS are from the surrounding neighborhood. Parents and teachers at CVHS
have organized regular breakfasts in order to maintain high levels of communication
and address current concerns. Another parent stakeholder volunteered a view
comparing CVHS to previous private schools which his child attended: ―After five
years of private elementary school it was quite worrying going to CVHS. My son is
mostly in honors classes and so far we have been pleasantly surprised. Most of his
teachers are comprable with the quality of his previous private schools if not better in
some cases. The diversity has benefits and the principal seems to be turning things
around. Public education deserves all the help the community can give for the benefit
of all.‖
Accordingly institutional researchers (Bolman & Deal, 2003, Elmore, 2002;
Marzano, 2005) agree that the quality of the connections between the adults,
arguably the main ingredient of the quality of the culture of the institution, is most
responsible for the level of the learning communities‘ effectiveness in accomplishing
its mission. Feeling connected in the workplace, foster a place where people feel
connected to one another and where they are able to experience growth and meaning,
which contribute positively to how organizations do business‖ (2003).
73
The above information suggests that the members of the CVHS community
feel connected to their institution. Interviews with the more experienced staff at
CVHS provide a basis to believe that the connectedness shared by the majority of the
adults of this learning community is one cultural factor in explaining its
outperformance and why students at CVHS generate mean scores comparable to
students in non-urban, non-California high schools.
FINDING 1.2: The concerted effort of hiring and retaining highly qualified teachers
at CVHS has supported improving the school’s academic effectiveness.
One stringent characteristic resulting from NCLB legislation is that
secondary classroom educators are, with few exceptions, expected to be fully
credentialed, or highly qualified (HQ), in their subject area. Research has shown that
teacher quality, as measured by the extent of expertise in their single subject area,
may make the greatest difference for student learning (Darling-Hammond, 2000;
Marzano, 2003). The following table speaks to the efforts by the school and its
district to attract and retain highly qualified educators. The full rollbook carrying
faculty is composed of 91 educators who have an average of 13.8 years teaching
(CDE, 2008). In addition to experience, over the span of some years, as noted in
Table 4.1, the proportion of HQ educators increased.
74
Table 4.1: Percentage Teaching with an Emergency Credential
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
40 17 12 8 6
The above statistics demonstrate an element that researchers agree is
important in improving any school, urban or otherwise: a cadre of teachers who are
knowledgeable in their single subject (Haycock, 1998; Elmore, 2003b). One of a
series of publications provided by the U.S. Department of Education supporting
NCLB entitled, ―Proven Methods – Highly Qualified Teachers for Every Child‖
(August, 2006 retrieved January 10, 2008 from
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/stateplanfacts.html) confirms the
importance of HQ faculty to student achievement : ―One of the most important
factors in raising student achievement is a highly qualified teacher. Research shows
that teacher subject-matter knowledge is greatly associated with student learning. In
this era of high standards and high expectations, having a highly qualified teacher
has never been more important.‖
On a related note, the former union representative confirmed that in the face
of a high attrition rate among teachers, deliberate efforts were made to hire teachers
who either met or were in the process of meeting HQ teacher criteria: (1) attaining a
bachelor's degree or better in the subject taught; (2) obtaining full state teacher
certification; and (3) demonstrating knowledge in the subjects taught. (personal
communication on October 24, 2007). Results of the recent past years‘ efforts have
75
had positive results in raising HQ teacher numbers. These efforts have included
support of new teachers in developing their curriculum delivery skills through
teacher mentoring, targeted coaching by out-of-classroom subject-area colleagues
and professional development activities. In some cases HQ status was a result of
meeting university credentialing requirements. Nonetheless, according to the veteran
educator in an interview held fall 2007, raising HQ teacher ratios has supported
school-wide efforts in raising student achievement. One student commented about
teacher quality to the HSSSE open-ended question: ―Would you like to say more
about any of your answers to these survey questions?‖ The student wrote: ―I advise
students to take advantage of AP and Honors classes offered as these are effective
classes to prepare students for college life, and the teachers teaching these classes are
true gems.‖ This increased stability of a highly qualified faculty may be one factor
explaining the school‘s rise of 144 points in its API from 2001 to 2007, and the
increased number in 2006 of 553 students taking advance placement exams, 308 of
whom received college credit (personal communication with advance placement
testing coordinator on October 24, 2007).
FINDING 1.3: A strong curriculum, innovative intervention practices, and
enrichment opportunities foster high achievement.
As CVHS increased articulation efforts with its feeder schools, the high
school analyzed the CST scores of incoming students and the performance of its
currently enrolled students to form ideas about the knowledge gaps that existed
throughout both young people. With the guidance of data analysis, the high school
76
restructured its master schedule to produce more satisfying results in raising student
achievement. True to the constructivist principles of providing multiple opportunities
for mastery of content, reflective practices needed by teachers to facilitate student
learning, and providing students with the opportunity for apprenticeship learning
(Vygotsky, 1978; Noguera et al, 2006) at tailoring the school‘s curriculum to
enhance intervention efforts for in-coming ninth grade students achieving low scores
on California Standards Tests.) The result of the stated efforts was a restructured
master class schedule that provided courses and curriculum meeting the needs of
students possessing varied cognitive skill sets. A driving concept in the curriculum
was offering multiple opportunities for students to experience exposure to and
interactions with new and missing knowledge (Marzano, 2005).
The school board has asked the school to develop plans targeting important
content areas on a staggered basis. During this case study the CVHS community had
already implemented extensive re-tooling to developing higher levels of academic
language among students. For the sake of this study, the researcher readily found
information about the school‘s efforts in that area. So, while CVHS is developing all
its content areas, language arts is highlighted as an example of efforts at innovation
addressing improving student learning.
Demonstrative of important collaborative articulation between the high
school and its feeder middle schools is the assessment program promoted in 2001 by
CVHS. At the time the feeder middle schools agreed to assess their eighth graders
and share the results with CVHS with enough time to create a tailored master
77
schedule. The arriving ninth graders in the fall then had as part of their curricular
program classes addressing knowledge gaps. The resulting heightened articulation by
CVHS with its feeder schools was the creation of a unique opportunity providing,
according to the head counselor at CVHS, ―a faster and more effective intervention
than at any time in the past.‖
The Structured English Immersion Program (SEIP) offers limited English
proficient (LEP) students an intense curricular experience in a three-hour block,
which focuses on accelerated English language development. A comprehensive
special education program provides special-needs students with a variety of
educational experiences as well as access to the core curriculum. The institution
provides specialized programs building on established partnerships. The Graphic
Communications Academy (GCA) was established in partnership with the Printing
Industry of Southern California (PISC) and the nearby city college. Students may
also access the Visual Arts and Design Academy (VADA) that is linked with the
internationally famous Art Center College of Design, the local community college
and the local Art Armory. The Center for Independent Study (CIS) Academy
emerged at CVHS as a school-within-a-school. It was created to meet the needs of
students that, while behind in graduation credits, can still benefit from another
opportunity to graduate from high school.
Further proof in CVHS striving to create an innovative curriculum and master
schedule is illustrated by the additional resources: additional time provided
counselors during the summer to identify underperforming students; professional
78
development based on student data; and increasing resources in the way of
scientifically-based curriculum designed to fill knowledge gaps; and out-of-
classroom coaches to assist colleagues in raising student achievement. Based on the
data received from the feeder schools, counselors placed these lower-performing in-
coming ninth graders were in newly created ―block classes‖ for instructional periods
lasting twice as long as other regular classes.
Other factors to be considered in the extent CVHS‘s curriculum has improved
student performance as noted by the head counselor is demonstrated by the in the
decision of capping the classes to no more than 20 students. Additionally, CVHS
purchased scientifically-based intervention curriculum for use during the block
periods. Specifically the intervention curriculum is applied to incoming ninth grade
students identified by CST scores in ranges described as ―Below‖ and ―Far Below‖
language arts and math skills.
The commitment to strengthen from the effort begun in 2001, noted the
English language arts coach, is compellingly illustrated by the principal‘s decision to
hire eight new teachers initially needed to meet the first master schedule. Even after
8 years one certificated instructor involved in the program, remembers that the added
block schedule of intervention classes exceeded expectations in two key areas: 1. the
percentage of those initial at-risk students staying in school increased to a level
exceeding 90%; and, 2. the number of diplomas presented to students once enrolled
in block classes increased, in contrast to testing out through either a General
Education Diploma (GED) or California High School Proficiency Examination
79
(CHSPE) , went up. (personal communication with a member of the data analysis
team).
The official CST results from the 2007 provide support that CVHS‘s three
main groups of students are making gains students are moving forward in passing
this important measure:
Table 4.2: STAR Test Scores - % Proficient and Above of Students Tested
CVHS 9
th
Grade 10
th
Grade 11
th
Grade
Language
Arts
All CST
Math
Language
Arts
All CST
Math
Language
Arts
All CST
Math
Latino 42% 70% 27% 25% 36% 65%
Latino
(Algebra II)
58% 20%
4%
Economically
Disadvantaged
40% 99% 26% 95% 38% 68%
Econ Dis.
(Algebra II)
67% 25% 8%
English Learner 8% 4% 0% 9% 0% 8%
African American 48% 43% 34% 21% 29% 21%
13% 6%
White 64% 51% 43% 59% 64% 82%
White
(Algebra II)
91% 24%
14%
Source: CDE website accessed May 1, 2008.
Even as recent as the 2007-08 academic school year, CVHS has pursued
innovation in its master schedule by offering opportunities for lower-performing
younger students to be mentored and academically supported by their higher-
achieving older students (e.g., those enrolled in higher level courses and receiving
80
above 3.0 grade averages) The older students selected from honors and advanced
placement (AP) courses In order to facilitate this peer-tutoring and mentoring
dynamic, the master schedule was changed so as to create a special period, known as
the advisory period, during the school day before the lunch break at a time when a
minimal number of core classes are offered.
During the advisory period, while under the supervision of certificated staff,
older and younger students who are from both high and low achievement groups,
respectively in most cases, are partnered for three-week mini-courses. During this
time the younger students are tutored in deficient areas by the older AP and honors
students. While the AP and honors students are self-selected peer mentors, the
younger students, primarily comprised of ninth graders, are chosen through a process
that assesses basic skills in math and language arts using an in-house exam
simulating the CST format. The peer tutoring serves to address knowledge gaps in
the younger high school students, however it also provides an opportunity for the
mostly ninth grade group to interact with more academically inclined older students.
The advisory period serves multiple important outcomes. It serves to address
knowledge gaps in lower-achieving younger students, while exposing them to
higher-performing older generally college-bound students. An added bonus may be
an indirect one: Students of different backgrounds are brought together fostering the
possibility of relationships resulting in the transfer of experiential knowledge
(Marzano, 2005).
81
The peer tutors, a cadre of juniors and seniors, must be receiving either an
‗A‘ or ‗B‘ in either an honors or advanced placement level courses --- the very same
area in which they are to tutor. These honors and advanced placement tutors are
offered multiple incentives for their efforts in assisting peers. Incentives for the
tutors include: meeting their community service graduation requirements, discounts
on the school yearbook, as well as special pricing for high interest school events (i.e.,
Homecoming activities, Prom, etc.). The peer tutors also benefit from developing
positive relationships with younger peers and a heightened sense of personal efficacy
and raised levels of participatory engagement leading to development in heightened
awareness of environmental problems and connected problem-solving strategies
(Yazzie-Mintz, 2007)
The curriculum was also enhanced by offering greater sections of advanced
placement courses and parents whose children met the necessary criteria were highly
encouraged to enroll their children in these challenging courses thus producing
increased opportunities for higher student achievement. When asked the degree to
which higher advanced placement class offerings.
In the 2005-06 school year, CVHS exceeded the California Education Codes
annual minute requirements by increasing instructional time 64,800 minutes to
66,600 minutes for a total of an additional 1800 minutes (School Accountability
Report Card, 2006-07). Additionally, although district guidelines are adhered to and
respected by the CVHS leadership, repeatedly CVHS staff credited the school‘s
82
improvement to the administration‘s informal policy of protecting instructional time
through minimizing distracting interruptions (reported during interviews).
In School Leadership that Works, Marzano et al (2005) note that student
achievement and the extent to which the schools improvement may be raised is
linked to ―having people in schools with the knowledge, skill, and judgment to make
the improvements that will increase student performance‖ (p 56). Significant data
surfaced providing a picture of a learning culture fostering the engagement of
students in creating higher levels of achievement. Interestingly, the five male
administrators connected to areas of responsibility that fit their personality types and
previous experiences.
The school‘s leadership (i.e., the principal and administrative team) is one
directed by dialogue with other stakeholders in pursuit of greater levels of
achievement. In discussion with the school‘s principal, a noticeable reflective stance
accompanied the principal‘s response to whether course offerings at CVHS indicated
forward movement vis a vis student achievement. He responded with certainty:
Back 10 years ago we had 129 students taking the AP exams. We grew that
number over time because parents and students were interested in classes that
explored academic subjects on that kind of level. Then five years ago 263
students took the AP exams and had 553 students participating in the
advanced placement exams. However, it was then, through the efforts of
teachers, parents and an interested administration that things really began
changing. Five years ago is when we began experiencing major growth.
