University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lesson from a high performing high poverty urban elementary school

(USC Thesis Other)

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lesson from a high performing high poverty urban elementary school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content
SCHOOL-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ELEMENTS OF
EFFECTIVE CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION:
LESSON FROM A HIGH PERFORMING
HIGH POVERTY URBAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

by

Kathleen Knox Dryden

___________________________________________________________

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

August 2008

Copyright 2008 Kathleen Knox Dryden

ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank all those who have supported me throughout the three
years of the Doctoral program. I am especially grateful for the support and guidance
provided by my chair, Dr. Sylvia Rousseau. I am also grateful for the support and
input provided by the other two committee members Dr. Kathy Stowe and Dr. David
Marsh.
A special thank you goes to the administration and staff at Lincoln
Elementary School for their help with this study. I truly appreciate the time and
thought you invested in this study.
Most importantly, an extraordinary thank you goes to my family for putting
up with my piles of research documents and seemingly endless hours in “the cave”
writing. To my husband, Bill who encouraged me and took over cooking dinner, but
kept me centered. To Chris, Courtney, and Becky for keeping me motivated. And
Beau and Maddie for their constant companionship by my feet as I read and wrote.
This truly was a team effort. Thank you one and all!

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS …………………………………………………. ii
LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………….. iv
LIST OF FIGURES ……………………………………………………….. v
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………….. vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY …………………. 1
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE …………………… 31
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY …………………... 77
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ……… 93
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ………………………….. 165
REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………. 192
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………….. 205

iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Public School Enrollment in the Southwest: 1970 to 1998 …………. 8
Table 3-1: Process of Data Analysis …………………………………………… 87
Table 3-2: Relationship of Data Collection Instruments to Research
Questions ……………………………………………………………………….. 90

Table 3-3: Topics Addressed by each Research Question and the Method of
Data Collection …………………………………………………………………. 91

Table 4-1: Lincoln Elementary API from 2002 to 2007 ……………………….. 97
Table 4-2: Percent of Students at or Above Proficient on the 2007 CST ………. 99
Table 4-3: Teaching Staff Stability ……………………………………………. 119
Table 4-4: Teaching Experience in Westham School District ………………… 120

v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Theoretical Framework ……………………………………………. 80
Figure 4-1: School, District-wide Elementary Schools, and State-wide
Elementary Schools Academic Performance Index (API) Scores 2003-2007 ….. 97

Figure 4-2: School-wide percent of students at or Above Proficient in
English Language Arts and Math: AYP Data 2003-2007 ……………………… 98

Figure 4-3: Percent of Sub-groups at or Above Proficient in English
Language Arts ………………………………………………………………….. 100

Figure 4-4: Percent sub-groups at or above proficient in Math: 2003-2007 ……. 101
Figure 4-5: Percent of Ethnic Sub-groups scoring at Proficient or Advanced
on English Language Arts on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007 ……… 102

Figure 4-6: Percent of Ethnic Sub-groups scoring at Proficient or Advanced
on Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007 …………………. 103

Figure 4-7: English Learners scoring at Proficient or Advanced on English
Language Arts and Mathematics on the California Standards
Test: 2003-2007 ………………………………………………………………… 104

Figure 4-8: Percent of English Learners Reclassified: 2003-2007 ……………… 105
Figure 4-9: Percent of Students with Disabilities scoring at Proficient or
Advanced on English Language Arts and Mathematics on the California
Standards Test: 2003-2007 ……………………………………………………… 106

Figure 4-10: Percent of Males and Females Scoring at or above Proficient
or Advanced in English Language Arts on the California Standards
Test: 2003-2007 …………………………………………………………………. 109

Figure 4-11: Percent of Males and Females Scoring at or above Proficient or
Advanced in Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007 ………. 111

Figure 4-12: Number of males and females who received special education
services: 2005-2006 through 2006-2007 ………………………………………... 113

Figure 4-13: Actual Attendance Rate 2002-2003 through 2006-2007 ………….. 113

vi
Figure 4-14: Percent of sixth graders scoring at or above proficient in
English language arts 2005-2006 to 2006-2007 ………………………………. 114

Figure 4-15: Percent of sixth graders scoring at or above proficient in math
2005-2006 to 2006-2007 ………………………………………………………. 115

Figure 4-16: Actual Attendance Rate for Villa, Park, and Green Middle and
Lincoln Elementary Schools ………………………………………………….. 116

Figure 4-17: Comparison of number of suspensions in three ethnically similar
middle schools: 2003-2007 ……………………………………………………. 117

Figure 4-18: Number of student suspensions at Lincoln Elementary
School: 2003-2007 …………………………………………………………….. 118

vii
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to learn about the structures and systems that
support high levels of performance in high poverty urban schools serving large
populations of students of color. In this case study of an urban elementary school in
the Los Angeles area of Southern California four research questions focused on the
trend of achievement among students of color, the identification of organizational
structures and systems that supported high levels of student achievement, the
classroom implementation of the identified structures and systems, and the school’s
construct of race. The results of the study indicated five emergent systems worked in
concert to support high levels of student achievement.
The principal was a strong and knowledgeable instructional leader. The
principal was very involved in all facets of the school and highly visible on campus.
Classroom observations and professional development focused on the
implementation of standards-based instruction and effective instructional
pedagogies. The mutual respect between adults and students was evident in
classrooms and on the playground. All site-based instructional decisions were
grounded on data from a variety of student assessments. A comparison of assessment
data from students who attended sixth grade at the elementary school and students
who went to middle school for sixth grade revealed that the students who stayed in
the elementary school environment achieved at markedly higher levels on high
stakes assessments than students who transitioned to the middle school for sixth
grade.

viii
As school districts seek to find ways to sustain high levels of elementary
school student achievement as students transition to middle school, the findings and
conclusions from this study can provide helpful information that may prove effective
for district and school administrators and classroom teachers working to support and
improve middle school student achievement. Further research is needed in the
middle school setting to determine how the successful structures and systems of the
elementary school can be incorporated into the middle school culture.

1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
Schools are complex organizations designed to prepare students to become
productive, responsible members of both the local and global community. To that
end schools are charged with determining structures and implementing systems to
educate all students effectively, regardless of race, ethnicity, or disability.
Chief Justice Earl Warren in the Supreme Court decision on Brown v. the
Board of Education (1954) stated that children who are denied the opportunity of an
education may not reasonably be expected to succeed. When states provide
education, it is a right that must be made available to all on an equal basis. In the
United States “public education is viewed as a birthright …that leads to an educated
electorate without which there would be no viable democracy” (Yell, Rogers, and
Rogers, 1998, p. 219). All children, regardless of race or disability, are entitled to
receive a free and appropriate public education (Education for All Handicapped
Children, 1975).
In recent decades the quality of education has come under close scrutiny in
this country. In 2002 the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001(NCLB) required that all
subgroups (e.g. special education students, minority students, and English language
learners) demonstrate grade level proficiency on annual state assessments in English
language arts and math by 2014. When the data from these assessments was
disaggregated by select subgroups there was ample evidence that overwhelming
numbers of low income, minority students were not meeting the goal of proficiency.

2
This focus on achievement by all subgroups highlighted the fact that many schools
were not meeting the instructional needs of their entire student populations. While
the current emphasis on examining achievement by all groups of students is
relatively recent, the historical discrepancy between White students and African
American or Latino students in academic performance existed even prior to Plessy v.
Ferguson (1896).
A general decline in the overall achievement of students in the United States
was made public in a report published by the National Commission on Excellence. A
Nation at Risk (1983) illuminated the dismal state of academic achievement by all
students in this country. The report stated “declines in educational performance are
in large part the result of disturbing inadequacies in the way the educational process
itself is often conducted” (National Commission on Educational Excellence, 1983, p.
1).
The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS 1995)
revealed results from assessment data in math and science of fourth, eighth, and
twelfth grade students from 23 countries. While the fourth grade students from the
United States scored above the international average in science and math; the twelfth
grade scores were among the lowest (NCES, 1999a, 1999b). When he was informed
of the results from the TIMSS report, President Clinton declared “[t]here is
something wrong with the system and it is our generation’s responsibility to fix it.
You cannot blame the schoolchildren” (cited in Asimov, 1998).

3
In 1969 the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) started
evaluating student work samples from private and public schools. In a review of
reading, science, and mathematics scores from 1971 through 1999 the NAEP found
that overall the scores remained the same. However, a longitudinal review of the data
for different subgroups revealed that the achievement gap between White and
African-American and Latino students narrowed in the 1980s, but widened in the
1990s (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2000c; 2003a). A 2003 study by
the Education Trust showed that poor, fourth grade Latino and African-American
students were about two years behind White students at the same grade. In eighth
grade the gap widened to three years, growing more pronounced through twelfth
grade. Factors that contribute to the continued discrepancy in achievement between
groups of students can be related to the manner in which their ancestors arrived in
this country. The present scrutiny of achievement gaps forces people to view
education as a precious resource that is dispersed differently to different students
depending on their ethnicity or socio-economic status (Stanton-Salazar, 1997;
Loveless, 2001).

A Nation of Immigrants
People come to the United States from different parts of the world bringing
diverse educational experiences, work related skills, and social capital. These
variations may result in disparities in the academic performance of students of color
or “unpreferred” minorities . The United States is a nation of immigrants. People

4
arrive in the country from a variety of homelands, under a variety of circumstances.
The entry point of immigrants affects their absorption into society (Crosnoe, 2006).
Those immigrants who arrive with needed job skills and higher levels of education
are more likely to be assimilated into more advanced groups of society resulting in
access to safer neighborhoods, better schools, more job options, and better connected
social contacts leading to increased amounts of social capital. Those entering the less
advantaged segments of society will not be able to easily access the assistance and
information that provide advantages to the middle and upper classes regarding career
and educational options. This group of immigrants tends to lack the upward mobility
of those minorities able to initially enter society at a higher level due to higher
amounts of social capital (Crosnoe, 2006).
The country of origin influences an immigrant’s accessible options.
Immigrants from less developed countries tend to come from rural backgrounds,
have more limited job skills and are less proficient with English. They are more
likely to have entered the country illegally and be non-white. Immigrants from more
developed countries, or less developed nations with a history of sending capable,
well-educated recruits to the United States, bring with them greater resources;
training, education, residency authentication, or language skills. This second group is
more likely to adapt to and be accepted by the dominant society and have a greater
chance of high academic achievement, socioeconomic success, and upward mobility
(Crosnoe, 2006; Ogbu, 1998).