From 129 taking the AP exam 10 years ago, we have expanded to the point
that last year we had 553! And of those, 308 received college credit! We
believe these rising figures are demonstrative of an upward trend at CVHS.
83
Findings for Research Question 2 - Is there a link between student engagement and
student achievement in an outperforming urban high school?
FINDING 2.1: Urban students at outperforming CVHS feel their school cares about
them and engages them in their process of learning.
The High School Survey of Student Engagement, instrumentation developed
by the CEEP at Indiana University, provided the means by which to examine CVHS
students‘ sentiments regarding three levels of engagement: participatory, emotional,
and academic. Each response area tells a story about student‘s perception of their
school. The HSSSE results were important to this research and specifically to the
research question: Is there a link between student engagement and student
achievement in an outperforming urban high school? Along with the case study
question, some central questions embedded in the spring 2008 HSSSE were: What
does student engagement look like in the school? and What are the level and
dimensions of student engagement?
In general, answers to the question What IS engagement? have had to with
the following areas: time on task; attendance/absence/truancy; and, internal
motivation. For purposes of the HSSSE, student engagement is defined ―as a multi-
dimensional construct with three primary components:
Cognitive/Intellectual/Academic Engagement:-- the work students do and
the ways students go about their work – engagement connected to
instructional time
84
Social/Behavioral/Participatory Engagement:-- the ways in which
students interact within the school community-- engagement with the
school outside of instructional time
Emotional Engagement:-- how students feel about their current school
situation, including the people with whom they interact, the work, and
school structures‖ (Yazzie-Mintz & Miller, 2008)
Because the 1,747 CVHS students were surveyed much later in their first
semester, in January, the CEEP juxtaposed CVHS‘s results with those of 65,454
other students averaging in all cases about a 73% response rate according to Yazzie-
Mintz & Miller (2008) who were surveyed by their high schools in the spring
semester of 2008. Consequently, this comparison data, it should be noted, were
captured at a different point than was that of CVHS‘s. Additionally, the HSSSE has
not been used extensively in California‘s urban high schools, or in other urban areas
nationally (HSSSE, 2007). However, this should not significantly alter the reliability
of the information. Nevertheless, as noted in sections earlier in this case study, the
experiences of urban and non-urban high school students are marked by a myriad of
differing environmental factors.
The following data is presented in order to better generate a sense of who the
students were that responded to the Spring 2008 HSSSE in the 27 different states.
The data for CVHS students is presented separately in order to better compare the
background variables of respondents.
85
Table 4.3: Disaggregated Data - Comparison of HSSSE Students: National and
CVHS Respondents
HSSSE RESULTS
(PERCENTAGES)
CVHS
Students
9
th
Grade 18,662 (27.77%) 461 (26.39%)
10
th
Grade 18,695 (27.82%) 458 (26.22%)
11
th
Grade 16,113 (23.08%) 423 (24.21%)
12
th
Grade 13,731 (20.43%) 405 (23.18%)
TOTAL 67,201 (100.00%) 1,747 (100.00%)
Table 4.4: Comparison of Demographics
National HSSSE CVHS
Race/Ethnicity Number Percentages Number Percentages
Native American 1,141 1.66% 7 0.40%
Asian 2,876 4.19% 80 4.53%
Black 6,631 9.66% 180 10.19%
Latino 4,049 5.90% 532 30.11%
Middle Eastern 561 0.82% 54 3.06%
White 38,301 55.80% 135 7.64%
No Response 9,929 14.46% 565 31.98%
Multiracial 5,156 7.51% 214 12.11%
Total Enrollment
Number of Survey
Respondents
Percent
Responding
HSSSE 97,687 68,644 70%
CVHS 2,289 1,767 77%
86
Table 4.4, continued
Gender National HSSSE CVHS
Female 33,172 = 51.03% 899 = 52.70%
Male 31,837 = 48.97% 807 = 47.30%
Academic Track National HSSSE CVHS
Do not know 11.29% 15.80%
Career/Vocational 4.60% 4.03%
ELL/ESLJBllingual 1.21% 0.34%
General/Regular 42.64% 38.91%
Honors/College Prep 37.76% 37.90%
Special Education 2.49% 3.03%
HSSSE Means Comparison of Engagement Dimensions
The following results speak to the work students do for school and the degree
of effort that they exert in getting their academic work done.
Table 4.5: Means Comparison: Cognitive/lntellectual/Academic Engagement
Grade HSSSE Mean CVHS Mean
9th Grade 34.15 29.93
10th Grade 34.82 31.10
11th Grade 35.38 32.42
12th Grade 35.47 34.73
Shift in Mean Scores +1.32 +4.8
Overall 34.48 31.87
87
The comparison of mean scores point to lowered levels of engagement when
analyzing CVHS students with the larger sampling from across the country. Without
knowing the specific school characteristics of the other institutions that administered
the HSSSE, it is unclear, especially as regards urban risk factors, how comparable
the larger engagement sampling is to CVHS. Nonetheless, it is very clear that the
effort mean rises in the sampling of CVHS students. It rises much greater, in fact, to
the national mean scores. While both sets of mean scores rise among students from
ninth to twelfth grades, and is indeed highest for both groups in the senior year, it is
significant that the mean shift is greatest among CVHS students.
Some items in the survey asked students to rate their sentiments using the
following scale: 1 – ―Strongly Disagree‖; 2 – ―Disagree‖; 3 – ―Agree‖; and, 4 –
―Strongly Agree‖. To the item stating ―In general, I am excited about my classes‖,
approximately 60% of students responded with ―agree‖ and ―strongly agree‖. To the
item, ―I place a high value on learning‖, 86% also responded with ―agree‘ and
―strongly agree‖. Nearly 75% responded similarly to the statement, ―I put forth a
great deal of effort when doing my school work.‖ In response to ―I am motivated to
work by teachers who encourage me‖ 72% of students had a positive reply. Clearly
the majority of CVHS students polled expressed high levels of academic
engagement.
Participatory engagement describes the behavior of students within their
school setting. The HSSSE results in this area demonstrate a marked increase, as
88
demonstrated by the comparison between the larger sampling and the case study
school‘s scores, in increased interaction within the school community.
Table 4.6: Means Comparison = Social/Behavioral/Participatory Engagement
Grade HSSSE Mean CVHS Mean
9th Grade 7.56 6.27
10th Grade 7.67 6.89
11th Grade 7.65 7.01
12th Grade 7.63 7.63
Shift in Mean Scores +0.07 +1.36
As an urban school, CVHS has consistently maintained an activities program
that is virtually unrivaled in its expansiveness. It is the largest high school in its
district and in its nearly 118 years of existence it has strived to provide its students
with an array of participation opportunities ranging from the academic to the social
to participating in an array of sports teams. This may serve to explain why at the 12
th
grade HSSSE respondents were the same at both CVHS and nationally.
The connection between students and their school is certainly one involving
feelings, nit the least of which is in regards to the relationships students form with
caring adults. The results below paint a picture closing in on the answer to the
question of whether a link may exist between student engagement and achievement.
89
Table 4.7: Means Comparison - Emotional Engagement
Grade HSSSE Mean CVHS Mean
9th Grade 24.65 23.97
10th Grade 24.58 23.97
11th Grade 24.65 24.03
12th Grade 24.97 24.51
Shift in Mean Scores +0.32 +0.54
Overall 24.40 24.04
Students at CVHS expressed attitudes very close to other students from
mostly non-urban environs outside of California. A few items from the HSSSE are
notable. To the item ―Overall, I feel good about being in this school‖, 86% students
polled expressed feeling positively about their institution. Seventy-two percent were
positive to the query ―I care about this school‖. As regards relationships with adult
stakeholders, almost two-thirds (61%) of the students felt affirmatively that ―There is
at least one adult in this school who cares about me‖. Notably the item ―I am
engaged in school‖ received 72% agreement.
Understandably the comparison of means showed slightly lower levels in two
of the three engagement areas: academic and behavioral engagement. This may be
best explained by elements unique to California urban areas not present in the other
geographic areas from teenage respondents to the HSSSE.
90
Analysis of the previous information provided give rise to several points:
1. Emotional engagement is highest among CVHS students in reviewing the
three levels of engagement (i.e., emotional, participatory, and academic).
These three levels then need to be looked at more closely so as to
possibly scaffold the stronger participatory and academic engagement
levels.
2. The level of each engagement type fluctuates as the students become
older. At CVHS, emotional engagement increased among 9
th
grade
students slightly more than the other respondents. Participatory
engagement, while remaining relatively steady in the mean scores of non-
CVHS youth, grew over time markedly more among the young people at
CVHS ultimately resulting in an equal score for ALL respondents of the
2007 HSSSE.
3. Although non-CVHS students had higher mean scores at each level of
high school, the trend was always upward.
In general, the survey results for CVHS were quite comparable to the results
form other students in other parts of the United States, presumably in general from
areas not as highly impacted by urban risk factors as those attending CVHS.
Clearly this response addresses one of the guiding questions, Is there a link
between student engagement and student achievement in a outperforming urban high
school?
91
Nevertheless, this combination of the two columns (i.e., ―Agree‖ and
―Strongly Agree‖) describes an approximate 80.15% of CVHS students responding
in positive terms. This percentage virtually matched the 64,990 other students from
other schools involved with the 2007 survey results whose over-all average was
81.2%.
Key comparisons between CVHS students and other respondents
demonstrated very similar results, with some exceptions. Generally, in academic
areas, there were percentage differences indicating slightly higher academic
engagement. One of the areas marked by similarity was in time spent in preparation
for class.
Table 4.8: Hours Spent in a Typical Week: Reading and Studying for Class
HSSSE 2007 CVHS
0 11.32% 10.42%
1 or fewer 41.75% 44.93%
2-5 36.61% 34.52%
6-10 7.84% 8.07%
10+ 2.48% 2.06%
A comparison of means among the four grade levels between the two sets of
data demonstrated no marked difference between the responses of students in
different grades. In each case the mean scores were within a narrow range.
92
Table 4.9: Comparison of Mean Scores: ―Hours Spent Per Week‖
GRADE HSSSE 2007 CVHS
9
th
2.32 2.43
10
th
2.31 2.33
11
th
2.29 2.57
12th 2.12 2.69
Overall 2.26 2.51
Table 4.10: Hours Spent in a Typical Week: Doing Written Homework
HSSSE 2007 CVHS
0 6.49% 4.34%
1 or fewer 33.84% 36.97%
2-5 40.70% 40.96%
6-10 13.92% 12.55%
10+ 5.04% 5.19%
Table 4.11: Comparison of Mean Scores
GRADE HSSSE 2007 CVHS
9
th
2.48 2.04
10
th
2.54 2.20
11
th
2.60 2.71
12th 2.31 2.96
Overall 2.49 2.46
93
The above data points to a possible trend about the importance CVHS
students give to how their time is spent outside of class on school-related matters: As
CVHS youth move up in their grade levels they decide to put more of their time into
reading and writing. In light of the improvement noted in the rise of CAHSEE
scores of the last few years, this researcher must assume that some factors are
prompting higher levels of commitment to academics.
The next survey item connects to the aspect of effort by students while in
school, an area believed to be more closely connected to achievement than
intelligence (lecture on Learning presented by Professor Keith Howard at USC in
2006). As cognitive psychologists have recently proposed, the ability to carry out
plans, which involve focus and control over internal states, commonly referred to as
―executive functioning‖ (Burgess, 1997). Abundant theories exist explaining the
importance of a healthy internal world as a factor in a young person‘s attaining
academic success. Marzano, referencing the work of Covington (1992) cites the four
factors key in explaining attribution theory, a construct where many students
attribute prior successes and failures to ability, effort, luck, and task difficulty: ―Of
these, effort is the most useful because a strong belief in effort as the cause of
success can translate into willingness to engage in complex tasks…‖ (2003, p 146).
The following HSSSE are survey results by CVHS addressing a statement
based on their opinion regarding the extent of effort put forth in completing
academic tasks.
94
Table 4.12: ―I put forth a great deal of effort when doing my school work‖
HSSSE 2007 CVHS
Strongly Disagree 5.10% 4.08%
Disagree 21.92% 19.05%
Agree 52.30% 57.18%
Strongly agree 20.69% 19.69%
Table 4.13: Comparison of Mean Scores
GRADE HSSSE 2007 CVHS
9
th
2.91 2.97
10
th
2.89 2.88
11
th
2.88 2.88
12th 2.86 2.98
Overall 2.89 2.92
Clearly the students at CVHS are of the opinion that putting forth effort in
school is of high order, more so on average than student survey respondents from
other institutions. Again this may be due to the culture of the school in its collective
attitude towards academic achievement. It may also speak to the relationship that
may exist between student academic achievement and the school‘s status as an
outperforming institution. Examination of some additional survey data may provide
further support to the contention that CVHS is an outperforming urban institution
supported by a possible connection between student engagement and their
achievement.