5
Ogbu (1992, 1998) states there are two groups of minorities: voluntary and
involuntary, or “unpreferred”. Voluntary minorities arrived in this country by their
own choice in search of a better life. Conversely, involuntary or “unpreferred”
minorities are people who were brought here by White Americans as slaves or had
otherwise been colonized as were the Latino people. The arrival status of a minority
may influence members’ perception and reactions to the educational system and
mainstream society at large, as well as the perceptions held by the dominant culture
of the various minorities (Ogbu and Simmons, 1998). Involuntary minorities, Blacks
and Latino, generally believe that the discrimination which has existed for
generations has become an enduring quality of current society as evidenced by the
continuing inequalities between high poverty urban schools with large concentrations
of students of color and schools in the middle class suburbs (Ogbu, 1992). Many
students of color attend schools based on European-American models that reflect
White, middle class values and beliefs. These schools often fail to meet the needs of
students of color. As a result of this failure many students of color make the
erroneous judgment that they are not capable of academic success and become
hopeless due to constant poor performance. The potent combination of
discrimination by society through schools that fail to meet their needs and a life in an
impoverished community can influence students’ academic and social behavior.
Students who exist in this cycle of frustration may exhibit that frustration by acting
out or behaving in noncompliant ways resulting in increased referrals for special
education and drop-out rate (Gardner and Miranda, 2001).

6
Today’s schools reproduce many of the negative and positive features of our
society. The unequal power relations among various cultural and immigrant groups
in society are frequently reproduced in schools (Bartolome, 1994). Schools, as
institutions of society, tend to validate middle class values that act as obstacles
preventing minority students from accessing the general curriculum and amassing
social capital. Social Capital Theory focuses on the level and value of middle-class
structures of social support built into a student’s interpersonal network. These
network relationships are critical; they represent the connections students have to
people capable of sharing important and diversified resources. Social capital enables
some students to access the benefits of the mainstream social world and generate
valued resources (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Dika and Singh, 2002). Students who lack
social capital or who do not have the means to generate social capital may
experience great difficulty entering and participating in the cultural world of the
dominant culture. These students are dependent on schools as one of the few
institutions to provide them with opportunities to build interpersonal networks and to
learn to “decode the system” (Stanton-Salazar p. 33, 1997) in order to mitigate the
ongoing discrimination still present in schools and society.

Segregation
Prior to the Civil War, Blacks were provided the training necessary to
maintain a capable labor force, but denied an academic education or even basic
literacy. Following the Civil War many Blacks migrated to the North; however

7
public education was segregated just as in the South (Kluger, 1976). In 1871, State
Supreme Courts in Ohio and Indiana both ruled that separate schools were legal, if
the schools were equal (Stephan, 1980). In the Southwest, segregation of Mexican
American students into separate, inferior school facilities was the norm until the
early 1930s (Valencia, Menchaca, & Donato, 2002). Segregated schools reflected a
desire by the dominant White society to continue the status quo of people of color as
a subservient class. Restrictive housing covenants were implemented to maintain this
segregation (Stephan, 1980). In the early 1930s America plunged into an economic
depression. School funding was impacted by the nationwide crisis and funding
discrimination was transparent. The national average per-pupil spent was $99.00, but
in the South the average was only $13.00 or less for Black children (Thompson,
1974). Public schools were provided by the states, but those schools were not equal
or open to all students.
Public schools continue to offer different and unequal educational
opportunities to students today. Minority students attending urban schools
predominantly serving students of color experience higher rates of teacher turnover,
higher student-teacher ratios, and frequently lack physical resources, such as science
labs and other up to date facilities, commonly found in suburban schools (Valencia,
Menchaca, & Donato, 2002). Cultural or racial groups, most typically in schools
with a lack of equal resources, are the groups most likely to post the lowest
graduation rates. In the class of 2002; approximately 78% of White students

8
graduated with regular diplomas from public high schools, as compared to 52% of
Latino students and 56% of African American students (Greene and Winter, 2005).
Discrimination and the resulting segregation in education present in schools
today are not recent occurrences. Minorities have historically been subjected to
segregation, both de facto and de jure. The Supreme Court decision in the landmark
case of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) set the precedent for “separate, but equal”
facilities for Blacks and Whites; subsequently providing a legal basis for segregation
for the following 50 years. The effects of the “separate, but equal” mentality still
prevail and account in large part for the persistent disparities in student achievement
(Stephan, 1980, Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). These effects have been built into
the structures and systems of America’s schools. Valencia, Menchaca, and Donato
(2002) documented the decreasing percentage of White students attending public
schools in the Southwestern states from 1970 to 1998.

Table 1-1: Public School Enrollment in the Southwest: 1970 to 1998
Changes in percentages of White students attending public schools in Southwestern
states 1970-1998
State 1970 1980 1998
Change
1970-1980
Change
1980-1998
Change
1970-1998
Arizona 45.5 43.5 34.8 -2.0 -8.7 -10.7
California 54.4 35.9 22.3 -18.5 -13.6 -32.1
Colorado 56.8 59.0 49.0 2.2 -10.0 -7.8
New Mexico 36.9 32.6 28.9 -4.3 -3.7 -8.0
Texas 31.3 35.1 23.5 4.0 -11.6 -7.6
Source: Valencia, Menchaca, and Donato (2002, p 75, Table 3.3)

9
Education and the Courts
An 1896 ruling by the Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson determined the
legal outline for race relations until it was reversed in Brown v. Board of Education
(1954). The court’s ruling in Plessy laid the groundwork for the “separate, but equal”
doctrine that infiltrated all aspects of life: public transportation, schools, restaurants,
and hotels throughout the country (Gossett, 1965). In 1936 the Maryland court ruled
that the Maryland law school must admit Donald Murray, a Black man, because
Maryland did not have a separate law school for Blacks (Murray v. Maryland, 1936).
This was the first successful challenge to the separate, but equal law for public
schools (Stephan, 1980).
The “separate, but equal” doctrine was reversed by the Supreme Court in
1954 in its decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court’s ruling
included the determination that state sanctioned or required segregation based solely
on a person’s fixed characteristics (e.g. race, disability, or gender) was
unconstitutional as it violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment. This ruling opened the door for students with disabilities and students
of color to attend public schools by citing the stigmatizing effects, such as fewer
economic opportunities resulting from the denial of an appropriate education.
Segregation was now illegal, but the implementation of integration policies was left
up to the very states that implemented segregation; consequently ethnic
desegregation was very slow. Even more time passed before the segregation of
students with disabilities was actually addressed by the court system.

10
Poverty, Culture, and Achievement
The segregation that was prevalent in education also prevailed in other
sectors of American life. The effects of segregation are interrelated and permeated all
aspects of “unpreferred” minority members’ lives. Even though segregation was
declared illegal by the court system, Blacks and other “unpreferred” minorities were
still relegated to low paying jobs and poor quality housing in isolated neighborhoods.
Therefore the poverty rate among “unpreferred” minorities continued to be higher
than among Whites (Ogbu and Simmons, 1998). Poverty and education were
inextricably intertwined. Poverty and family income influence children’s ability to
perform and achieve in school. A family’s economic status affects their choice of
which neighborhood to live in, what they eat, health care, and priorities in daily
living. Preventive health care has become more critical as there are a
disproportionate number of African-American males identified in the special
education categories of deaf, blind or visually impaired and other health impairments
(Harry and Anderson, 1994).
Duration of poverty, especially during early childhood, also impacted
children’s scores on assessments of cognitive ability. Those children who lived in
ongoing poverty scored six to nine points lower on a variety of assessments than
children who never lived in poverty. Furthermore a study by the National
Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY), 1995 showed that the affects of long-term
poverty on measures of cognitive ability were markedly greater than the affects of
short-term poverty (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997). Research by NLSY

11
discovered that family poverty was also associated with problematic behavior;
however, children in long or short term poverty situations experienced emotional
problems with equal frequency or intensity. The study noted that the effects of
poverty on cognitive development were greater than emotional outcomes (Brooks-
Gunn and Duncan, 1997). The delayed cognitive development in children of long-
tem poverty was evident in research on fourth grade students who qualified for free
or reduced price lunches. Research on urban school achievement by fourth graders
showed a widening achievement gap between White and “unpreferred” minority
students; particularly unpreferred minority students who qualified for free or reduced
price meals (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997).
In addition to the influence of poverty on school performance, differences
between the culture of “unpreferred” minorities and the White American mainstream
culture of the school played a prominent role in student achievement. Crawford
(2004) suggests that the sociocultural implications of “unpreferred” minority
students’ lack of achievement are more significant than the linguistic factors.
Minority students bring understandings and cultural models of their “social realities”
(Ogbu, 1992, pg. 5) and familiar educational pedagogies to school that are equally
significant as those found within the school. However, the type of minority status,
voluntary or “unpreferred”, influences the school experience of the minority
students. Voluntary minority students may have initial challenges, such as language,
to deal with upon entering school; but their cultural belief that success in school will