95
FINDING 2.2: The leadership team, headed by a transformational leader, promotes
change resulting in increased levels of student engagement and student achievement.
The collective research on the leader‘s role in the improvement of high
schools (Marzano, 2003; Darling-Hammond, 2001; Northouse. 2002) speaks to an
array of leadership styles, including transformational leadership distinguished by the
leadership positing itself more in situations than in depending on position for its
authority. In the above finding change agent specifically refers to Marzano et al‘s
description in School Leadership that Works, 2005) of ―the leader‘s disposition to
challenge the status quo‖ (p. 44). Furthermore, even though the school has
implemented an NCLB-compliant curriculum, automatic growth in student
achievement is an unreal expectation. According to a meta-analysis by Wagner
(1995), a body of research on school improvement (see for example R. Cohen, T.
Deal, H. Frieberg, A. Kohn, D. Levine, L. Lezotte, K. Peterson, P. Robbins, T.
Sergiovanni, T. Sizer, et.al.), even incorporating ―research-based‖ programs cannot
move student achievement if the climate or culture (i.e., the adults at the school)
doesn‘t improve.
Wagner, co-director of the Center for Improving School Culture, asserts that
"Schools that have improved have put the emphasis on the shared experiences of
their staffs," In a presentation by the to the Association for School Curriculum
Development (ASCD) Wagner (1995) noted that. "Culture always should precede
programs. If teams of people do not improve, a school never will." He contends that
culture provides a definition for school culture: It is that shared set of experiences
96
creating a sense of community, of family, of team.‖ (as quoted from an article
written by Delisio retrieved electronically on October 28, 2008 from
www.education-world.com).
Much like Wagner, researcher James Comer supports the idea that significant
academic growth is effected when the school‘s leadership demonstrates the
collective value of ―personhood‖, paying attention to the value of a range of
experiences by the community‘s stakeholders (2007). Unequivocally, each member
of the leadership team spoke to the influence of the principal in promoting student
engagement at CVHS. One assistant principal remarked that, ―The principal is
visionary in dreaming up goals for enhancing student involvement in the school; we,
the team, are charged with finding the means to achieve his vision.‖
The principal and his team targeted areas to shift CVHS in ways that created
outperformance and enhanced adult bonds to students. Strategies employed by the
leadership were primarily composed of improving communication with parents and
teachers, but also addressing achievement by studying data. The principal and his
administrative team, in collaboration with other stakeholder groups, agreed that
incremental targeted focus steps would provide sustainable effectiveness. The first
area of focus was instructional improvement in language arts. Incoming ninth
graders STAR scores in language arts supported the decision to focus on language
arts improvement.
The principal and his team were instrumental in improving articulation with
CVHS‘s feeder schools. As earlier, meaningful articulation with feeder schools
97
provided CVHS with important information about the new ninth graders prior to
their arrival. Having in-coming ninth graders‘ information produced a master
schedule more tailored to the new students. The tailored master schedule, as noted by
teachers, served to keep students engaged in their studies and to explain the
subsequent academic gains.
The above may partially explain why of the other groups surveyed on the
HSSSE, the ninth graders felt most emotionally engaged to their school. In short, the
teachers teaching ninth grade classes benefit greatly from the fact that the
articulation between the feeder schools and the high school now includes
performance score information about gaps in knowledge and skills as demonstrated
by the incoming ninth graders‘ spring CST results. As the entering ninth graders‘
classes are tailored closely to their needs, the staff has some lead time to prepare
targeted lessons. In addition, as a safety net of sorts, the high school‘s leadership has
taken the initiative of creating a number of assessments simulating the state‘s high
stakes tests. These school-created tests, also adopted by other district high schools,
are administered approximately every three weeks.
In efforts to engage students further, the principal at the start of his placement
in time for the 2002-03 academic year, instituted changes resulting in school
improvement. The first stage of intervention under the current administration was in
2003 – 04 academic school year, exactly the time when the 20:1 ratio was first
applied at the ninth grade at CVHS. At that point a process was put in place that
would have far-reaching effects in later years.. The school schedule was expanded
98
so as to accommodate larger numbers of ninth grade students needing math and
English language arts.
Block periods of LANGUAGE!, a comprehensive literacy curriculum. was
established and about 10 new teachers were added to class sections made up of two-
period long classes. Of the newly hired teachers during that academic year, at least
five were brand new to the profession and to the school. The LANGUAGE!
curriculum ―increases the performance of students who are reading two or more
years below grade level. Providing an integrated approach to literacy instruction,
LANGUAGE! accelerates learning so students can access grade-level content.
Designed specifically for struggling learners—English language learners (ELLs) and
students in special education or general education—LANGUAGE! leads to improved
reading comprehension and written expression.‖ (electronic source accessed on
January 20, 2008 from store.cambiumlearning.com/ProgramPage.aspx?parentId-
019005277&functi)
The administration scheduled meetings for the block teachers and asked them
to generate various strategies for involving the students. Teachers shared out that
many ninth grade students at the time were uncomfortable with the perception of
being singled out by placement in the block schedules. The students were made
aware of the data that had driven the decision to create the blocks, their ―special class
schedules‖. The result was an on-going conversation between block teachers and
their students. Teachers began to share on a broader level, including students, the
gains being made in the blocks. Ultimately both students and teachers in the block
99
schedule (classes generally targeted exclusively for ninth and tenth graders) began to
review individual progress together.
The decisions made by the administrative team and other CVHS stakeholders
resulted in students reporting doing better in their other classes outside the blocks.
One teacher who taught a block class shared, ―The students felt motivated to succeed
in other content areas because they had the cognitive tools to address content areas
outside the blocks‖ (Personal communication with CVHS staff on November 7,
2007). As the first focus of the block classes was English language arts, this may
explain why CVHS students performed at consistently higher levels that on the CST
in Language Arts when contrasted with CST math sections.
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) results in language arts also
support the contention that students are responding to the increased levels of
achievement and engagement fostered by the leadership‘s added attention: In the
2007-08 academic year 80% of all students passed the CAHSEE in English language
arts, up from 63% in the 2005-06 school year The official CST results from the 2007
(see Table 4.2) provide support that CVHS‘s three main groups of students are
making gains students are moving forward in passing this important measure.
Finding two supports the view that student engagement and student
achievement on a school-wide level may be connected. It is true that while CVHS is
not a Title 1 funded school, the NCLB mandate, emphasizing the academic areas of
English language arts and math, it is also true that the federal mandate impacts all
California schools. The first area of emphasis on a multi-year strategic plan for
100
improving academic achievement was English language arts. CVHS faculty
collectively addressed this area, as evidenced in the faculty survey results. The
research team generated survey instrumentation that targeted language arts. One
reason the researchers felt this area to be important had to do with the important
language structures embedded in important content areas, including but not exclusive
to math. So, the survey questions relating to English language arts is, for purposes of
this study, related to the engagement of students by their teachers in producing
academic language. The resultant information thereby creates an idea of
communication levels, in English, between students and their teachers at the case
study schools. This information would inform the triangulation of any relationship
between student achievement and engagement.
During the meetings where the USC researchers discussed collecting
appropriate data for addressing the guiding questions in this study, the group agreed
that the quality of the mixed-methods research would be enhanced by information
generated from school adult stakeholders, in particular the researchers felt that the
opinions of educators interacting with students in and out of the classroom would
provide rich and substantive information. In a move to capture information pertinent
to the aims of the case studies, the research team met to produce a survey instrument
specifically for the school‘s educators. This next section explores results gleaned
from the survey given to CVHS educators. The survey included questions about
classroom practices, school culture, opinions about student effort, and an open-ended
question about reaons why the school may be outperforming other similar schools.
101
The 70 certificated members of the school collectively represented 11 CVHS
Departments: Foreign Languages, English, Fine Arts, Graphic Arts Academy,
History, Mathematics, Physical Education, Science, Special Education, and Visual
Arts & Design Academy, and Educational Support (i.e., Counseling, Library, etc.).
As regards assigned hours of reading per week, only the hands-on Graphic
Arts Academy, assigned some reading, but not consistently as the other departments.
Table 4.14: Assigned Reading Hours / Week (In percentages)
102
Marzano (2003) makes a fundamental point that the activity of reading is one
method by which students create memory records, units related to crystallized
intelligence, and increased through exposure to vocabulary acquired through reading;
Marzano cites Chall (1987) in the following caveat: ―Although crystallized
intelligence is certainly not synonymous with vocabulary development, vocabulary is
commonly considered a good general measure of intelligence.‖ (p. 137).
In initially targeting the development of English language arts, teachers on
the whole were targeting raised engagement levels all their students, predominantly
from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds, in enrichment activities (e.g.,
vocabulary development) that could be connected to raised levels of advanced
placement credit awarded to CVHS students. The teachers in all but one department
surveyed felt that reading was an important instructional activity. Marzano (2003)
makes a fundamental point that the activity of reading is one method by which
students create memory records, units related to crystallized intelligence, and
increased through exposure to vocabulary acquired through reading; Marzano cites
Chall (1987) with the following caveat: ―Although crystallized intelligence is
certainly not synonymous with vocabulary development, vocabulary is commonly
considered a good general measure of intelligence.‖ (p. 137). A body of research
connecting cognitive skill development and reading (see for example Marzano, 2003;
Bandura et al 1996; Wagner et al, 1994; Vygotsky, 1976) may serve to explain the
raised levels of advanced placement credit awarded to CVHS students.
103
Developing language arts, especially academic language, was important to
teachers on the whole at CVHS. One reason for the emphasis was the parallel of
heightened communication with implementing strategies for encouraging all students
to participate in class. Of the faculty surveyed, 96.5% responded that they ―very
often‖ and ―frequently‖ utilized strategies to encourage participation by students in
class. In emphasizing improving communication skills, 50% of teachers felt they
―very often‖ provided personal feedback to students, and 37% did so ―frequently‖. In
contrast, less than 2% ―never‖ gave prompt and personal feedback to their students.
Prompt feedback, according to Marzano (2003) and other researchers, is critical to
moving achievement forward.
Further emphasis of future continued efforts by CVHS in developing its
students communication skills was provided by a member of the institution‘s
technology committee: ―The school is preparing a technology lab that will be made
available to students during the next academic year; the computers will be preloaded
with advanced writing tutorial software whereby students‘ written work is analyzed
remotely by a mainframe computer that will provide near instant feedback to
students, and their teachers, about areas needing improvement.‖
This outperforming school was also impressive in utilizing innovative ways
to promote student achievement and engagement among mostly lower SES students
performing below-basic and far-below basic in the California set of tests, collectively
as the STAR assessment program. Every secondary school in California, whether or
not it is receiving federal funds through Title 1, is expected to show overall
104
improvement, especially in the heavily scrutinized academic disciplines of math and
English language arts. Students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have proved
to be an especially challenging group to move forward academically due to raised
risk factors associated with SES. In an effort to provide enhanced motivation for all
students, including those in the SES category, the educators at the high school have
agreed to strategically implement instructional policies aimed at raising student skill
sets and test scores. The following question regarding typical units, or hours, applies
to reading. CVHS staff has taken upon itself the creation of a preparatory set of tests
mirroring those given by the state. Students are then tested using these internal
assessments and categorized according to the results.
For those students who are found to have ―gaps‖ in their comprehension of
key test items an in-house peer-tutoring program has been designed to occur during
the school day referred to as the advisory period, also scheduled during the fourth
period of the day. Students in advanced placement and honors classes who are
receiving a minimum of a B average are recruited for the advisory period. These
student tutors are also awarded community service credit as well as an attractive
package of incentives including field trips and discounts to important school
memorabilia (i.e., yearbooks, senior pictures, etc.). While the program is still
experimental, it has already provided interesting ―fruit‖; and counselors are all
involved in the nomination and selection of peer tutors. They were quite positive
when asked to comment on the program. One counselor volunteered:
105
We have chosen to include a tutoring program during the school day. We're
calling it our advisory period. Right now we have 10th-graders 11th-graders
and 12th-graders tutoring 732 students who are being tutored by other
students who are from honors level classes… Parents of possible participants
in the advisory period are notified.
As a group, the grade counselors interviewed felt that it was important for
students at different ends of the cognitive scale, and of varying ages, could benefit
from peer tutoring. This feeling was perhaps best captured by one counselor advising
10
th
grade students, who commented: ―Those children who might qualify as excellent
tutors are made aware of this opportunity to help their school community. We make
it a point to emphasize to parents of honors and AP students that being of service,
especially when a child has certain mental talents is an important lesson to learn
early in life. Not all of us are lucky enough to have the mental gifts that some young
people possess.‖
While reading helps develop important cognitive mental skills and was
considered important by most teachers surveyed, teachers over-all felt students were
most encouraged to get involved in experiential activities.. Although 32.5% of
teachers, the highest percentage, reported assigning two to three hours of reading per
week 55% of CVHS educators felt students spent ―very much‖ or ―quite a bit‖ of
their out-of-classroom time on their studies. More educators, 78% (evenly split
between ―very much‖ and ―quite a bit‖), thought that students were encouraged to
spend their out-of-classroom time participating in school activities. Interestingly, in
regards to developing students‘ experiential learning while solving real-world
106
problems, 44% of the faculty felt that these opportunities were sparingly offered to
their youth (40% replied ―some‖ and 4% said ―very little‖).