12
be rewarded through later economic success sustains the students’ academic efforts
and persistence.
On the other hand, involuntary minority students may have a very different
school experience, as well as a different perspective on education and the long term
significance of school success. Involuntary minority communities tend to view
White, mainstream schools as perpetuators of societal conditions that deny equal
opportunities or rewards to minority students by means of academic tracking or job
ceilings; accordingly “unpreferred” minority students frequently experience more
long-lasting and greater difficulties with school learning and performance (Ogbu,
1992).
These difficulties in the schooling experienced by students of color and their
rejection of education as a means for social mobility contribute to behavior that is
often inaccurately and overly identified as eligible for special education services.
The implications of erroneous placement in special education are long term (Harry
and Anderson, 1994). Identified students are at greater risk for dropping out of
school and delinquent behavior (Stensrud, 2006).
Involuntary minority communities often view the learning of White
American culture and language as assimilating the culture of their “oppressors” or
“acting White” (Ogbu, 1992, p 10). Therefore the relationship between the school
and the home cultures of its students is a critical factor that can contribute to or
impair students’ academic performance (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). The hostile
sociocultural context of the school exacerbates the sense of alienation from school

13
that students of color often experience. Schools reflect the values and beliefs of the
White middle class and, thereby intentionally or unintentionally frequently demean
or reject the home cultures of students of color to further alienate these children. The
historical constructs of race that have been cultivated through segregation and
discrimination affect the attitudes of the mainstream society and schools toward the
cultures of “unpreferred” minorities. Schools are not perceived as inviting and
welcoming institutions by the very students they are required to serve (Ladson-
Billings, 1995a, 1995b; Valencia, Menchaca, & Donato, 2002).
There is no shortage of excuses for blaming students and their families for
poor student performance. Family background, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status
have been labeled as reasons for low levels of student achievement. While some of
these issues may place students at-risk for lower levels of achievement due to level
of family support available or challenges with English language, these factors are not
determinative predictors of academic achievement (Reeves, 2000). Reeves (2000,
2003) and the Education Trust (2003) studied high achieving, high poverty, urban
schools serving large concentrations of students of color. The students in those
schools demonstrated that they were able to meet high academic standards; 90
percent of students in Norfolk, Virginia met high performance standards on the
Virginia Standards of Learning test (Reeves, 2003).

14
The No Child Left Behind Act
Recently, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) put forth the expectation
that by the year 2014, 100 percent of students were expected to perform at a
minimally proficient levels in English language arts and math (NCLB, 2002). This
legislation required that schools’ scores on high stakes assessments used to
determine proficiency be disaggregated by predetermined subgroups: gender,
ethnicity, students qualifying for Title 1 funds, and students with special needs.
These disaggregated scores were also to be used as measures of school proficiency.
In this way, schools were held accountable for the academic proficiency of all
students. This change in policy provided a more detailed and in-depth view of the
actual effectiveness of the educational process, revealing the achievement gap
between minority students and their White, middle class peers. NCLB also focused
on the academic performance of students with disabilities. The Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) requirement highlighted the achievement gap between White and
Asian students’ performance and the performance of Latino, African-American,
Native American, and special needs students.
Despite the passage of laws such as NCLB specifically addressing the need to
educate all students, inequities continue to exist in the educational system. Students
who attend schools in high poverty urban neighborhoods frequently face a shortage
of resources, or work with out-of-date resources. Classes in high poverty, urban
schools are often taught by teachers with fewer years of experience than schools in
more affluent areas. Students of color, particularly African-American males,

15
attending high poverty, urban schools are at greater risk of identification as eligible
for special education services due to the cultural disparity between the school and
home influencing teachers’ judgment, as well as inadequate and discriminatory
assessment procedures (Harry and Anderson, 1994). The influence of less
experienced teachers and inadequate resources was illuminated by the more focused
scrutiny of students’ academic performance as required by NCLB.
The achievement gap experienced by students of color, who predominantly
attend schools in high poverty communities, emphasized the critical necessity for
equal distribution of resources to all schools. Issues of inferior educational
opportunities based on race and economic status are highly related to issues also
surrounding special education. A history of practices, based in erroneous constructs
of race and historical resistance to desegregation, contribute to massive neglect of
schools and neighborhoods with large concentrations of students of color located in
high poverty communities. The beliefs about students of color also resulting from
this history contribute to low expectations for students of color, who are typically
among the “unpreferred” or “involuntary” immigrant groups. Both of these effects
contribute to an overrepresentation of students of color in special education (Harry
and Anderson, 1994 Gardener and Miranda, 2001).

Structures and Systems that Support High Student Achievement
Despite historical practices of segregation and discrimination there are
schools that overcame these obstacles to deliver high student performance (Reeves,

16
2000, 2003). Elementary schools that incorporate structures and systems that monitor
instructional practices, promote student engagement, provide meaningful
professional development, and connect the home and school cultures foster students’
development of academic self-efficacy and social skills (Ogbu, 1992; Ladson-
Billings, 1995a, 1995b; Marks, 2000). Structures, such as the state content standards
or the required number of instructional days, are requirements imposed on the school
by an external authority (e.g. the California Department of Education, the federal
government or local school board). Structures may or may not effectively support
student achievement. Schools implement systems to put the externally imposed
structures into practice. Professional development that regularly integrates a review
and discussion of student assessment data to focus instructional planning is an
example of intertwined structures and systems.

Student Engagement as a Vehicle for Academic Achievement
Students who are actively engaged in their education, experience greater
cognitive growth and social development than students who are not engaged (Marks,
2000). Student engagement is positively related to a positive attitude toward school,
increased academic self-efficacy, and high school graduation rates (Marks, 2000). A
lack of personal connection to the school and cultural dissonance between the home
and school cultures may act as an obstacle to student engagement and reduce
students’ levels of cognitive and social growth. Students need schools and
classrooms that respect their culture and the social capital they bring to school. This

17
regard for the prior knowledge students have constructed within the sociocultural
context of their families and communities is a basis for engaging students as they
acquire new knowledge. In fact this process is expressed in Vygotsky’s (1987)
notion of sociocultural learning through Zones of Proximal Development.
Denigrating or ignoring students’ home culture in favor of the mainstream
culture of the school and society leads to cultural dissonance and thus the
disengagement of students from the learning experience (Ogbu, 1992; Stanton-
Salazar, 1997). The impact of this dissonance and lower levels of engagement is seen
in the low academic performance and over-representation of students of color in
special education. Schools where teachers capitalize on students’ strengths and prior
knowledge, building instruction on the students’ current knowledge are most likely
to engage students and reduce the number of erroneous referrals to special education
(Harry and Anderson, 1995). This positive relationship between students’ home
culture and the school culture occurs as a normal function of schools for students
from White middle class families (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Lack of student engagement can be attributed to a large extent to teachers’
lower expectations for students of color from high poverty backgrounds or students
with special needs; therefore teachers with low expectations respond less positively
to those same students for whom that personal connection to school is the most
critical. Discrimination, racism, and prejudice experienced by students of color or
students with special needs act as obstacles to school engagement (Ogbu, 1987;
Gutman & Midgley, 2000). Elementary schools that provide meaningful

18
professional development incorporate structures and systems that examine
instructional practices, promote student engagement, and connect the home and
school cultures demonstrate respect for all students. Students attending such
elementary schools are better prepared to successfully to transition to and absorb the
changes occurring in middle school. The potent influence of the combined effects of
poverty, cultural dissonance, and low levels of engagement and academic self-
efficacy on students’ academic performance in elementary school becomes even
more pronounced in students’ transition to middle school (Marks, 2000).

The Influence of Transition to Middle School on Student Achievement
In alignment with sociocultural theories of learning, students are dependent
upon cultural learning settings that respect and affirm their identities (Gallimore and
Goldenberg, 2001). However, upon transition to middle school students work with a
different teacher for each subject area and are less likely to connect with an adult and
more likely to experience greater dissonance, especially if the positive attitude
toward school was not developed during their elementary school experience.
Students’ positive attitude, as reflected in school success and enhanced self-efficacy,
was a predictor of levels of engagement, while race or ethnicity did not distinguish
levels of classroom engagement during instructional activities (Marks, 2000).
Therefore it is critical that elementary schools implement instructional pedagogies
and create school cultures that mitigate cultural dissonance and are supportive of all

19
students, empowering them to build positive attitudes toward school and establish
self-identities as “a learner” (Eccles and Midgley, 1989; Marks, 2000).
The transition from elementary to middle school is a critical period in a
student’s educational career. Middle schools are larger, both physically and in the
number of students than elementary schools. Less small group instruction and
individual attention occurs in middle school (Santrock, 2007). While students may
experience more independence, there is also the expectation of increased
responsibility for completing long term assignments. There is a heightened focus on
academic performance and achievement. This new middle school culture and
environment may cause entering students heightened anxiety and apprehension
regarding the transition (Ormrod, 2006). The changes in the school environment and
developmental needs of students can cause a dissonance between the student and the
middle school resulting in a decline in student performance and grades (Eccles and
Midgley, 1989, Eccles, Midgley, Buchanan, Flanagan, Mac Iver, Reuman, ad
Wigfield, 1993).
There are characteristics consistently identified in research studies of students
of color who were successful during elementary school, but do not maintain that
level of performance in middle school. Students in middle school are at higher risk
for a decline in performance due to an increased school emphasis on relative
academic ability and lack of supportive adult relationships. The disconnect between
the school culture and the students’ home culture may present additional challenges
to students’ academic performance and success (Gutman & Midgley, 2000). It is

20
important that elementary and middle schools collaborate to ensure that the
structures and systems that supported students in elementary school are replicated in
middle schools.
Stensrud (2006) identified social networks as a theme related to successful
transition from elementary to middle school. A study of elementary to middle school
transition found that students who had difficulty transitioning to middle school had
smaller social networks and few friends that developed from school activities. These
students were less likely to be involved in extracurricular activities and spent more
time at home alone. Students who made unsuccessful transitions described teachers
as unhelpful and not caring about them.
Ormrod (2006) found that minority students from high poverty, urban schools
were at high risk for difficult transitions through their school careers due to a variety
of factors. Students from high poverty backgrounds may feel that their home culture
and the school culture are completely unrelated. These same students may have less
access to positive adult role models, mentoring, and lower levels of social capital;
therefore, stable relationships with caring, supportive adults are especially important
(Gutman and Midgley, 1999). These factors, along with the increased emphasis on
competition, relative ability, and comparative performance negatively influence
“unpreferred” minority students who are more apt to be placed in lower level
academic programs than their European American, nonpoor classmates (Gutman and
Midgley, 1999).

21
Students who were identified as “successful transitioners” (Stensrud, 2006, p.
102) portrayed their social networks as generated of their own initiative and centered
on their personal activities and interests. These students reported beliefs that they
received more help from their teachers and had more positive relationships with
adults than reported by students experiencing difficulty with the transition.
“Successful transitioners” demonstrated positive social skills. They approached
teachers and other adults for help to attain goals. Forgan and Vaughn’s study of
typical students and students with learning disabilities revealed that student’s
perceptions of their academic and social abilities were potent indicators of how they
moved through the transition from elementary to middle school (2000).

Structures and Systems that Support Transition
There are structures and systems used in some elementary and middle schools
that support continued high performance by middle school students. Effective middle
schools provide support for academic achievement as well as the emotional, social
and personal developmental differences of incoming students (Ormrod, 2006). This
support is essential for all students as teachers in middle schools tend to be less
available to develop personal connections with students due to the number of classes
they teach during the instructional day. A lack of significant personal connections
between the student’s home or community culture and the school culture contributes
to the students’ feeling of alienation from the school and decreased school
performance.

22
Students who adopt behaviors that address and mitigate these common
concerns are more likely to experience successful transitions to middle school and
maintain higher levels of academic achievement (Schumacher, 1998). Some
students need more support than others in adopting behaviors that allow them to
experience a successful transition to middle school and maintain high levels of
achievement. Much of the need is based on the kind of preparation and support they
received in elementary school and on the degree of transition support provided by the
sending and receiving schools to ensure that the factors that supported them in
elementary school continue in middle school.
Although transition systems and structures help students reduce anxiety about
middle school, elementary schools’ major role is to ensure that students leave
elementary schools with their self-identities as learners intact, based on a
sociocultural setting that has affirmed their cultural backgrounds and assets.
Elementary schools with schoolwide structures and systems to implement culturally
relevant and responsive pedagogy in a rigorous academic curriculum will strengthen
students’ self-efficacy and ability to encounter the changes that come with middle
school. A school that has connected with students’ home and community cultures
and built positive teacher-student relationships has given students the support they
need to build new relationships in the middle school setting (Schumacher, 1998;
Ormrod, 2006). Although transition strategies are important, the main function of
the elementary school is to ensure that students leave elementary school equipped to
confront the challenges of middle school and to re-engage with the school setting.

23
Statement of the Problem
Public schools in the United States have produced varying levels of student
achievement, as defined by standardized assessments, throughout the past century.
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001(NCLB) requires that all students, regardless
of ability, gender or ethnicity, be proficient in English Language Arts and
Mathematics by 2014. Very few high poverty schools serving large populations of
students of color have met, or are expected to meet, this lofty goal. Those elementary
schools serving students of color who are achieving at high levels and who are on a
trajectory of meeting the goal established by NCLB must be studied to determine the
organizational structures, systems, and instructional approaches that support and
facilitate students’ academic performance in elementary school and into middle
school.
Frequently students achieve at higher academic levels in elementary school
than in middle school (Eccles and Midgley, 1989, Eccles, Midgley, Buchanan,
Flanagan, Mac Iver, Reuman, and Wigfield, 1993). The transition from elementary
to middle school is a critical period in a student’s educational career. There is ample
evidence that the performance of students of color in urban elementary schools
declines in middle school (Eccles and Midgley, 1989, Eccles, Midgley, Buchanan,
Flanagan, Mac Iver, Reuman, and Wigfield, 1993).
There are structures and systems in place in some high poverty urban
elementary schools that support schoolwide effective instruction and high academic
achievement increasing academic self-efficacy among students of color. What is not

24
known is which organizational structures and systems and instructional practices
result in maintained or increased student outcomes and how those specific structures
and systems can be generalized to other schools to sustain their students’ high
academic performance and successful transition from elementary to middle school.
All students regardless of ethnicity must have equal access to high quality instruction
in order to become responsible, contributing members of society. In order to expand
the number of high poverty schools with large concentrations of students of color
that produce high academic achievement, further research is needed to learn more
about the ways in which high performing urban elementary schools select and
implement structures and systems that support student achievement.
Purpose of the Study
This study will investigate the organizational structures and systems of a high
poverty urban elementary school that serves a large concentration of students of
color. The combined examination of effective organizational structures and systems,
culturally relevant instruction, and influence of the relationship between the
students’ home and school cultures will construct an understanding of how
instructional leaders and classroom teachers in elementary schools can work together
to foster continued high levels of performance by students of color in high poverty,
urban schools. There is abundant agreement that systems and structures are
necessary to foster high academic achievement and to facilitate students’ transition
from one learning environment to the next. The purpose of this study is to make
available the findings to the body of knowledge.

25
This study will be guided by the following research questions:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of
color?
2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived
to contribute to high student performance in high-poverty urban
schools with large concentrations of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes
student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?

Significance of the Study
The mission of all schools is to educate and prepare all students to become
productive and responsible members of the local, national, and global community.
With that overarching mission in mind improved performance by all students is a
national priority. It is critical that successful structures and systems be generalized to
all schools in order to develop more effective schools that graduate students who are
prepared to participate in our national democracy and become contributing members
of the worldwide society in order to maintain our nation’s status in the global
economy. Federal and state accountability measures hold all schools responsible for

26
high levels of student achievement, meting out sanctions to those schools not
demonstrating improving levels of student performance.
The academic performance of elementary school students of color, already
historically lower than their White and Asian counterparts, declines further when
they transition to middle school. Despite the need for districts to implement effective
structures and systems that support students’ high performance in elementary school
and prepare them to maintain high levels of achievement in middle school, there is a
limited amount of information offering practical support in this endeavor. Through
an examination of an elementary school with effective structures and systems that
support high academic achievement, preparing students for continued high
performance, other schools gain understanding and insight that may assist their
efforts to improve and strengthen structures and systems that support students’
continued high achievement. Therefore, this study has significance for practitioners
at all levels, educational researchers, and policymakers.

Assumptions
This study is grounded in the premise that there are organizational structures
and systems that support high student achievement in high poverty urban schools.
Effective structures and systems in elementary school support continued levels of
high student performance as students of color transition from elementary to middle
school. It was assumed that the school studied met the selection criteria outlined in

27
the delimitations. Respondents were expected to be honest and the information
obtained from them was assumed to be accurate.

Limitations
The data collected for this study was gathered over a 10 week period in 2007
from a school located in a large school district in Southern California. The size of the
sample was small due to the limitations of time and selection criteria. Although all
efforts were taken to prevent bias, the researcher did not have control over the
participants’ biases. The analysis of the data was subject to researcher interpretation.

Delimitations
The parameters of this investigation were confined to an examination of one
elementary school demonstrating effective structures and systems that support high
levels of student achievement. This descriptive, analytical case study gathered and
analyzed data from one elementary school. The school was located in a large, urban
school district in Southern California. The qualitative nature and sample size of the
study restricted the ability to generalize the results to other situations. The schools
were purposefully selected based on the following criteria:
a. 80 % of the student body was identified as African American or
Latino.
b. The school had a trajectory of growth in Academic Performance
scores over the past five years.

28
c. 75% of the students enrolled qualified for free or reduced price meals.
d. The school served an urban community.

Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this inquiry, the following terms were operationally
defined:
Academic Performance Index (API): The API is a numeric scale ranging
from a low of 200 to a high of 1000. The index reflects a local education agency’s or
school’s performance level as measured by statewide assessments.
Accountability: A system that incorporates specific information about
curriculum, teaching and leadership practices, as well as academic performance
scores leading to a focus on the progress of individual students.
Assessment: A measurement of a student’s specific knowledge or skill that
may be performance, oral, written. Standardized assessments are administered and
scored identically for all participants to measure particular knowledge or skill.
Culture: A shared group of practices, goals, attitudes and values that
distinguish a school.
Data-driven decision making: A process of basing decisions relating to
instruction and curriculum centered on analysis of standardized test data and
classroom data.

29
Engagement: A process incorporating attention, interest, investment, and
effort that students expend in the work of learning. Engagement entails affective and
behavioral involvement in the learning experience.
Equity: The operational belief of designing practices and policies that
provides high expectations and appropriate resources enabling all students to achieve
at the same rigorous standard; with minimal discrepancy due to language, income
level, gender, or ethnicity.
High poverty school: Schools in which at least 75% of the student population
qualifies for free or reduced price breakfast and lunch.
Implementation: Actualizing an idea into reality with the purpose of attaining
a particular goal.
Large concentration of students of color: Schools with an 80% or greater
enrollment of African Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans or Indigenous
Peoples.
Professional development: Opportunities for teachers, administrators, and
paraprofessionals to build new knowledge and skills that focuses on improving the
quality of instruction.
Self-efficacy: The belief that a person is capable of successfully executing
behaviors relating to a specific domain or task.
Special Education Services: Additional services designed to enable students
with special needs to access the general education core curriculum; may include
speech and language therapy, occupational or physical therapy among other services.

30
Students of color: Indigenous Peoples, Latino Americans, African
Americans, Asian Americans.
Students with special needs: Students with cognitive, physical, social-
emotional disabilities that qualify them for special education services.
Transition: A process during which students matriculate from elementary
school to middle school.
Urban schools: Schools located in culturally and ethnically diverse, densely
populated areas.

Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 of this dissertation contains an overview of the study, a statement
of the problem being considered, the purpose of the study, and the significance of the
study. It also contains the research questions to be investigated, and definition of
terms utilized in the study. Chapter 2 is a review of the literature relevant to the study
leading with a historical overview of student achievement at high poverty, urban
schools with large concentrations of students of color. Chapter 2 further proceeds to
presenting a review of the literature on the particular challenges faced by students of
color as they transition from elementary school to middle school. Chapter 3 explains
the methodology used in the study, including the research design, and selection of
the school participating in the study. Chapter 4 explores the findings of the
investigation and presents an analysis and discussion of the findings. A summary of

31
the study and possible implications for practice are presented in Chapter 5.
Appendices and references follow this chapter.