In interviews with members of these academic departments one emerging
idea became very clear: the instructors were not only concerned with the delivery of
content, but with the development of important problem solving strategies. Teachers
agreeing to be interviewed explained that writing assignments given to students were
used by many teachers to measure understanding and to determine whether students
had understood the material covered in a particular unit. The educators were also
aware that as English language development was a focus area school-wide, requiring
more student writing achieved multiple goals. Notably survey results confirmed that
social studies and science teachers were in a virtual tie in assigning students papers
of 3-5 pages at the same level of frequency.
Table 4.15: Assigned Writing Assignments
3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+
a. Written papers of 5+ pages 3 3 X X 3
b. Written papers of 3 – 5 pages 6 X X X 3
c. Written papers of fewer than 5 9 6 2 X 11
One example of the degree of caring of faculty members was expressed
during an interview with the literacy coach. In describing how the expanded
articulation with the feeder schools improved understanding of the incoming ninth
107
graders strengths and knowledge gaps (at the time the block courses and
accompanying intervention curriculum was added to the master schedule), an
unexpected issue arose among those students ―in the blocks‖: they felt stigmatized
and the objects of possible ridicule by higher-performing peers.
The last question on the faculty survey asked the open-ended question: ―What
are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement?" resulting in the
approximate following percentages:
90% of the surveys indicated the importance of parent involvement as a
factor mitigating poor student behavior and promoting student effort in
their courses.
80 % responded a heightened emphasis on holding students accountable
through raised expectations by teachers (who, as a group, targeted student
learning over high stakes test scores.
75% mentioned that teachers‘ involvement with students was one key
element in raising student achievement.
Above 70% pointed to the shared responsibility teachers felt in helping
students gain higher levels of achievement.
Above 70% included a statement regarding a collective sense of security
by students and teachers while at school.
Over 60% mentioned personalization of instruction through directed
student-teacher conferences during the school day and through smaller
class sizes throughout the school.
108
Over 60% mentioned the school culture as united in enforcing school
policy as evidenced by a consistent and effective discipline policy, as
well as a stricter policy regarding regular attendance and timeliness.
More than 50% mentioned the instructional intervention in place for
students needing to bridge the achievement gap.
When asked about the ―principal effect‖ on student achievement and
engagement, one of the staff members volunteered that: ―The principal creates a
vision for students and their parents to interact with the school, and in turn teachers
and staff proceed to brainstorm ways in which to address this vision.‖ This supports
Northouse‘s (2002) contention that transformational leadership is rooted in the leader
creating a vision based on the followers‘ (school community‘s) needs. In querying
the principal about his views of the connection between student engagement and
their achievement, he pointed out that emerging research supports fostering a climate
where meaningful relationships between adults and youth are possible. Specifically
he supports teachers as special adults charged with the most important of task:
educating young people. His thoughts painted a picture of connectedness whereby in
his supporting teachers, he was in fact supporting their connection to personalizing
the learning environment for students. This then bridged the connection between
achievement and engagement. Specifically, the principal explained:
To be in education today is a difficult task. In fact, I was talking to a teacher
today, and this teacher asked the question, ‗Why am I still teaching? There
are so many things that I have to worry about as a teacher.‘ Can you guess
my response? I looked at that teacher in the eyes, and I said, ‗You cannot
help but to be who you are, and you are a teacher! Your reward is in the
109
difference that you make in the lives of your students. When you touch them
with your knowledge, you change them forever with that.
The principal's comments can be supported by research that suggests that
indeed a caring environment in school does have an influence on how well students
perform (Darling-Hammond, 1997; Yazzie-Mintz, 2007). However, what in fact
does the ―support‖ look like at CVHS? It needs to be an environment where students
feel cared about as learners and as individuals.
FINDING 2.3: The students and staff feel safe at their site, thus enabling students to
feel connected to the learning environment.
The federal government has noted that barriers to learning involve questions
of the degree to which a school provides an environment that is perceived to be as
being safe and conducive to learning by the stakeholders. National statistics on safe
schools reported that in 1999, students ages 12 through 18 were victims of about 2.5
million crimes at school, including about 186,000 serious violent crimes, including
rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and alarmingly rising instances of
hate-based crimes. agreement by all parties interested in factors that make schools
effective agree that a safe instructional environment is of critical importance. In
2007, EdSource presented the CDE with research contained in WestEd‘s report, The
State Data System to Assess Learning Barriers, Supports, and Engagement:
Implications for School Reform Efforts. The report, generated in compliance to the
Title IV provisions of NCLB, relies heavily on two state-sponsored complimentary
surveys, the California School Climate Survey (CSCS) given to school staff, and
110
the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS). Specifically the studies presented to the
CDE had two central areas of interest:
Underlying these two surveys is the recognition by CDE that learning is a
complicated phenomenon, affected by a multiple related variables, and that
local schools need data to determine:
• the nonacademic social, emotional, behavioral, and health-related
barriers to learning and success that their students‘ face; and
• whether their school climates impede or promote students‘
motivation, readiness, and ability to learn, as well as their teachers‘
ability to effectively teach. (p. 1)
It is fair to assert that a link between student engagement and student
achievement exists at CVHS, that larger percentages of stakeholders surveyed, both
faculty and students, felt safe at their school. Of the faculty surveyed, 87% felt safety
was a chief concern. The majority (approximately 75%) of CVHS students either
agreed or highly agreed in that they ―felt safe‖ at their high school. The reality of
feeling secure in the learning environment is expressed in attendance figures.
Students at CVHS expressed their feeling of safety not only in the HSSSE survey
results but also through their raised (within last two years) in-seat student attendance
to an average 97% (personal communication with the attendance office clerk on
October 29, 2007). CVHS lowered its truancy rate by over 30% from the 2005 -2006
school year to the 2007 – 2008 as reported in the CDE‘s Safe & Healthy Kids
Program. Increased levels of attendance as demonstrated by reduced truancy rates
mirror the flourishing of programs and practices affected by the current
administrative staff beginning in the 2003-04 academic school year. Finn & Voelkl
111
(1993) indicate that the rate of dropping out by urban youth was significantly
influenced by the level at which they felt adults cared at their schools. Logic and
research point to the primary importance of in-seat attendance to raising student
achievement.
On a related note: The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory
(NCREL) cite research (see for example Rumberger, 2001; USDE, 1996; and Garry,
1996) connecting truancy to dropping out of school (NCREL, 2007). Students often
do not attend schools in which they do not feel safe or connected, resulting in higher
truancy rates (NCREL, 2007). Furthermore raised levels of truancy is a primary risk
factor in predicting dropping out of school. However, as students become more
engaged in their school, truancy rates drop and achievement improves and
graduation rate calculation improves. At CVHS in academic year 2002-03 the
graduation rate was 84.7%, based on the NCES definition; in 2006-07 this rate
moved upwards to 87.9% (CDE, 2009).
In regards the question relating to the perceived factors, What perceived
factors contribute to academic achievement in an outperforming urban high school?
at CVHS the factors revolve around adult stakeholders who hold students
accountable beyond high stakes test scores, a visionary leader who creates a roadmap
that is then contextualized and made real by the other stakeholders, a rigorous
relevant curriculum addressing student needs, and an overall effort to make authentic
data-driven decisions informing the school‘s improvement efforts. Because the
school is held accountable by what policy analysts like Easton call stressors and
112
actors, this discussion includes recent efforts locally and nationally affecting the
direction in which institutions may need to go to meet newly carved out measures.
The high school adult stakeholders expressed concern about improving
student achievement for the sake of the students themselves. This concern may
explain the above results, but is moreover obviously connected to innovative re-
tooling of both intervention efforts and enrichment of educational options (e.g.,
evidence of greater numbers of advanced placement courses). The adult
stakeholders were sure to examine data prior to implementing new practices in their
learning community.
Marzano (2005) summarizes in chapter 14, ―Learned Intelligence and
Background Knowledge,‖ in his book, What Works in Schools: Translating Research
into Action, that, ―A strong link is established between crystallized intelligence and
vocabulary knowledge.‖ (p. 143). The researcher compared the results from teachers
in three academic departments that involve building vocabulary knowledge. A total
of 27 teachers from the English/Language Arts, Social Studies, and Science
departments were compared in their practices of assigning students writing
assignments, or demonstration of the sequential process (writing) involving
vocabulary development. Specifically, Marzano points to enhancing students‘
background knowledge as a means to construct opportunities where crystallized
knowledge and fluid intelligence are optimized.
The building of grids of understanding was evidenced at CVHS through
observation of the English language development curriculum known as Language!
113
This intervention curriculum emphasizes strategies by which students build grids of
understanding to scaffold their skills through the range of cognitive skill sets. While
Language! was utilized as an intervention in English classes, Social Studies and
Science teachers were engaging students by building their students experiential base
through meaningful, relevant activities involving projects, research, and peer-
mentoring. Evidence provided by researched, and called out by Marzano (2003),
indicates that a lower-performing student may be favorably impacted.
Summary
In the age of accountability for high schools, effectiveness is measured in
various ways including, but not limited to, high stakes test scores and graduation
rates for all students. The findings addressing the two research questions included:
1. A history of reform efforts guided by constructivist practices has
supported a culture of stability among teachers, continual improvement
in the classroom, collegiality amongst stakeholders, and learning
community resiliency contributing to academic performance;
2. A knowledgeable, highly qualified, stable and committed teacher group
enhance learning and achievement at the urnam outperforming school;
3. A strong curriculum, innovative intervention practices, and enrichment
opportunities fosters high achievement;
4. The students and staff feel safe at their site, thus enabling students to feel
connected to the learning environment;
114
5. The leadership team, headed by a transformational leader, promotes
change resulting in increased levels of student engagement and student
achievement; and,
6. Urban students at outperforming CVHS feel their school cares about them
and engages them in their process of learning.
Urban environments, like that of the high school in this case study, are facing
possible cuts in funding prompted by budgetary shortfalls, a worsening economy,
unfunded mandates, and high-minority student populations facing increased risk of
dropping out. While less than 10 % of the state‘s high schools have reached an
optimal API score of 800 or above, some secondary institutions in urban environs are
moving their mostly minority students toward the mark. This case study of the out-
performing urban high school has demonstrated that the recipe for movement is
staying the course of solid pedagogy in thought and deed. Engagement of students in
their own education is a concurrent process related to the level of connectedness,
support and interest provided by adult stakeholders increase the likelihood that
students will perform better (Scales & Taccogna, 2000). While no causality between
the level of outperformance of the school students‘ engagement may be established,
it is possible to postulate that a relationship between the two areas may exist.
Evidence that a possible relationship between heightened student engagement and a
raised level of performance has been examined in this case study of an urban
outperforming high school.
115
In summary, the researcher was able to identity the following themes that
explain CVHS‘s effectiveness, as they emerged from the data. Note that there are
some overlaps in some elements that could be explained as products of combinations
of themes.
1. A culture of caring adults composed of a high percentage of highly
qualified, resilient teachers is willing to hold themselves accountable for
student success by stressing that students themselves had to be
responsible for their own learning
2. The curriculum is responsive to the needs of the students. A wide range
of classes assist students in attaining learning goals driving them towards
individual success. Additionally the master schedule is designed to
permit for delivery of a curriculum filling the needs of students on many
levels.
3. Success at an urban school is not possible without the driving force of an
administrative team led by a principal who sees what is possible in order
to move the school to higher levels of achievement. The visionary
principal at CVHS is such a leader. Wisely, he establishes relationships
with all stakeholders, principally parents, but also the school community
and its local supporters.
The research, and indeed intuition, suggests that an effective school involves
its stakeholders in the mission of the institution. As the demands of society heighten
the need for a ready population of high school graduates, the strategies offering to
116
personalize instruction in an urban setting are increasingly more important in
insuring this aim. It then remains a goal to further study the success of urban schools
like CVHS in linking achievement and engagement.
117
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
Introduction
In 2005 at an NGA conference where 45 of the nations governors were
assembled with educators and representatives from U.S. businesses, then-CEO Bill
Gates opined that American education was ―obsolete‖ (National Summit on
America‘s ―Silent Epidemic‖, 2006).
California schools are charged with producing students ready to participate
in, and indeed maintain, one of the wealthiest economies in the United States, ranked
sixth in the world just five years ago (accessed electronically on March 1, 2008 on
www.ed-data.k12.ca.us? Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison). The
climate is charged with accusations that schools, especially those in urban settings,
are neither sufficient nor adequate in narrowing the achievement gaps between
diverse racial and ethnic groups of students.