32
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Throughout the history of education in the United States, urban schools
located in high poverty areas serving large concentrations of students of color have
been associated with low levels of student achievement. Ogbu and Simons (1998)
determined that differences in student performance were a result of the treatment of
minority groups both by society at large as well as in our schools. The discriminatory
practices leading to inequitable access to educational resources extend into the adult
world as well, in the form of job discrimination and unequal compensation for work
or educational accomplishments. Consequently lower academic achievement by
students of color became a type of response to the barriers set up by society to
employment and advancement opportunities in the adult world (Ogbu, 1987; Ogbu &
Simons, 1998). The results of these centuries-old historical discriminatory practices
that have denied students of color opportunities to learn are now highly visible
because of the recent No Child Left Behind mandates.
In spite of this continuing pattern, some minorities have more positive school
experiences than others. Cultural-ecological theory considers the dynamics
functioning within a minority community (ecology) as well as the general societal
and school (cultural) factors to explain minority school performance. This two-part
theory consists of the system, which addresses the way minorities are treated by
society and the community forces, which represent the minority group’s perceptions
of and responses to the school experience (Ogbu, 1992). Ogbu uses the cultural-

33
ecological theory to explain the phenomenon of low academic achievement among
people of color in the United States.
The United States is a country built on the immigration of people from all
over the world. Some groups of immigrants arrived voluntarily with dreams of “a
better life,” and of greater political or religious freedom. Voluntary minorities chose
to leave their homelands and do not perceive their presence in this country as forced
upon them by White Americans or the government. This perception positively
affects their frame of reference toward their lives in this country. Minorities who
choose to immigrate have positive dual frames of reference (Ogbu, 1992) in which a
comparison is drawn between the situation in their homeland and the current
situation. A positive comparison results in more adaptive behaviors such as
motivation to work hard to succeed, or learn English, as a means to a better future.

Voluntary Minorities
The responses and beliefs of minorities toward society, as well as society’s
responses toward them, influence the minority’s attitudes and behaviors in school.
Voluntary or “preferred” (Ogbu, 1992) minorities arrived in this country by choice in
search of a better life. Voluntary minorities tend to enter the country legally and have
more resources; education, job training, or language skills. This group tends to adapt
to the values and beliefs of, and be accepted by, the dominant White, middle-class
society leading to better opportunities for high academic performance and
socioeconomic success (Ogbu, 1998; Crosnoe, 2006). Voluntary minority parents

34
tend to be highly committed to their children succeeding in school. This attitude is
supported by their community. Parents who are members of voluntary minorities
tend to hold high academic expectations for their children and hold their children,
rather than the school, responsible for academic success. These parents view
education, particularly learning to speak English, as a key element for success in
school and subsequently the job market. The children of voluntary minorities
generally share their parents’ attitudes and values. Their peers support academic
success, so there is less peer pressure to detract from the focus on school
achievement (Ogbu, 1998). This perspective reflects the viewpoint that schools act as
agents reinforcing and reproducing the status quo of the dominant Anglo-Saxon
culture within society providing access to social, economic, and political resources to
groups and individuals who manifest the attitudes, abilities, and behaviors valued by
the dominant school culture (Bartolome, 1994, Stanton-Salazar, 2002).

Involuntary Minorities
Involuntary minorities are those groups of people who were enslaved,
conquered, or colonized by the dominant group of a society. These minorities did not
choose to become part of the United States, and they perceive their presence in the
United States as forced upon them by White people as in the Treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo, 1884, which included Mexico’s ceding of what are now Arizona,
California, New Mexico, and parts of Utah, Nevada, and Colorado to the United
States. One of the outcomes of this land-grab was communities and schools that

35
segregated Mexican-origin families and students from White families and students
(Valencia, Menchaca, & Donato, 2002). Involuntary, or “unpreferred” (Ogbu, 1992),
minorities tend to be less economically successful, have more persistent and greater
cultural and language obstacles to overcome, and do not perform at the same levels
as voluntary minorities in school (Ogbu, 1992, 1998). The education of the children
of involuntary immigrants continues to be affected by socio-political institutions that
shaped the lives of their ancestors. In the United States the construct of race that
gave birth to the institution of slavery continues to impact society through the
ongoing resistance of Whites to efforts to desegregate schools and communities. The
construct of race became a justification for subordinating a labor force based on the
color of skin. It was also during this period of history that negative characteristics
created by the cruelties of the living conditions of slaves in the plantation system
came to be considered as the “natural” traits of Blacks (Stephan, 1980).These
negative stereotypical labels such as ignorant, lazy or slovenly, became the basis for
discrimination against Blacks as evidenced in residential and school segregation and
job discrimination (Stephan, 1980).

Segregation
In the South poll taxes, grandfather clauses and literacy tests effectively
disenfranchised Blacks in every state. The doctrine of “separate, but equal” became
law with the 1896 Supreme Court interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment
through the court’s decision on Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). Segregation was legally

36
extended to all areas of life in the south: public education and transportation,
hospitals, hotels and restaurants, even the gallery of the United States Senate
(Stephan, 1980). These early actions created the context in which public education
emerged.
The struggle for equity in education has been as intense in the North as the
South. A wave of Black migration to the North was precipitated by deteriorating
economic conditions in the South and increasing job opportunities in the North
brought about by World War I. Blacks, much like ethnic Whites, were forced to live
in isolated areas in outlying areas of Northern cities. As a consequence of residential
segregation, the schools available to Blacks in the North were almost as segregated
as those in the South (Stephan, 1980). Funding of schools served as another
instrument of discrimination. In the South the average expenditure for White
children was $44.00, while the average expenditure for Black children was only
$13.00. These disparate funding levels provided ample evidence that the schools in
the South were decidedly separate, but not equal (Stephan, 1980). In an effort to
ensure equal educational opportunities for all children a series of lawsuits were filed
in the courts suing for equal education for students of color. Brown v. The Board of
Education (1954) argued that segregation violated the “equal protection under the
laws” clause guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. In response to the suit the
Supreme Court struck down the “separate, but equal” model in public education.
Sixteen years after the Brown decision, in an extension of the argument against
segregation the Supreme Court stated that state-sanctioned segregation based

37
singularly on a person’s unalterable characteristics (e.g. disability or race) was
illegal.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 empowered the federal government to terminate
funding to school districts that were not in compliance with the desegregation order.
This action was in response to states’ continued resistance to granting equal
educational opportunities to students strictly on the basis of race, which was also the
key distinction between voluntary or “preferred” and involuntary or “unpreferred”
immigrants (Ogbu, 1992). However, as the federal government at that time was not
funding local schools to any great degree, it was not until the passage of the
Elementary and Secondary Schools Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 when federal
funds increased significantly that the threat of loss of monies for non-compliance,
became meaningful. In order to be eligible to receive funding under ESEA school
districts were forced to desegregate the local schools. ESEA also provided funding to
subsidize direct services to certain groups of students.
Equal funding for all schools and districts was addressed by the California
Supreme Court in its decision on Serrano v. Priest (1988). The court ruled that
education was a fundamental right and determined that California’s funding system
at that time was inadequate to ensure equitable funding for all school districts. Prior
to Serrano v. Priest, school funding was based on community property taxes;
therefore districts with high property values (where residents were typically White
middle or upper middle class) generated higher levels of funding for their schools
than school districts serving high poverty communities whose residents were

38
typically people of color. In response to the court’s finding, the state legislature
passed Senate Bill 90 (SB90) which set revenue limits on per pupil funding. The key
adjustment written into SB 90 was the provision for a higher dollar amount per pupil
from the state to equalize funding in low-revenue districts (Townley, Schmieder-
Ramirez, Lane, & Wehmeyer, 2001).
While the implementation of the Brown decision ended de jure segregation.
De facto segregation proved more challenging to eliminate. Residents of Boston
elected a school board that was opposed to desegregation. Even though the election
results were subsequently overturned by the federal judiciary, schools and
communities continued to remain segregated as a result of residents’ choices of
where to live. Whites in Los Angeles were also against desegregation. This belief led
to “White flight” in Los Angeles and other communities (Stephan, 1980). The result
was a de facto resegregation of schools and communities. Communities continue to
be affected by this phenomenon as prospective home buyers look at school districts
and test scores before purchasing a home (Holme, 2002). People’s ability to move to
certain areas is based on income; therefore the cycle created between poor schooling
for students of color and their low income status continues to affect the access
students of color have to quality education. Typically high poverty schools are also
schools with large concentrations of students of color with low academic
achievement (Ogbu, 1987; Ogbu and Simons, 1998). The theory of schools as
agents of social reproduction explains this phenomenon (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Dika
and Singh, 2002). There continues to be a close interrelationship between de facto

39
segregated schools, poverty, and the quality of education. A recent study by the
California State University (Futernick, 2007) found that teachers in schools in high
poverty neighborhoods were more likely to work with shortages of instructional
materials and in unclean and unsafe work environments. The United States has a
long history of operating in a “separate, but unequal” mentality in relation to students
of color who belong to the “unpreferred” immigrant groups.

Poverty and Achievement
Poverty limits the mobility of a family. Families living in poverty are
constrained in their selection of communities and schools. Low income levels may so
limit their options that families have no choice but to live in neighborhoods with
high levels of crime, few parks and playgrounds, accompanied by a lack of easily
accessible health care facilities, high numbers of unemployed adults, gang activity,
violence, as well as segregated and overcrowded schools (Suárez-Orozco and Qin,
2006; Zhou, 2003). Living in such neighborhoods has been connected to a lack of in-
home school readiness experiences which are more influential than the level of
family income and early learning experiences.
These factors are linked to lower school achievement, greater grade level
retention, and a higher drop-out rate (Suárez-Orozco and Qin, 2006; Zhou, 2003).
Long-term poverty in young children plays a large role in predicting school
outcomes. Children who live in homes below the poverty threshold are 1.3 times
more likely to experience developmental delays or learning disabilities than non-

40
poor children (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). Studies conducted by the National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) and Infant Health and Development Program
(IHDP) revealed that the effects of poverty on cognitive development occur early in
a child’s development influencing academic performance and achievement (Brooks-
Gunn and Duncan, 1997). As a result, a greater percentage of students from high
poverty homes are identified as eligible for, and placement in, special education
services as compared to students from homes from higher income levels (Harry and
Anderson, 1994).
The connection between schooling and income is a cyclical relationship.
Educational achievement is a well known and potent predictor of success later in life,
but economic status is a predictor of the quality of education to which a child has
access.
Schools, as institutions of social reproduction, promote the values and beliefs
of the dominant culture, and do little to reinforce and value the knowledge and skills
that students of color bring to school (Cummins, 1986; Delpit, 2006). Old constructs
of race traced back to slavery still persist in the systems and structures of American
institutions, including schools. Consequently students of color, who are also more
likely to be poor, are methodically denied genuine opportunities for long-term
success. They lack the social connections to the people and institutions that can help
them learn to access significant forms of institutional support that are avenues to
greater economic opportunities (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Dika and Singh (2002) note
that it is the access to institutional resources that enables individuals to build social

41
connections and social capital that in specific situations may be converted into
economic capital.
The effect of poverty on health and nutrition has significant influence on
child outcomes, yet income determines the extent to which families have access to
adequate health care. School achievement and cognitive ability are affected by low
birth weight, anemia, and recurring ear infections. The 13% to 20% difference in IQ
scores between poor and non-poor four-year olds in the 1970’s and 1980’s may be
attributed to poor health and nutrition (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997).
Many studies utilizing the HOME scale, an instrument which measures
household resources such as, reading materials and toys and parenting practices such
as discipline methods, have shown that higher levels of income are associated with
improved home settings as measured by the HOME scale (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan,
1997). Parents’ interactions with their children facilitate children’s adjustment to and
achievement in school. Parents who live in poverty are also more likely to be less
healthy, physically and emotionally, than non-poor parents. Poor parental emotional
health is linked to impaired parent child relationships and a lack of school readiness
learning experiences in the home (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). The influences of
poverty on quality of life and academic achievement are undeniable. Long term low
levels of academic performance place students at greater risk for: alienation from the
school culture, higher drop-out rates, placement in special education classes, fewer
employment opportunities resulting in reduced upward social mobility (Gardener and
Miranda, 2001; Harry and Anderson, 1994).

42
Overrepresentation of Students of Color in Special Education
One of the most dramatic and debilitating ways that historical segregation,
cultural dissonance, and poverty play out is in the overrepresentation of African
American students in special education. African American students are more likely
to be identified as eligible for special education than their European American peers.
African American students are approximately 16% of the school age population
however 34% and 26% of students receiving services with eligibilities of
emotionally disturbed (ED) and mild mental retardation (MMR) respectively are
African American (Gardener and Miranda, 2001). ED and MMR eligibilities are
determined subjectively through teacher and other professional experts’ judgment
whether students exhibit debilitating behaviors. The significant role of judgment
makes it a possible source of bias in determining eligibility (Harry and Anderson,
1994). Students of color identified for special education are especially
overrepresented in these soft categories of special education that lack specific
criteria, but are determined by the judgment of the teacher and other professionals
for placement (Gardner and Miranda, 2001). The higher ratio of students of color in
special education suggests that these students are at higher risk of alienation from the
school culture and thus low levels of academic performance, placement in special
education, or dropping out of school (Gardner and Miranda, 2001).
In contrast to the over identification of African American males in soft
categories, eligibilities based on judgment, in categories requiring a medical
determination or diagnosis such as deaf/hard of hearing, visual impairment, severe

43
mental retardation, or physical disabilities African Americans are represented in
percentages proportionate to their percentage in the general school population
(Gardener and Miranda, 2001).
Over identification of African Americans is due to a combination of factors:
 Academic instruction by teachers who are not prepared to teach in high
poverty urban schools and may have low expectations of students
resulting in decreased levels of academic achievement. (Gardener and
Miranda, 2001).
 Social and psychological obstacles African American students encounter
in schools based on a European American model that reflects White
middle class values and beliefs. This results in cultural dissonance
between the school and students creating an environment of
misunderstandings and increased referrals of African Americans for
special education assessment. (Gardener and Miranda, 2001). Only 6% of
teenaged African American males entering special education are apt to
return to general education (Harry and Anderson, 1994).
 Lack of, or decreased levels, of parent and community support for
education. This break in communication between parents and school
prevents these stakeholders from understanding the expectations of the
two environments students must function in. High poverty urban
communities may have inadequate resources, such as after-school

44
programs, to support the needs of students. (Gardener and Miranda,
2001).
Frequently African American males in special education are more likely to be
in classrooms that are separate from the main school buildings. The separation of
special education programs from the general school leads to students leaving special
education less prepared for a real world life of responsibility and work. Not only
does this occur in special education, but in most extreme cases, arguably happens for
all African American students. The options for employment or higher education
leading to upward mobility are drastically reduced for African American students in
special education (Harry and Anderson, 1994). This is a significant factor in the
ongoing cycle of low levels of education and decreased income.

Students of Color and Social Capital
In spite of the significant effects of poverty, students of color from high
poverty backgrounds arrive at school with a variety of assets from their home and
community experiences which could support them as successful learners (Delpit,
2006). Cultural models and understandings of “social realities” (Ogbu, 1992, p. 5)
from students’ communities and their commonly used learning approaches are
equally as significant as those inherent within the school (Ogbu, 1992; Gauvain,
2001; Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001). Foundational research in social
construction of knowledge was lead by Vygotsky in the 1920s and early 1930s. The
social constructivist approach is based on the premise that learning occurs within a

45
social context and knowledge is constructed through social interactions. This
sociocultural view emphasized the role of adults in communicating the ways their
particular culture understands and reacts to the world. This information was
conveyed through informal conversations as well as the formal school setting
(Ormrod, 2006; Santrock, 2006). The lack of a connection between the home and
school cultures is evident in students’ achievement.
The achievement score gap for children from families at or below the poverty
line is 33 points for black and White fourth graders; while the gap is only 22 points
for the same groups whose family income is above the poverty line. The Hispanic-
White gap for families who do not qualify for free or reduced price meals is 19
points, the gap for qualifying families is 29 points.(Brown Center Report on
American Education, 2001) Although the gap is smaller above the poverty line, it
still exists; therefore there appears to be a factor other than poverty at work.
Significant connections between the home and school cultures are influential factors
affecting academic performance (Ogbu, 1992; Gauvain, 2001; Gallimore and
Goldenberg, 2001).
A lack of meaningful personal connections between students’ home or
community culture and the school culture contributes to cultural dissonance between
those environments. Cultural dissonance contributes to lower levels of student
engagement during the school day as well as decreased academic achievement. The
impact of lower levels of achievement and cultural dissonance results in an over-
representation of students of color in special education (Harry and Anderson, 1994).

46
African American students are 16% of the school population, but represent a much
greater percentage of the special education population. African Americans represent
34% of students identified as emotionally disturbed and 26% of students with mild
mental retardation. Identification for these categories is based on subjective criteria,
teacher’s and other professional’s judgment. In comparison, African Americans are
proportionately identified, approximately 16%, in special education categories
requiring a medical diagnosis such as visually impaired or physical disability
(Gardener and Miranda, 2001).
In spite of the effects of poverty, cultural dissonance, immigration status,
discrimination, and segregation some urban schools in high poverty communities
select and implement research based organizational structural and systemic practices
that contribute to high levels of student achievement. At the heart of these systems
lies a different set of beliefs about the cultural and intellectual capital students bring
to the sociocultural learning environment of the school.

Systems that Contribute to High Achievement
Despite historical trends, research based systemic practices contribute to high
student achievement in high poverty urban schools. This phenomenon is exemplified
in the research conducted by the Center for Performance Assessment on the
“90/90/90 Schools” (Reeves, 2000). Schools in the study varied widely; both in
settings and student population variables. Consistent characteristics of these schools
included: more than 90 percent of the students qualified for free or reduced price

47
meals, were from ethnic minorities, and met high academic standards as determined
by independently conducted assessments of academic performance. The study found
there were consistent connections between many instructional strategies and student
achievement on a variety of assessments. High performing schools incorporated
structures and systems that involved a school wide focus on high student
performance, professional development focused on improving instructional practices,
and involved parents as partners in the educational process. The mandate for
accountability through NCLB created a structure that has increased schools’ needs to
create these systems. To meet NCLB goals, schools need to have multiple elements:
a focus on achievement, student engagement, professional development, and
meaningful assessment working together. These elements interplay and work in
concert with one another to affect school-wide change and increase student
performance.
A synthesis of research exploring the impact of schools on student
achievement by Marzano (2003) revealed that individual schools may account for 20
percent of the variation in student achievement. The logical conclusion to be drawn
from this analysis is that effective schools have a significant influence on student
performance (Delpit, 2006). Madaus et al (1979) remarked that conclusions from
studies employing appropriate student performance measures (those that do not
create conditions in which student background variables factor into the assessment of
student performance) “provide strong evidence for the differential effectiveness of
schools; differences in school characteristics do contribute to differences in

48
achievement” (p. 233). Effective schools furnish interventions that are intended to
mitigate student background characteristics that might impede learning (Marzano,
2003).
In a study of resource allocation and interventions in five schools Miles and
Darling-Hammond (1998) found that International High School, with a mission of
educating recent immigrants who scored below the 20
th
percentile on an English-
language proficiency exam, reallocated instructional resources to align with the
school’s mission. Language skills were taught in context and embedded in content
areas to promote meaningful, efficient learning; rigorous standards were linked to an
effective student support system; students were grouped heterogeneously to enable
them to learn from each other; and thoughtfully planned use of multiple learning
environments (learning center, fieldtrips, and career internships) along with
classroom instruction were used to facilitate language learning and content mastery.
As a result of these constructivist practices, and others, the school’s graduation and
college acceptance rates have exceeded 90 percent for the past ten years.
Central Park East Secondary School (CPESS), an alternate school, in New
York had large high poverty and special needs populations. CPESS allocated almost
all of its positions for classroom teachers rather than guidance counselors or
administrators. To provide counseling to students, all professional staff members are
responsible for serving as advisors to twelve to fifteen students per year. As a result
of this and other restructuring designs, 90 percent of CPESS students graduate and
are accepted to college (Miles & Darling-Hammond, 1998).