In the face of NCLB requirements for states to capture various educational
performance data, not the least of which is reporting out high school graduation
rates. This has proven to be a contentious issue as uniformity has been thus far
elusive on many levels. California has been taken to task by such organizations as
the Education Trust and the Civil Rights Project at Harvard with different
calculations than those officially reported by state school districts. This
disjointedness is illustrated by the variance in the 2002 graduation rates calculated in
different ways: That year the CDE reported an 87% graduation rate while the NCES,
118
using an estimated ―averaged freshmen‖ graduation rate, reported that California had
a rate of 68.8%. Differences in measures of graduation aside, there is agreement that
some secondary institutions are effective. Moreover, even with raised risk factors
challenging urban high schools, students are receiving diplomas and moving on to
productive career pathways. This ―beating of the odds‖ by impacted urban high
schools leads to questions about how these outperforming schools are managing to
raise student achievement while staying in school long enough to graduate.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine what factors, including student
engagement, enabled student achievement in an out-performing urban high school.
This case study examined the possible factors of one recognized outperforming
urban high school in engaging its students in their learning process. A team of
researchers from the University of Southern California selected mostly
outperforming urban high schools located in both Los Angeles and Orange Counties
guided by a road map by which to collect data. The group-generated road map was
centered around two guiding questions and a shared understanding of a general body
of pertinent research. In addition the researchers created a conceptual framework to
serve as a lens by which to aid in the collection and synthesis of captured data.
The research questions that guided this study were:
1. What perceived factors contribute to academic achievement in an out-
performing urban high school?
119
2. Is there a link between student engagement and student achievement in an
outperforming urban high school?
Findings
Research suggests that student success at the secondary level involves the
presence of certain factors such as a safe environment, a strong curriculum, a process
by which decisions are based on relevant data, and supports of varying types that
raise the likelihood of students staying in school until graduating and moving
forward to enrollment in college or a viable career pathway (Woods, 1995; Shernoff
et al, 2003; Orfield et al, 2005). CVHS has used its long history of restructuring and
facing taxing challenges from within and outside the learning community to achieve
impressive results in raising academic effectiveness measures.
CVHS has implemented measures creating a stronger, and consequently more
effective, learning culture. The effectiveness in raising the schools status as an
outperforming urban institution portend the possibility of other institutions in urban
impacted settings doing likewise. Specifically, CVHS is a case study of a high
school creating strong ties to its students by creating strong ties to the feeder schools
from which they arrive. The articulation process enabling the faculty and adult
stakeholders at CVHS to be effective is possible because the culture of the
institution, noted for its resiliency, collegiality, and heightened levels of
communication, has built the channels enabling timely student data from feeder
schools to guide tailored instructional offerings. This tailored curriculum allows
arriving ninth graders to build their skill sets and confidence to meet greater
120
challenges. In short, educators from feeder institutions provide information to CVHS
in order to better engage students in their own learning from the very beginning of
the young students high school tenure.
Proof of the schools effectiveness is provided not only by improvement in
high stakes test scores and its outperformance of other like institutions, but by
environmental factors such as the high agreement among adolescent and adult
stakeholders that the school is an urban safe harbor. As regards the all-important
question of safety, the school‘s stakeholders expressed feeling safe at school. This is
important as it provides fertile ground in which to grow other cultural values
supporting the school‘s upward rise. The safe environment allows for the culture of
caring in the students growth as persons to flourish. Teenage and adult stakeholders,
educators and parents inclusive, stated in interviews and through surveys that
relationships were important.
Having quality relationships between adults and young people at CVHS
emerged as possibly contributing to the school‘s outperformance status. Indeed, the
idea of personalizing education for high school students is a central idea in current
restructuring efforts at many lower performing schools (Klem & Connell, 2004).
Marzano (2005), as supported by the case study‘s general findings, is correct that
leadership is foundational in establishing a professional learning community which
one intuitively connects to developing ―personhood‖ and engagement in learning by
students.
121
Emerging evidence supports the contention that students who feel connected
to their school, vis a vis relationships with the adults at their secondary institution,
will tend to improve in their academic performance (Herlihy & Quint, 2007). Indeed,
recent studies on instructional improvement richly support the findings discussed in
this case study: outperformance by a secondary institution and early personalization
of engagement by students in their learning are twin pillars supporting school
improvement (herlihy & Quint, 2007; Marzano, 2005, Balfanz & Legters, 2004). The
findings from the research at CVHS support the notion that a relation relationship
between a school‘s outperforming status and higher levels of student engagement
exist.
CVHS has a key advantage in that it has a well-documented history of
involvement in reform efforts. Indeed the documentation of prompted and self-
initiated steps by stakeholders, a sizable remaining percentage of veteran teachers
working through many of those past efforts still evident, is easily produced.
Arguably the resilience and trust developed through past efforts has created a setting
in which the school has not merely survived previous restructuring, but has risen to
higher levels of effectiveness. In effect, CVHS has become a professional learning
community where educators are provided, and supported by a visionary school
leader, opportunities to pursue new ideas for improvement. These include a
curriculum targeting key areas in stages (e.g., English language arts initially),
scheduling early data capturing provided by enhanced articulation with feeder
schools, and experimenting with an in-house volunteer tutoring program between
122
older, more academically able students and younger academically challenged
colleagues.
A result of the learning community‘s efforts in growing its capacity to
improve student achievement has been a strong curriculum that includes innovative.
Perhaps more important to the success of the school in achieving its outperforming
status is meeting the challenge, albeit a moving target in an urban environment, of
having virtually the lion‘s share of stakeholders, students, educators, and parents, in
feeling that the school is a safe harbor in which learning can take place.
Conclusions
Although it wasn‘t until the 1970s when direct links to specific widely
beneficial outcomes were researched, as early as the 1930s sociologists recognized
the importance of school cultures in forming a productive citizenry (Jarid, 2006).
That a link may exist between a school‘s effectiveness and the level to which it
engages students in their learning may be a notion emerging from intuitiveness, but
increasingly supported by a growing body of research in the area of school
restructuring and improvement. In particular the researchers and policy-makers are
focusing more and more of their attention to factors permitting challenged urban
secondary institutions to beat the odds by performing a higher levels of effectiveness.
Because there are high schools in California, such as CVHS, that are achieving
higher levels of performance than other similar schools, more research must guide
the efforts to personalize these settings. Clearly increasing the rate at which urban
high school students graduate will require improvement in both wide-spread practice
123
and effective state policy that tangibly supports timely and focused research, as noted
by the ad-hoc California Dropout Research Project (CDRP, 2006). In enhancing
educational outcomes and narrowing the achievement/opportunity gap will
necessarily involve policy makers in discussions of adequacy and equality in
education for students all settings. And, while greater spending doesn‘t necessarily
guarantee greater achievement, targeted application of resources, like scientifically-
based ones, does require higher expense and so remains a relevant talking point.
Additionally, professional learning communities must be grown and supported so as
to achieve the needed personalization in the delivery of instruction.
It makes sense to consider the recommendations proposed by various
research and advocacy organizations like the PPIC, P-16 Council, CDRP, NGA, and
NCES. Tellingly, California faces the possibility of increased economic burdens as
calculated by the initial cost of imprisoning dropouts, a statistically evident group,
and the added cost of loss revenue from contributing taxpayers. Indeed, if effective
interventions are not put into play, the state faces the risk of losing its pre-eminence
as a leading economic center. Additionally, policy makers must consider the
philosophic issues pertinent to ensuring both adequacy and equality in California‘s
provision of education to its students. The goal is not merely to fund targeted in
order to meet standards of equality and adequacy, but to create environments where
one can , as researcher Craig Jarid says (2006), ―Walk into any truly excellent school
and you can feel it almost immediately -- a calm, orderly environment that hums
124
with an exciting, vibrant sense of purposefulness. This is a positive school culture,
the kind that improves educational outcomes.‖
It is the areas of effort and persistence that are most related to traditional
ideas of engagement. Graduation rates improvement is a complex equation
consisting of different elements. Intuitively educators and other interested parties
understand that effort by everyone, adults and teenagers, will impact effectiveness
indicators, as proven in areas outside the United States. Inasmuch as mathematics
curricula in California has been impacted by successes in achievement in other
countries, then it makes logical sense to expand the effort in looking at what else
works in engaging learners in foreign climes.
Implications
California public high schools, as other publicly funded programs in the state,
are up for discussion regarding their levels of funding. The governor and the
superintendent are at odds regarding needed steps in bettering the state‘s
circumstances One policy maker warns that ―severe cuts‖ are called for, while the
other one points to the need to provide needed resources in order to ensure current
and future economic strength through the provision of a 21
st
century ready work
force.
Urban areas in California pose their own challenges to the envisioned cycle
of continuous improvement recently proposed by the governor‘s Committee on
Education Excellence (2008). Similarly, the P-16 Council‘s goals include linking all
education levels to create a seamless system of student learning. In all cases concern
125
must be placed on narrowing, and ultimately extinguishing, the achievement gap
between groups of students, substantial numbers of California‘s poor and minority
youths inclusive. As such, it is of particular import to look at schools that are
beating certain risk factors by engaging its students in their learning. Urban
institutions that take to heart that high schools are not just budgetary items, or places
of learning. They are often places where the community weaves a fabric enhancing
its collective identity through activities and the exchange of thoughts.
It is worthy to include the notions of engagement with recommendations
proposed by research bodies. An example of possible ―next steps‖ comes out of the
process of the state‘s recent adoption of mathematics books originally used by
students in Singapore. The process brought to light the need to engage students in
deeper more authentic ways in mathematics curricula as done in other countries.
President G. W. Bush created a research council to study and report out changes that
need to be implemented. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP) made
up of leading mathematicians, cognitive psychologists, and educators weighed in
favorably on the new texts from Singapore, a place noted in past years for higher
scores in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, 1995,
1999, and 2003). While this is not to be taken as an examination of math textbook
adoption per se, the process of looking more closely at the practices used in other
nations that may be incorporating innovative practices in the education and
preparation of their students for a 21
st
century world economy is critical practices
raising students‘ academic engagement exist both in the United States and abroad.
126
One example is WestEd‘s recent report Rethinking High School: Preparing Students
for Success in College, Career, and Life (2007). The report profiles programs that
are creating opportunities for ethnically and socioeconomically diverse students to
beat the odds by being college-ready. Five themes were common in the programs
profiled: impoverished students were helped to see college as an attainable goal;
academic programs were strengthened; transitions from middle school to high school
were closely examined for ways of providing greater support and articulation; the
provision of academic and social support during the critical freshmen year of high
school; and, developing strategies to lure students who had dropped out back into
school (Corbett, 2007).
127
REFERENCES
Achieve Inc. and National Governors‘ Association. (2005). An action agenda for
improving America's high schools. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from
http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.9123e83a1f6786440ddcbeeb50
1010a0/?vgnextoid=4a17a32889da2010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
Agee, J. L. (2004). The fact book: Handbook of education information. Sacramento:
California Department of Education.
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2007, October). High school dropouts in America.
Retrieved November 25, 2007
Alliance for Excellent Education. (2007). High school dropouts in America factsheet.
Washington, D.C.: Alliance for Excellent Education.
American Youth Policy Forum. (2003). High school reform in San Diego.
Washington, D.C.
Andersin, L. and Krathwohl, D. (Eds) (2001). A taxonomy for learning teaching and
assessing. New York: David McKay Company.
Armor, D. and Schwarzbach, D. (1978). White flight, demographic transition, and
the future of school desegregation. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.
Associated Press (2007, October 29) 1 in 10 U.S. high schools is a ‗dropout factory‘.
Retrieved January 20, 2008 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21531704/
Bainbridge, W., and Lasley, III, T. (2002). Demographics, diversity, and k-12
accountability. Education and Urban Society, 34(4), 422-437.
Balfanz, R. and Letgers, N. (2006). Closing "dropout factories": The graduation rate
crisis we know and what can be done about it. Education Week, 25(42).
Balfanz, R. and Letgers, N. (2006b, August 16). Locating and low performing high
schools which produce the nation's dropouts. Paper presented at the Turning
Around Low-Performing High Schools: Lessons for Federal Policy from
Research and Practice.
Bandura, A., Caprara, G. and Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-
efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67(3), 1206-
1222.
128
Battistich, V., Solomon, D. and Watson, M. (1997). Caring school communities.
Educational Psychologist, Lawrence Erbaum Associates, 32(3), 137-151.
Bayton, D. (2001). America's $60 billion problem. Trainingmag.com
Bennis, W. and Goldsmith, J. (1997). Learning to lead - workbook on becoming a
leader (Third ed.). New York: Basic Books.
Bickel, R., Howley, C., Williams, T. and Glascock, C. (2001). High school size,
achievement equity, and cost: Robust interaction effects and tentative results.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 9(40).
Bielenberg, B. and Fillmore-Wong, L. (2005). The English they need to know.