49
In a study of eight pairs of effective and ineffective schools Teddlie, Kirby,
and Stringfield (1989) found that efficient use of instructional time was the most
significant feature of effective schools. The study identified five commonalities
among the schools identified as effective:
 Teachers focused on students’ mastery of basic skills.
 There were important and visible displays of student work products
representing academic excellence throughout the school.
 The school site principal insisted on an obvious academic focus during the
school day and maintained a high level of presence in hallways and
classrooms.
 There was a schoolwide concentration on increasing the amount of
interactive teaching in all classrooms.
 That the classroom was the essential core of the school was evident through
the “child as client” values, beliefs, and feelings of the entire school.
Hanson, 2001, noted that common values, beliefs, and feelings contribute to the
culture of a high performing school.

School Culture and Collaboration
Each school has its own unique culture. Hanson (2001, p. 641) commented
on school culture:
“Schools also have their own unique cultures that are shaped around a
particular combination of values, beliefs, and feelings. These school cultures
emphasize what is of paramount importance to them, such as …sending kids

50
to college who come from inner-city urban schools. Although the culture of a
school is not visible to the human eye, its artifacts and symbols reflect
specific cultural priorities”.

A school’s culture is a consequence of people working closely together, the culture
may have a positive or negative impact on the school’s effectiveness (Marzano,
Waters, & McNulty, 2005).
In high performing schools all teachers and staff are responsible for students’
learning. In schools where students are well known by teachers, student achievement
is higher (Miles and Darling-Hammond, 1998). In these schools all students and
adults are accorded respect and cultural differences are nurtured; teachers utilize
students’ home culture as a medium for learning (Ladson-Billings, 1995). To build
and maintain the connection between the school and students, schools are using staff
in creative ways. Central Park East Secondary School and International High, both in
New York, have implemented school wide systems to support all students. All
professional staff meet regularly with a small group of students to discuss personal,
academic, and social concerns as well as help students prepare college applications
(Miles and Darling-Hammond, 1998). Teachers’ support during transition from one
learning environment to another is important in any student’s education and even
more so for students of color to facilitate continued and improved levels of
achievement, as these students are most at-risk for dropping out of school (Maras
and Aveling, 2006).
High performing schools tend to have cultures that support collaboration by
teachers as they work together to discuss students’ progress and plan instruction

51
(Michigan Department of Education, 1997; Marzano, 2003). Teacher collaboration
has a direct impact on student achievement as viewed through student performance
data. Not only did test scores improve, but the achievement gap between various
subgroups decreased in schools that supported teacher collaboration. The generation
and development of a collaborative professional community led to fresh perceptions
about instruction for teachers such as heightened levels of commitment and
collaboration (Fullan, 2000; Marsh, 1995). Schools cultures that foster strong,
collaborative relationships among staff, provide time for planning, and appropriate
classroom resources tend to experience greater teacher retention and increased
student achievement (Futernick, 2007).

Professional Development
The goal of professional development is to increase teachers’ knowledge and
skill levels though collaboration with peers or through the guidance of a more
knowledgeable peer (Guskey and Sparks, 1996). Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of
learning hypothesizes that learning is a shared process and is most effective within a
social context (Vygotsky, 1987). Through language, structured interactions occur in
the zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Vygotsky, 1987). The ZPD identifies the
distance between the actual development and possible development with adult
guidance or in collaboration with capable peers. It is within the ZPD that the most
effective learning takes place (Vygotsky, 1987). Therefore, effective professional
development needs to access teachers’ zone of proximal development.

52
Effective professional development incorporates students’ assessment data to
inform the design of staff development (Louis, Marks, and Kruse, 1996; Cotton,
2003; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005). The relationship of student performance
and professional development must be aligned for a system of coherent, cohesive
professional development to be meaningful for teachers (Guskey and Sparks, 1996).
Professional development which is grounded in data-based inquiry helps teachers see
evidence of the value of high quality, timely data in improving instructional practices
(McLaughlin and Talbert, 2003). Massell (2000) emphasizes the systematic use of
data to plan professional development, determine student achievement gaps, align
curriculum to state content standards, allocate teachers and support staff, and identify
students needing remediation. High poverty, high performing schools implement
cohesive systems of using data to inform instruction and make adjustments to
instructional practices as necessary (Reeves, 2003). Collegiality and strong
professional relationships developed through meaningful professional development
are significant reasons veteran teachers stay in the classroom (Futernick, 2007). The
continuity of the presence of veteran teachers provides opportunities for students to
establish and maintain a meaningful connection with the same teacher throughout the
student’s school experience. High performing/high poverty middle schools have
systems in place that reduce the teacher to student ratio allowing students to develop
meaningful connections with a teacher (Miles and Darling-Hammond, 1998). This
stability helps students stay engaged in school at a point in their lives when many

53
students, especially male African Americans, are at risk of failing classes or
dropping out of school (Ormrod, 2006).
One of the critical differences between high and low performing schools is
the school wide structures in place that foster problem solving and planning along
with the development of a supportive school-level professional community providing
teachers opportunities to reflect on their practice (McLaughlin, 1992). The
establishment of professional learning communities within schools provides a
structure that is supportive of the necessary inquiry into pedagogy and student
outcomes through regular professional conversations (Darling-Hammond and
McLaughlin, 1995; Guskey, 2002; Joyce & Showers, 2002). The type of discussions
during professional development is the key to improving student achievement.
Discussions by teachers on how instruction fosters student’s development and
intellectual growth focuses teachers’ attention on developing more effective
instructional pedagogies (Louis, Marks, and Kruse, 1996). Many teachers who left
the profession noted that lack of time for professional development or planning was a
significant problem (Futernick, 2007).
In order to foster the development and intellectual growth of all students,
professional development must address the instructional needs of students of color.
All teachers need professional development on meaningful implementation of
culturally relevant and responsive pedagogies to effectively address the instructional
needs of students of color (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). Professional
development that fosters connections between the students’ home culture and the

54
culture of the school and provides culturally relevant pedagogies helps keep students
in the general education population. Learning new skills and building capacity takes
place over time through coherent, cohesive presentations of pertinent information
(Guskey and Sparks, 1996; Marzano, 2003). Professional development which occurs
over a period of time, is connected to pedagogy, and is curriculum specific, results in
increased achievement for all students (Cohen and Hill, 1998a; Darling-Hammond,
2000).
The direct impact of professional development on teachers’ and
administrators’ knowledge and practices can be seen indirectly by its impact on
student performance. Teachers must alter their teaching practices and enhance their
professional knowledge or the result will be very little increase in student
achievement (Guskey and Sparks, 1996; Guskey, 2000; Kamil, 2003; National
Reading Panel, 2000).

High Expectations
In all the 90/90/90 schools there was a sharp focus on student achievement
and high expectations for all students. Academic performance goals should challenge
all students (Marzano, 2003; Taylor, Pressley, & Pearson, 2000). High expectations
and goals for all students must be clearly communicated to students and families by
all school staff members along with a collective sense of responsibility for school
improvement (Taylor, Pressley, and Pearson, 2000). Clearly communicated high
expectations for all students contribute to a school culture of high achievement.

55
Evidence of student effort such as charts, graphs, and tables were displayed in
hallways and offices of 90/90/90 schools showing not only students’ achievement,
but more importantly students’ improvement. Trophy cases showcased exemplary
student work, writing, math and, science projects. Breaking from historical patterns
that devalued the cultural capital of students of color, these schools placed an
emphasis on taking the skills and knowledge students brought to school and moving
the children forward from there (Vygotsky, 1987; Reeves, 2000, 2003). School
validation of the skills and knowledge students have acquired in their home and
community cultures provided a positive starting point for instruction and established
a home-school connection for all students and families. Effective teachers
communicate high academic expectations for all students and implement culturally
relevant pedagogies that build on the cognitive and social capital students bring to
school as well as require that students master literacy, numeracy, social, political,
and technological skills (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b; Delpit, 2006). Students
were treated as individuals with unique strengths and needs rather than a group with
similar abilities. Students who showed deficiencies or were significantly below grade
level in reading and writing received daily, consistent focused intervention (Reeves,
2000, 2003). Progress by all students was monitored through frequent, content
specific assessments and that information was shared with each student. Students’
awareness of their progress led to a more positive attitude toward school and
increased engagement in instruction (Marks, 2000).

56
School cultures that are focused on high expectations for all students are
grounded in structures and systems that explicitly support high expectations and
quality classroom instruction. State standards express the skills and knowledge
within each content area that students are expected to master by the end of each
grade level (California Department of Education, 1999). The assumption is that
students learn and master specific skills at particular grade levels and those standards
of subsequent grade levels build upon earlier foundational skills (California
Department of Education, 1999). All teachers must teach to the state content
standards to support high achievement by all students; while state standards describe
what to teach (the structure), they do not describe how to teach it (the system).
Schools that tighten the alignment between content standards and curricula have
shown increased student outcomes as measured by standards-based assessments
(Billig, Jaime, Abrams, Fitzpatrick, & Kendrick, 2005; Shannon & Bylsma, 2003).
State assessments in first through twelfth grade focus primarily on English language
arts and math. Therefore, classroom instruction is greatly influenced by the English
language arts and math state standards. Effective teachers communicate high
expectations and promote student engagement in standards-based lessons through
culturally relevant pedagogies (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b, Delpit, 2006). The
ability to connect with students and the quality of the classroom teacher outweighed
the influence of students’ past performance, class size, race, or socioeconomic status
in impacting student achievement (Wright, Horn, and Sanders, 1997).