Educational Leadership, 62 (December), 45-9.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2006). High schools for the new millenium,
imagine the possibilities. retrieved May 2, 2006
Blankenstein, A., Cole, R. and Houston, P. (Eds.). (2007). Engaging every learner.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organizations (Third ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Borman, G., Hewes, G. and Brown, S. (2002). Comprehensive school reform and
student achievement. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.
Bourdieu, P. (1982). L'economie des echanges linguistiques (the economy of
linguistic exchange). Paris: Fayard edts.
Brewster, C. and Fager, J. (2000). Increasing student engagement and motivation:
From time-on-task to homework. Omaha: Nebraska University.
Bryan, J. (2005). Fostering educational resilience and achievement in urban schools
through school-family-community partnerships. Professional School
Counseling Special Professional School Counseling in Urban Settings, 8(3),
219-227.
California Department of Education. (2006). API 2005 base. Retrieved March 15,
2007, from http://www.ed-
data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Fl
evel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
129
California Department of Education. (2004). Definition of dropout. Retrieved
December 12, 2006, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/def05dropout.asp
California Department of Education. (2004). The implementation of the
accountability provisions of the no child left behind act: A state perspective.
Retrieved June 11, 2006, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/el/le/wp.asp
California Department of Education School Improvement Division. (2003-2003).
Enrollment and staff in california private schools. Sacramento: California
Department of Education.
California Department of Social Services. (2004). Improving the lives of children
and families.
California Departmnet of Education. (2004). Comprehansive school reform program:
No child left behind, title 1, part f. Sacramento.
California Department of Social ServicesChildren's residential update. Retrieved
November 30, 2006 from .ccld.ca.gov/res/pdf/CRupdate0407.pdf
Caraway, K., Tucker, C., Reinke, W. and Hall, C. (2003). Self-efficacy, goal
orientation, andfear of failure as predictors of school engagement in high
school students. Psychology in the Schools, 40(4).
Career technical education standards, Education Code Cong. Rec.(1983).
Center for Education Policy. (2004, July). The implementation of the accountability
provisions of the no child left behind act: A state perspective. Paper presented
at the How do we improve NCLB's accountability standards? Sacramento.
Center for Education Policy. (2006). Wrestling the devil in the details: An early look
at restructuring in California. Washington: Center for Education Policy.
Chapman, C. and Hoffman, L. (2007). Event dropout rates for public school students
in grades 9-12: 2002-03 and 2003-04. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Education - National Center for Education Statistics.
Christian, S. (2003). Educating children in foster care. Washington, D.C.: National
Conferences of State Legislatures.
Clark, R. and Estes., F. (2002). Turning research into results (First ed.). Atlanta:
Center for Effective Performance, Inc.
130
CNN Money.Com. (2006). Best places to live. Retrieved January 3, 2008, 2008,
from
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2006/snapshots/PL06560
00.html
Coleman, J. (1968) Equality of educational opportunity. Equity & Excellence in
Education. 1547-3457, 6(5), 19-28
Community Care Licensing Division. (2004). Children's residential update.
Retrieved November 30, 2006 from cld.ca.gov/res/pdf/CCUpdate0108.pdf
Corrales, J. (1997). The politics of education reform: Bolstering the supply and
demand; overcoming institutions. Issues in Science and Technology, 2(1),
41-9.
Cotton, K. (1996). Affective and social benefits of small- scale schooling.
Clearinghouse on Ruural Education and Small Schools.
Cotton, K. (2001). New small learning communities. Findings from recent literature.
Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Cresswell, J. (1994b). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Croninger, R. and Lee, V. (2001). Social capital and dropping out of high school:
Benefits to at-risk students of teachers' support and guidance. Teachers
College Record (Record 103), 548-81.
Cross, C. (2004). Political education: National policy comes of age. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Cushman, K. (1997). Esential leadership in the school change process. Horace,
13(4), 1 - 11
Curran, B. (2006). Implementing graduation counts. Washington, D.C.: National
Governors' Association.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teacher learning that supports student learning.
Strengthening the Teacher Profession, 55, 6-11.
Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., and Wichterle O. (2002). Reinventing high
school: Outcomes of the coalition campus schools project. American
Educational Research Journal, 39(3), 639.
131
Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform.
Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047-1085.
Davies, B. and Hentscheke, G. (2002). Changing resource and organizational
patterns: The challenge of resourcing education in the 21st century. Journal
of Educational Change, 3(2), 135-159.
Dev, P. (1997). Intrinsic motivation and academic achievement: What does their
relationship imply for the classroom teacher? Remedial and Special
Education, 18(1), 12-19.
Dibartolomeo, J. (1998). Small learning communities and their relationship to school
performance outcomes. Unpublished case study of small learning
communities, Widener University, Chester, PA.
Dill, D. (1999). Academic accountability and university adaptation: The architecture
of an academic learning organization. Higher Education, 38(2), 127-154.
Doland, E. (2001). Give yourself the gift of a degree. Washington, D.C.:
Employment Policy Foundation.
Edsource Online. (2006). Accountability overview. Retrieved June 10, 2006, from
http://www.edsource.org
Edsource Online. (2008). Accountability overview. Clarifying Complex Education
Issues. Retrieved March 1, 2008, 2008, from
http://www.edsource.org/contact.cfm
Education at a Glance. United States trails most countries in high school graduation
rates: U.S. Department of Education.
Education Coalition. (2008). Fact sheet. Sacramento.
Education Data Partnership. (2005). Comparing california. Sacramento.
Edweek. (2008). Diplomas count: Ready for what, Education Week (Vol.
MAECH2): Education Week.
Elmore, R. (1997). The politics of education reform. Issues in Science and
Technology, 14, 41-9.
Elmore, R. and Fuhrman, S. (2001). Research finds the false assumption of
accountability. The Education Digest, 67(4), 9-14.
132
Elmore, R. (2001a). Holding schools accountable: Is it working? Phi Delta Kappan,
83(1), 67-72.
Elmore, R. (2001b). Research finds the false assumption of accountability. The
Education Digest, 67(4), 9-14.
Elmore, R. (2002). Hard questions about practice. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 22-
5.
Elmore, R. (2003a). Forum. Excerpt from "the limits of change" harvard education
letter, January/February 2002. Journal of Staff Development, 24(3), 76.
Elmore, R. (2003b). A plea for strong practice. Educational Leadership, 61(3), 6-10.
Elmore, R. (2005). Accountable leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 134-42.
Elmore, R. (2006). Breaking the cartel. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(7), 517-18.
Emerson, J. (2006). Strategies for working with college students from foster care. E-
source for college transitions, 3(4), 3 - 4
Ferraro, D. and Kerckhove, V. (2006). Trends in international mathematics and
science study. Washington, D,C: U. S. Department of Education.
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids (2003). Bullying prevention is crime prevention.
Washington, D.C. Retrieved March 10, 2008 from www.fightcrime.org.
Finn, J. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, D.C.: National
Center for Education Statistics.
Finn, J. and Voelkl. (1993). School characteristics related to student engagement.
The Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 249-268.
Fordham, S. and Ogbu, J. (1986). Black student‘s school success: Coping with the
burden of ‗acting White‘.‖ The Urban Revuew, 18(3) 176-206
Friedman, T. (2006). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century.
New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Fullan, M. (2004). How high achieving districts succeed with all students, United
States: HOPE Foundation.
133
Funk, P. and Bailey, J. (1999) Small schools, big results: Nebraska high school
completion and postsecondary enrollment rates by size of school district.
Walthill, NE: Center for Rural Affairs
Gall, M. Borg, W. and Gall, J. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th
ed.). New York: Longman Publishers
Gandara, P., Gutiaez, D. and O‘Hara, S. (2001). Planning for the future in rural and
urban high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
(JESPAR), 6 (1 & 2), 73 -93.
Gandara, P., Rumberger, R. and Maxwell-Jolly, J. (2003). English learners in
California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy
Archives, 11(36).
GE Foundation. (2006). Accountability overview. Retrieved June 10, 2006, from
http://www.edsource.org
Gehring, J. (2003). Motivation among students. Education Week, 23(15), 5.
Gibson, C. (1998). Population of the 100 largest cities and other urban places in the
united states: 1790 to 1990. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
Giordano, V. and Nevin, A. (2007). What can mixed methods designs offer
professional development program evaluators? Paper presented at the
Pathways to Learning: Creating Connections between research and Practice,
Miami Shores, FL. Barry University
Glanville, J. (2004). Voluntary associations and social network structure: Why
organizational location and type are important. Sociological Forum, 19(3),
465-493.
Goldin, G. (1999). A brief history of the united states. Washington, D.C.: National
Bureau of Economic Research.
Good, T. (1996). Educational researchers comment on the education summit and
other policy proclamations from 1983-1996. Educational Researcher, 25(8),
4-6.
Good, T. (1999). The purposes of schooling. The Elementary School Journal, 99(5).
134
Guglielmo, R. (1995). Self-concept and school achievement: Interaction dynamics
and a tool for assessing the self-concept component. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 73 (4) 419-425
Guskey, T. (2005). A historical perspective on closing achievement gaps. NASSP,
89(644), 76-89.
Haertel, E. (2005). Using a longitudinal student tracking system to improve the
design for public school accountability in california. Accountability Systems
Retrieved June 10, 2006, from
http://www.ccsso.org/projects/Accountability_Systems/Resources/
Harvard Foundation. (2003). Forum. Excerpt from "the limits of change" harvard
education letter, January/February 2002. Journal of Staff Development,
24(3), 76.
Hawley M. and Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Rethinking the allocation of teaching
resources: Some lessons from high-performing schools. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(1), 9-29.
Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters: How well-qualified teachers can close
the gap. Washington, DC. The Education Trust
Haycock, K. (2001). Helping all students learn: Closing the achievement gap. Center
for Development & Learning Retrieved on December 10, 2007 from
.cdl.org/resource-library/articles/achieve_gap.php
Haycock, K. (2001). Keeping students from dropping out. Education Trust
Herbert, B. (2008). Clueless in America. New York: New York Times, April 22.
Herlihy, C. and Quint, J. (2006). Emerging evidence on improving high school
student achievement and graduation rates. New York: Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporstion (MRDC).
Herman, R. D. (1999). An educators' guide to schoolwide reform. Washington, D.C.:
American Institutes of Reasearch.
Hickok, E. (2002). No child left behind: A desktop reference. Washington, D.C.:
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Horowitz, J. (2005a). Inside high school reform: Making the changes that matter.
San Francisco: WestEd.
135
Innes, S. (1995). Creating the commonwealth: The economic culture of puritan New
England. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
Institute of Education Sciences U.S. Department of Education National Center for
Education Statistics. (2007). The condition of education in brief. Washington,
D.C.: US Department of Education.
Johnson, R. (2002b). Using data to close the achievement gap: How to measure
equity in our schools (Second ed.). Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Kahlenberg, R. (2001). Learning from James Coleman. Public Interest(144), 54-72.
Kane, T., Stalger, D. and Geppert, J. (2001). Assessing the definition of adequate
yearly progress in the house and senate education bills (Policy Research).
Washington: Brookings Institution.
Katzenbach, J. and Smith, K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-
performance organization. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
Klonsky, M. (1995). Small schools: The numbers tell a story. A review of the
research and current experiences. The small schools workshop. (Evaluative).
Chicago: Illinois University.
Kraathwol, A. (2001). A taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing. New York:
David McKay Company.
Krantz, G. (2001). Failure is not an option. New York: Penguin Books.
Kristin, S. (2005). Effective high school reform: Research and policy that works.
Kuh, G. Kinzie, J., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., and Gonyca, R. (2006). Connecting the
dots: Multi-faceted analyses of the relationships between student
engagement results from the nsse, and the institutional practices and
conditions that foster student success. Bloomington: Center for
Postsecondary Research Indiana University.
Kushmann, J., Sieber, C. and Hearlold-Kinney, P. (2000). This isn't the place for me:
School dropout. American Counseling Association, 471-507.
Laird, J, DeBell, C., and Chapman, C. (2004) Dropout rates in the United States.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
136
Lee, J., Grigg,W. and Donahue, P. (2007). The nation's report card: Reading 2007.
Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Statistics.
Legters, N., Balfantz, R. and McPartland, J. (2002). Solutions for failing high
schools: Converging visions and promising models. Washington, DC: Office
of Vocational and Adult Education.
Levin, H., Belfield, C., Muennig, P. and Rouse, C. (2007). The costs and benefits of
an excellent education for all of america's chidren. Retrieved February2,
2007
Levine, M. (2007). The essential cognitive backpack. Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development, 64(7), 16-22.
Malloy, C. and Wohlstetter, P. (2003). Working conditions in charter schools: What's
the appeal for teachers? Education and Urban Society, 35(2), 219-41.
Marien, M.and Kendall, J. (2000). Implementing standards-based education. Teacher
Librarian, 28(2), 30-2.
Marien, M. (2007, November-December). The 2007 outlook report. The Futurist.
Marzano, R. (1997). An array of strategies for classroom teachers. Momentum, 6-10.
Marzano, R. (1998). What are the general skills of thinking and reasoning and how
do you teach them? The Clearing House, 71(5), 268-73.
Marzano, R. (1999). Building curriculum and assessment around standards. High
School Magazine, 6(5), 14-19.
Marzano, R. (2000). Introduction to the special section. Implementing standards in
schools. Updating the standards movement. NASSP Bulletin, 84(620), 2-4.
Marzano, R. (2000a). Implementing standards-based education. Teacher Librarian,
28(2), 30-2.
Marzano, R. (2000b). Introduction to the special section. Implementing standards in
schools. Updating the standards movement. NASSP Bulletin, 84(620), 2-4.
Marzano, R. (2002). In search of the standardized curriculum. Principal, 81, 6-9.
137
Marzano, R. (2003a). The key to classroom management. Educational Leadership,
61(1), 6-13.
Marzano, R. (2003b). Using data: Two wrongs and a right. Educational Leadership,
60(5), 56-60.
Marzano, R. (2003c). What works in schools. Alexandria: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R., Waters, T. and McNutty, B. (2005). School leadership that works:
From research to results. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
McDonnel, L. (2005). No child left behind and the federal role in education:
Evolution or revolution? Peabody Journal of Education, 80(2), 19-38.
McMillen, M., Kaufman, P., Klein, S., and Klein, S. (1997). Dropout rates in the
United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Educational Research and
Improvement.
Merriam, S. (1998) Qualitative research and case study applications in education.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Minnesota Department of Health. (2005). The difference between vision and
mission. Retrieved December 14, 2005, 2005, from
http://www.health.state.mn.us/about/direct.html
Nann, D. (1986). Dropout prevention. NASSP Bulletin, 70, 66-73.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005a). Dropout rates in the united states.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005c). Nces common core of data state-
level public-use data file on public school dropouts: School year 2004-05.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). An open letter to the
American people: A nation at risk. Washington, D.C.: Department of
Education.
National Governors Association. (1990). Politics, markets, and America's schools.
Washington, D.C: Brookings.
138
National Governors' Association. (2005). An action agenda for improving America's
high schools. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from
http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.9123e83a1f6786440ddcbeeb50
1010a0/?vgnextoid=4a17a32889da2010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
National Governors Association and the Center For Best Practices. (2006).
Implementing graduation counts. Washington, D.C.: National Governors'
Association.
Newmann, F., Wehlage, G. and Lamborn, S. (1992). The significance and sources of
student engagement. New York: Teachers College Press
Newmann, F., King, M. and Rigdon, M. (1997). Accountability and school
performance: Implications from restructuring schools. Harvard Educational
Review, 67(1), 41-74.
Noguera, P. (2006). From vision to reality. In Blankenstein, C., and Houston (ed.).
(Ed.), Engaging every learner.Thousand Oaks: AASA.
Noguera, P. and Akon, A. (2000). The significance of race in the racial gap in
academic achievement. The Nation
Northouse, P. (2004). Leadership theory and practice (Third ed.). Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Ogbu, J. (1990). Minority education in comparative perspective. The Journal of
Negro Education, 59(1), 45 - 57.
Onwuegbuzie, A. (2000). On becoming a bi-researcher: The importance of
combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies., National
meeting of National Academy of Educational Researchers. Pointe Verde,
Florida: National Academy of Educational Researchers (NAER).
Orfield, G.et al. (2005). Dropouts in California: Confronting the graduation rate
crisis (Dropouts). Cambridge: Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.
Organization for Economic Cooporatiion and Development, E. A. A. G. (2004).
United States trails most countries in high school graduation rates. Retrueved
on Januar 20, 2008 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/17855718/UAE-Digest-
Jun-06
Pecora, P., Kessler, R., Williams, J., and O‘Brien, K. (2005). The northwest foster
care alumni studies. Seattle: Casey Family Programs.
139
Peyton, D. (1995). Time management and educational reform. Directions in
Language & Education, 1(6).
Pinkus, L. (2006). Who's counted? Who's counting: Understanding high school
graduation rates. Washington, D.C.: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Pretti-Frontczak, K. (1999). Building curriculum and assessment around standards.
High School Magazine, 6(5), 14-19.
Public Schools of North Carolina. (2007). Nc releases first four-year cohort
graduation rate. In Instruction, D. o. P. (Ed.): State Board of Education
Rarick, E. and Robinson, N. (2006). Voters duck the tough issue, California Policy
Inbox: University of California.
Raywid, M. (1998) Current literature on smallschools. Charleston, WV: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
Reich, R. (2006). Equality and adequacy in the state's provision of education:
Mapping the conceptual landscape. Palo Alto: Stanford University.
Reyna, V. (2002, February 6). Scientifically based research. Paper presented at the
The Meaning of Scientifically Based Resea, Washington, D.C.
Roithmayr, D. (2005). Locked in segregation. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and
the Law, 12(957).
Rosenthal, L. (2007). How important is school size? Retrieved December 10, 20
Rufo-Lignos, P. and Richards, C. (2003). Emerging forms of school organizations.
Teachers College Record, 105(5), 753-781.
Sable, J., Gaviola, N. and Hoffman, L. (2007). Numbers and rates of public high
school dropouts: School year 2004-05. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Education.
School Finance Working Group. (2006). California school finance working group
notes. Sacramento: California Assembly Woking roup
Schwartz, A. and Steifel, L. (2006). Is there a nativity gap? New evidence on the
academic performance of immigrant students." Institute for Education and
Social Policy.
140
Schwarzenegger, A. (2008). State of the state. Improving Student Achievement With
Stronger Accountability And Greater Transparency Retrieved March 23,
2008, from http://gov.ca.gov/sots/text/education
Shanahan, M., Erickson, L. And Bauer, D. (2005). One hundred years of knowing:
The changing science of adolescence, 1904 and 2004. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 15(4), 383-394.
Shernoff, D., Csilkszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., and Shernoff, E.S. (2003).
Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow
theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158-176.
Silva, E. (2007). On the clock: Rethinking the way schools use time. Washington,
D.C.: Education Sector.
Simple science difficult for urban students to grasp. (2006). Education Week.
Sizer, T. (1987). Horace‘s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school.
New York: Mariner Books.
Snyder, T., Ed. (1993). 120 years of american education: A statistical portrait.
Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.
Standard and Poors. (2005). Schoolmatters, a service of standard and poor's.
Retrieved February 24, 2007, from http://www.schoolmatters.com
Stanton-Salazar, R. andSpina, S. U. (2005). Adolescent peer networks as a context
for social and emotional support. Youth & Society, 36(4), 379-417.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. A. S., S. U. (2005). Adolescent peer networks as a context for
social and emotional support. Youth & Society, 36(4), 379-417.
Stecher, B. and Kirby, S. N. (2004). Organizational improvement and accountability:
Lessons for education from other sectors. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
Stoops, N. (2007). A half-century of learning: Historical census statistics on
educational attainment in the united states, 1940 to 2000. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Census Bureau.
Stringer, E. T. (1999). Action research (Second ed.). Thousand Oaks, California:
Sage Publications.
141
Trochim, M. (2006). Qualitative measures. Retrieved on January 20, 2008 frowww.
socialresearchmethods. net
Tucker, A. (1993). Goals 2000: Stifling grass roots education reform. Washington,
D.C.: The Heritage Foundation.
Tucker, S. (1996). Benchmarking: A guide for educators. Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin Press.
Useem, E. and Balfanz, R. (2002, Winter) Comprehensive district reform:
Philadelphia‘s grand experiment. Benchmarks, 4(1).
U.S. Department of Education. (2005). Comprehensive school reform awards
database. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from www.sedl.org/csr//awards.html
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2004). The implementation of the
accountability provisions of the no child left behind act: A state perspective.
Retrieved June 11, 2006, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/el/le/wp.asp
U.S. Census Bureau. (2007). A half-century of learning: Historical census statistics
on educational attainment in the united states, 1940 to 2000. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
U.S. Department of Education. (2005). Comprehensive school reform awards
database. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from www.sedl.org/csr//awards.html
Uekawa®, K.et al. (2005, April 11-15). The role of social capital in
comprehensiveschool reform. Paper presented at the Educational Research
Association, Montreal, Canada.
United States Census Bureau. (2007). Comparison of earnings and educational
achievement.
United States Department of Education. (2003). No child left behind: A desktop
reference. In Education, D. o. (Ed.): United States Department of Education.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2004). The implementation of the
accountability provisions of the no child left behind act: A state perspective.
Retrieved June 11, 2006, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/el/le/wp.asp
Verstegen, D. (1990). Education fiscal policy in the reagan administration.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(4), 355-373.
142
Wahlberg, H. and Bast, J. (2003) Education and capitalism: How overcoming our
fear of markets and and economics can improve America's schools. Stanford,
CA: Hoover Institution Press.
Wasley, P.et al. (2000). Small schools: Great strides. A study of new small schools
in chicago. Chicago: Bank Street College of Education.
Wentzel, K. R. A. W., A. (1998). Academic and social motivational influences on
students' academic performance. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2),
155-173.
Wohlstetter, P. (1991). Accountability mechanisms for state education reform: Some
organizational alternatives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis.
Wolanin, T. (2005). Higher education opportunities for foster youth: A primer for
policymakers. Washington, D.C.: The Institute for Higher Education.
Wood, W. (1925). Early vision of semple, swett realized in broad, firm educational
system. Retrieved January 8, 2007
Woods, E. (1995). Reducing the dropout rate. Retrieved March10, 2007, from
www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c017.html
Woods, E. G. (1995). Reducing the dropout rate. Retrieved March10, 2007, from
www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c017.html
World Bank. (2006). World development report. New York: United Nations.
World Future Society. (2007). The 2007 outlook report, The Futurist: World Future
Society.
Yazzie-Mintz, E. (2007). Voices of students on engagement. Bloomington: Indiana
University Center for Evaluation & Education Policy.
Zapf, J.et al. (2006). Education policy brief (No. 6). Bloomington: Indinan
University.
Zeldin, S. (2005). Intergenerational relationships and partnerships in community
programs: Purpose, practice, and directions for research. Journal of
Community Psychology Special Youth-Adult Relationships in Community
Programs: Diverse Perspectives on Good Practices, 33(1), 1-10.
143
Ziersch, A., Baum, F., Macdougall, C. and Putland, C. (2005). Neighbourhood life
and social capital: The implications for health. Social Science & Medicine,
60(1), 71-86.
144
APPENDIX A
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools
Suggested personnel to interview: Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent of
Educational Services, Principals, Assistant Principals of Instruction, School Board
Members, Counselors, Teachers, Support staff, Parent groups and community
groups, Extra-curricular Activities Leaders (minimum of 5 interviews)—maybe
focus group or department chairpersons or during a designated prep period.
Questions:
Tell me about this school/school district
What are you most proud of at this school/school district? What areas
would you like to improve?
What is the vision or mission of the school? Are there common goals in
which all stakeholders are focusing upon? If so, please tell me about
them.
What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement at
your school/school district?
What role do you feel student engagement (defined by cohort group)
contributes to student achievement at your school/school district?
What do you feel are the strengths of the school/school district?
Would you consider your school/school district high performing? Why
or why not? If so, how?
Is your school/school district unique? If so, how?
How does the school/school district prepare students beyond high school?
145
APPENDIX B
SURVEY OF HIGH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS REGARDING STUDENT
ENGAGEMENT
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools
This survey asks questions about how you perceive the high school experience for
the students at your high school. The information provided by these surveys will be
compiled to be shared with site and district stakeholders. Thank you for your
thoughtful responses.
1. What areas do you supervise?
2. Are you _____ Female ______ Male
3. What is your racial or ethnic identification? (Mark all that apply.)
______American Indian/other Native American
______Asian American or Pacific Islander
______Black/African American
______White
______Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin
______Other, specify: ___________
______Prefer not to respond
4. Is English the main language used in the majority of your students‘ homes?
_____ Yes _____ No _____ I do not know
5. Do the majority of your students have a computer with Internet access at
home?
____ Yes ____ No ____ I do not know
6. During this school year, about how many writing assignments are students
given?
0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+
a. Written papers/reports of more than 5 pages
b. Written papers/reports of 3 to 5 pages
c. Written papers/reports of fewer than 3 pages
146
7. How much reading are students assigned in a typical school week?
# of hours of assigned reading
___0 ___1 ___2-3 ___4-5 ___6-7 ____8-10 ____11+
8. During this school year, how often do teachers utilized strategies to
encourage all students to participate in class?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
9. During this school year, how often are students given prompt, personal
feedback on assignments?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
10. School safety is clearly a priority on this campus?
____I agree ____I disagree
For numbers 11- 21, check the response that best identifies the extent to which this
high school emphasizes the skill or learning activity mentioned.
11. Students must spend a lot of time studying and on school work.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
12. Students are provided the support needed to succeed in school.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
13. Students are encouraged to participate in school events and activities
(athletics, music, etc.).
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
14. Students are encouraged to get involved in school leadership and governance.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
15. All adults on campus treat students fairly.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
16. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to learn
work-related skills.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
17. Students are encouraged to write effectively.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
147
18. Students are encouraged and provided the support to use information
technology.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
19. Students are encouraged and provided opportunities to solve real-world
problems.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
20. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to develop
clear, sequential career goals and prepare for appropriate post-secondary
education or training.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
21. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to make their
community a better place.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
22. What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement?
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
148
APPENDIX C
SURVEY OF HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS REGARDING STUDENT
ENGAGEMENT
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools
This survey asks questions about how you perceive the high school experience for
the students at your high school. The information provided by these surveys will be
compiled to be shared with site and district stakeholders. Thank you for your
thoughtful responses.
1. What subject area do you teach? ________________________________
2. Which category represents most of the classes you teach?
_____ General/Regular _____Special Education
_____ Remedial _____Honors/College Prep
_____Career/Career Technical Education
3. Are you _____Female ______Male
4. What is your racial or ethnic identification? (Mark all that apply.)
___American Indian/other Native American ___Asian American or Pacific Islander
___Black/African American ___White
___Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin ___Other, please specify: ___________
___Prefer not to respond
5 Is English the main language used in the majority of your students‘ homes?
_____Yes _____No _____I do not know
6. Do the majority of your students have a computer with Internet access at
home?
____Yes ____No ____I do not know
7. During this school year, about how many writing assignments have you
given?
0-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11+
a. Written papers/reports of more than 5 pages
b. Written papers/reports of 3 to 5 pages
c. Written papers/reports of fewer than 3 pages
149
8. How much reading do you assign in a typical school week?
# of hours of assigned reading
____0 ____1 ____2-3 ____4-5 ____6-7 ____8-10 ____11+
9. During this school year, how often have you utilized strategies to encourage
all students to participate in class?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
10. During this school year, how often have you given prompt, personal feedback
to students on assignments?
____Very often ____Frequently ____Sometimes ____Never
11. School safety is clearly a priority on this campus?
____I agree ____I disagree
For numbers 12-22, fill in the response that best identifies the extent to which this
high school emphasizes the skill or learning activity mentioned.
12. Students must spend a lot of time studying and on school work.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
13. Students are provided the support needed to succeed in school.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
14. Students are encouraged to participate in school events and activities
(athletics, music, etc.).
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
15. Students are encouraged to get involved in school leadership and governance.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
16. All adults on campus treat students fairly.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
17. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to learn
work-related skills.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
18. Students are encouraged to write effectively.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
150
19. Students are encouraged and provided the support to use information
technology.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
20. Students are encouraged and provided opportunities to solve real-world
problems.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
21. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to develop
clear, sequential career goals and prepare for appropriate post-secondary
education or training.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
22. Students are encouraged and provided meaningful opportunities to make
their community a better place.
____Very much ____Quite a bit ____Some ____Very little
23. What are the factors that you feel contribute to student achievement?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
151
APPENDIX D
DOCUMENTS
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools
How we would identify high performing schools?
API score
Similar School Ranking
What do we need to know?
CAHSEE passage rate
Discipline (suspensions, expulsions, rewards)
School sponsored activities
Attendance
Graduation rates
Student Demographics (SES, free/reduced lunch, mobility, ELL)
Parent education level
Course grades (GPA)
How would we find this information?
California Department of Education (Data Quest- http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/)
WASC Report- Self study report & recommendations
School Accountability Report Card
District Website
School Website
School Handbook
Student/Parent Handbook
152
APPENDIX E
OBSERVATION LOG
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Impacting Student Achievement at Urban High Schools
Date: ________________________________________
Page ________ of ________
School Class Leadership Meetings
School
Culture
Curriculum &
Instruction
Leadership Student
Engagement
Additional
Observations
153
APPENDIX F
HIGH SCHOOL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
154
155
156
157
APPENDIX G
GUIDE TO CALCULATING DROPOUT RATES
The following was the 2004 guidance provided to California school districts in
calculating dropout rates: [The student]
1. Was enrolled in grades 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 at some time during the previous
school year AND left school prior to completing the school year AND has not
returned to school as of Information Day; OR, 2. Did not begin attending the next
grade (7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12) in the school to which they were assigned or in which
they had pre-registered or were expected to attend by Information Day. (CDE, 2004)
(electronic source accessed online at the CDE web site on December 4, 2007 -
dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/gls_drpcriteria.asp)
In June 2007, continuing its own research, the CDE chose to revisit how to calculate
graduation and dropout rates in the following manner:
Dropout Guidelines for October 2007 CBEDS
The California Department of Education (CDE) defines a dropout for the October
2007 CBEDS data collection as a person who meets the following criteria:
1) Was enrolled in grades seven through twelve at some time during the 2006-07
school year AND left school prior to completing the 2006-07 school year OR
2) Successfully completed the 2005-06 school year but did not begin attending the
next grade (seven through twelve) in the school to which he or she was assigned or
in which he or she had pre-registered or was expected to attend during the 2006-07
school year; AND,
3) Is not enrolled and attending school as of Information Day, 2007.
Exclusionary Condition The student is not a dropout if he or she meets any of the
conditions noted below:
Example 1:
The student was enrolled in grades seven through twelve at some time during the
2006-07 school year AND left school prior to completing the 2006-07 school year.
An example of this would be a student who started school at the beginning of the
2006-07 school year but stopped attending in February 2007 and is still not enrolled
as of Information Day, 2007. If the student does not meet any criteria in the
158
"Exclusionary Conditions" section, then this student is reported as a dropout on the
October 2007 CBEDS.
Example 2:
The student successfully completed the 2005-06 school year but did not begin
attending the next grade (seven through twelve) in the school to which he or she was
assigned or in which he or she had pre-registered or was expected to attend during
the 2006-07 school year DS.
Example 3:
Another example would be the student who successfully completed grade ten during
the 2005-06 school year, but did not attend grade eleven in the school they were
expected in 2006-07. If the student does not meet any of the "Exclusionary
Conditions" on Information Day, report this student as a 2006-07 dropout in grade
eleven on the October 2007 CBEDS.
Transfers to Adult Education Programs
Students under the age of 21 who enroll in adult education programs during the
2006-07 school year are to be counted as dropouts unless the school system remains
responsible for the student. In that case, it is the high school's responsibility to check
the status of those students on Information Day, October 2007. At that time, the
following determination should be made:
The high school does not count students as dropouts if:
Districts are responsible for determining the status of their "no-show" students. ‗No-
shows‘ are students who completed any of grades six through eleven during the
2005-06 school year but who did not begin attending the next grade in the school to
which they were assigned or in which they had pre-registered or were expected to
attend in the fall of 2006. It is important to verify if ‗no-shows‘ are dropouts or
merely attending a school other than the school they were expected to attend. If you
establish that a fall 2006 no-show student assigned to your school is a dropout, you
are responsible for reporting that student as a dropout on the October 2007 CBEDS
report.
Dropouts enrolled in ‗upgraded secondary‘ or ‗adults in kindergarten through grade
twelve programs‘ should be counted in the grade closest to their age group.
(CDE, 2007; initially accessed on December 15, 2007
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/dropoutguide.asp last modified: Tuesday, June 19,
2007 )
Dr. Joel Rabin, administrative analyst in the Fresno Unified School District‘s
superintendent‘s office felt there were authentic causal factors for the confusing
159
definitions. The factors most frustrating for Dr. Rabin included unaccounted for
factors such as:
Researchers can't track students over time
Researchers don't agree on the definition for a freshman or senior (some use
credits to determine status while others use year in school). Therefore,
researchers create estimates based on enrollment and dropout counts (Rabin
& Calhoun, 2007).
Further assistance has been developed by the CDE in the form of a checklist to help
schools and districts determine if a student has truly dropped out.
Researchers can't account for students who leave one school and enroll elsewhere.
Researchers don't agree on whether to look at dropout rates for a single year or over
a four-year period.
The following is a checklist to assist in determining if a student is a dropout:
A Student Who Meets the Definition of a Dropout AND Report on
2006 SIF as
Dropout
1. Graduated, received high school diploma, GED, or CHSPE
certificate
NO
2. Special education student who has completed an individualized
education program (IEP) or received a certificate of completion
NO
3. Transferred to and is attending any public or private educational
institution and is in a program leading toward a high school
diploma or its equivalent (exception: adult education programs)
NO
4. Died NO
5. Has not graduated, has not completed an approved program, has
not died, and, has not completed an approved program, has not
died, and is not known to be in an educational program leading
toward a high school diploma or its equivalent
YES
6. Completed four years of high school, has not graduated or
received a GED or CHSPE certificate, and is not known to be in an
educational program leading toward a high school diploma or its
equivalent
YES
7. Was suspended or expelled and is not known to be in an
educational program leading toward a high school diploma or its
equivalent
YES
8. Was incarcerated, in the armed forces, in the Job Corps, or in the
Peace Corps and is not known to be in a secondary educational
program
YES
9. Left school to get married YES
160
10. Moved out of district or out of state and is not known to be in
an educational program leading toward a high school diploma or its
equivalent.
YES
11. Was reported as a dropout on a CBEDS School Information
Form in any year prior to October 2006, re-enrolled in school since
dropping out, subsequently left school, has not graduated or
completed an approved program, and is not known to be in an
educational program leading toward a high school diploma or its
equivalent.
YES
12. District placed the student in an adult program, but has no
verification that the student is enrolled and attending the adult
school
YES
13. Has an illness, verified as legitimate NO
14. Is planning to enroll late (e.g. extended family vacation,
seasonal work)
NO
15. Was suspended or expelled and the term of suspension or
expulsion is not yet over
NO
16. Was expelled with no option to return YES
17. Was expelled and enrolled in another school and/or district NO
18. Completed an individualized education programs (special
education)
NO
Even with the federal government‘s attempt to promote uniform definitions for
dropout rates, confusion remains as to the actual national rate at which high school
students graduate or dropout from state-to-state (NGA, 2003). This universal
calculation may be hampered by the different ages at which states require teenagers
to leave school.
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study
PDF
A case study of an outperforming urban high school: the relational pattern between student engagement and student achievement in a magnet high school in Los Angeles
PDF
Factors which may contribute to academic achievement in an outperforming urban high school with a career technical education curriculum
PDF
A case study to determine what perceived factors, including student engagement, contribute to academic achievement in a high performing urban high school
PDF
A study of an outperforming urban high school and the factors which contribute to its increased academic achievement with attention to the contribution of student achievement
PDF
Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study
PDF
Student engagement in a high-performing urban high school: a case study
PDF
A case study of factors related to a high performing urban charter high school: investigating student engagement and its impact on student achievement
PDF
Student engagement in high performing urban high schools: a case study
PDF
Factors contributing to the high performance of an urban high school
PDF
Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school
PDF
A case study of factors related to an outperforming urban charter high school
PDF
Outperforming nontraditional urban school: a success case study
PDF
A case study of student engagement in a high performing urban continuation high school
PDF
Student engagement in an outperforming urban school as measured through cognitive, behavioral, and emotional indicators
PDF
A case study of an outperforming urban magnet high school
PDF
Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs
PDF
Factors that contribute to high and low performing Vietnamese American high school students
PDF
Outperforming expectations: a case study of an urban high school
PDF
Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement
Asset Metadata
Creator
Hernández, José Ignacio
(author)
Core Title
Factors that may lead to an urban high school‘s outperforming status: a case study of an institution‘s achievement in the age of accountability
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
09/26/2009
Defense Date
08/25/2009
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
academic effectiveness,academic engagement in a California urban outperforming high school,California urban high school outperforming similar high schools,culture of resilience and engagement,drop-out factory,effectiveness and student resiliency,factors that may contribute to an urban high school's outperformance,graduation rates,graduation rates and standardization,High School Survey of Student Engagement 2008 results in a California urban outperforming high school,increased effectiveness,No Child Left Behind and the age of accountability,OAI-PMH Harvest,obsolecence and the need for educational standardization,outperformance,student engagement,student engagement and student achievement
Place Name
California
(states)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Gothold, Stuart E. (
committee chair
), Hocevar, Dennis J. (
committee member
), Stowe, Kathy Huisong (
committee member
)
Creator Email
jihernan@usc.edu,jose5673@sbcglobal.net
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2611
Unique identifier
UC1122229
Identifier
etd-HERNANDEZ-3240 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-256733 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2611 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-HERNANDEZ-3240.pdf
Dmrecord
256733
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Hernández, José Ignacio
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
academic effectiveness
academic engagement in a California urban outperforming high school
California urban high school outperforming similar high schools
culture of resilience and engagement
drop-out factory
effectiveness and student resiliency
factors that may contribute to an urban high school's outperformance
graduation rates
graduation rates and standardization
High School Survey of Student Engagement 2008 results in a California urban outperforming high school
increased effectiveness
No Child Left Behind and the age of accountability
obsolecence and the need for educational standardization
outperformance
student engagement
student engagement and student achievement