57
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Culturally relevant instruction involves the academic development of
students, the school’s and teachers’ motivation to support and nurture cultural
competence, and the development of students’ critical consciousness. Culturally
relevant instruction provides teachers with a means to systematically incorporate
students’ home culture in the classroom in meaningful ways leading to higher levels
of student engagement and performance (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b).
Instructional pedagogies that provide opportunities for students to work
together to build knowledge and skills contribute to increased perceptions of self-
efficacy, a protective factor during middle school transition for all students, but
particularly students with disabilities and students of color (Gutman and Midgley,
1999, Ormrod, 2006). A perception of self-efficacy may help support and maintain
higher levels of school performance during the stressful transition from elementary
to middle school (Gutman and Midgley, 1999). Students’ perceptions of their
academic self-efficacy and their ability to transition successfully to middle school
were significant predictors of how they fared during the transition process and school
year following (Forgan and Vaughn, 2000). Classroom practices in elementary and
middle school that engage students through culturally relevant instruction increase
students’ level of academic self-efficacy and support successful transitions to middle
school. Effective pedagogies that help support increased academic self-efficacy
require students to make numerous responses, experience high rates of success, and
receive regular feedback on their responses (Ormrod, 2006). Gardner and Miranda

58
(2001) found use of student response cards, peer tutoring and self-correction to be
effective systems to increase students’ engagement and participation during
instruction.
Teachers must be willing to support students’ development of cultural
competence and self-efficacy concurrently with building high levels of academic
performance (Ladson-Billings, 1995b). Effective classroom instruction integrates
students’ culture as a pathway for student engagement and learning (Delpit, 2006).
Ladson-Billings (1995a) sited a second grade teacher who utilized “non-offensive”
rap music as a means of exploring poetry with her students. Students felt comfortable
with the music and the teacher used transcripts of the songs as a bridge to facilitate
students’ understanding of figurative and literal meanings and technical elements of
poetry. As a result of implementation of culturally relevant pedagogies and socially
situated learning opportunities the students scored well above state and district
requirements (Delpit, 2006). Use of culturally relevant instruction provided a way for
students to succeed in school while maintaining their cultural integrity (Ladson-
Billings, 1995a, 1995b). Other teachers have invited students’ parents and
community members into classrooms to share their expertise with the students. This
involvement provided another occasion for sociocultural learning as parents shared
their expertise with students. This afforded an opportunity for teachers to reaffirm
that the students’ parents were a capable and knowledgeable resource readily
available to students in addition to enhancing the home and school connection.

59
Teachers who implement culturally responsive instructional pedagogy tend to
share certain characteristics. Many of these teachers deliberately chose to become
educators in schools serving predominately low income, minority student
populations. These teachers shared a strong belief that all students can learn and
succeed in school and that the job of teacher is to work to ensure the success of each
child (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). Effective teachers focus on mastery of state
content standards, high levels of students’ time on-task, frequent monitoring of
student performance, and culturally relevant instructional strategies (Gardner and
Miranda, 2001; Shannon and Bylsma, 2003). Students in classrooms with teachers,
who developed communities of learners as an instructional system, participated in
collaborative learning, reciprocal teaching, and developed a sense of responsibility
for each other’s learning (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b).
Many teachers fail to connect with their students of color in meaningful ways
that demonstrate respect and value of the students’ home culture and prior
knowledge (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995 b). Frequently inexperienced teachers who
are not prepared to effectively teach students of color from high poverty, urban
neighborhoods are assigned to those very schools due to the high, up to 10%
(Futernick, 2007), teacher turnover rates. High rates of teacher turnover result in a
loss of continuity, expertise and experience that may negatively impact the students
(Futernick, 2007). This may lead to a cultural disconnect between the teacher and
students that impede the establishment of personal relationships between teachers
and students. As students of color experience frustration with teachers and schools

60
that fail to meet their needs students may become noncompliant in regard to
teachers’ directions or act out in other ways as a means of expressing frustration
(Ogbu, 1987). As a consequence of students’ feelings of alienation from the school
and the teachers’ lack of understanding of the students’ home culture students of
color are more likely to: be less engaged during instruction, perform at lower levels,
be referred for assessment for special education, and experience higher drop-out
rates, all of which combine to result in access to fewer employment opportunities
and reduced upward social mobility (Gardner and Miranda, 2001). Effective teachers
use culturally relevant pedagogies to engage and prepare students to succeed in their
current class as well as future classes.

Student Engagement
All students, regardless of ethnicity or ability, need to actively engage in the
classroom learning process. Students who are engaged in the instruction tend to find
the school experience more rewarding and are more likely to graduate from high
school and attend college (Marks, 2000). A positive attitude toward school, as
reflected by school success, predicts greater student engagement at all grade levels.
Students who are actively engaged in the instructional process experience greater
cognitive and social development than those who are not (Marks, 2000).
Effective teachers create positive classroom environments that incorporate
norms of respect, safety, fairness, and positive communication. This positive and
supportive atmosphere increases engagement, fosters autonomy, interaction, and

61
choice by all students (California Standards for the Teaching Profession, 1997).
Teachers communicate high expectations of all students through challenging and
compelling work underscored by substantive discussions with students (Marks,
2000). Teachers meet regularly to exchange and evaluate student work using uniform
scoring criteria and multiple readers to ensure inter-rater reliability and an accurate
reflection of student progress (Reeves, 2000).
Teachers’ questioning strategies engage students and require them to access
and use higher order thinking skills. Students need to move beyond mere recall of
knowledge to analyzing and evaluating information from lessons, leading to greater
engagement in the lesson (California Standards for the Teaching Profession, 1997).
When teachers use this strategy, they are manifesting high expectations for a group
of students who historically have been portrayed as incapable of higher order
thinking. Effective teachers implement a variety of instructional pedagogies, such as
small group discussions or cooperative learning experiences, and make wise
decisions about when to use various methods of instruction (Marzano, 2003). In a
study of student engagement, Marks (2000) found that ethnicity and race did not
influence students’ levels of engagement in classroom instruction. This finding is
true if the pedagogy is culturally relevant and responsive. In order for students to be
engaged in instruction, the content material and the way in which it is taught must be
relevant to the students (Ladson-Billings, 1995, Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001).
Culturally relevant and responsive instruction incorporates a school wide culture that
respects the home cultures of all students and the cultural model of the surrounding

62
community (Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001). Classroom teachers who are effective
with students of color welcome the cultural and intellectual capital students bring to
school and build on it, not requiring students to divide their identities into a home-
self and a school-self (Ladson-Billings, 1996a, 1995b; Gallimore and Goldenberg,
2001; Delpit, 2006; Rousseau, 2007). They acknowledge and build on the social-
constructive aspect of learning in which the construction of knowledge takes place
through social interaction (Vygotsky, 1988; Santrock, 2006). Teachers who respect
the social and intellectual capital students bring to school can build and expand that
knowledge by working with students in ways that reflect the teaching pedagogies of
the home culture to construct new knowledge that is linked to their prior knowledge
(Santrock, 2007). Through small group discussions and cooperative learning groups
students are more likely to engage in instruction as they work together to construct
new understandings and knowledge and increasing their academic self-efficacy
(Marks, 2000; Ormrod, 2006; Santrock, 2007).
The influence of student engagement and high quality instruction was evident
in data from the 1992 and 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) reading assessments that showed that fourth-grade students who had fully
credentialed teachers performed at a higher level than students in classrooms with
non-credentialed teachers on the same reading tests (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2000c). An additional examination of the NAEP findings from 1990
through 1996 in combination with the 1993/1994 Schools and Staffing Survey
(SASS) revealed that states with the highest levels of student achievement in math

63
and reading put a high priority on improving the quality of instruction. Odden and
Archibald (2001) determined that reallocation of currently existing resources may
increase the quality of school-wide instruction and positively affect student
engagement and performance. In 1992 Tennessee instituted a statewide value-added
system, which after modifying for demographics, identified the academic gains a
student made each year with a specific teacher. The results showed some teachers
measured 50 percentile points more effective than other teachers three years in a
row. The connection between achievement and other resources (i.e., per-pupil
expenditures or class size) was found to be minimal (Darling-Hammond, 1999).
Teachers identified as effective were successful with students from all achievement
levels, despite the classroom heterogeneity (Wright, Horn, and Sanders, 1997).
These studies underscore the significance of effective teachers who engage all
students in the learning process and the influence those teachers can have on
students’ performance.

Assessment
Reeves (2000, 2003) found that frequent assessment of students’ progress
provided multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate improved performance.
Student progress was monitored through various indicators of learning such as:
assessment results, student work portfolios, and grades, as well as student attendance
and study habits (Guskey and Sparks, 1996). Assessment is the necessary
complement to effective teaching in a system that promotes student engagement in

64
instruction and high academic achievement. Regular assessment allowed teachers to
provide focused reteaching and coaching to students on an as-needed basis; it
provided opportunities for students to determine their own areas of strength and set
goals for areas needing improvement (Marzano, 2003, Reeves, 2000). Marzano
(2003) reported that studies by Madaus, Kelleghan, Rakow, and King (1979)
revealed assessments that were designed to gauge a particular school’s curriculum
were less likely to underestimate students’ actual learning than external or
standardized tests. The assessments used in the 90/90/90 schools were developed by
local teachers rather than district or state assessments (Reeves, 2000, 2003).
Written responses were required for all performance assessments, setting the
higher performing schools apart from lower performing schools that emphasized a
student’s oral language as the major means of responding to performance
assessments. Teachers were able to give students effective, formative feedback to
help improve performance (Marzano, 2003). Writing also helped students clarify and
monitor their own thinking processes and understanding of the subject area content.
The finding that student proficiency in writing was associated with higher
performance in other content areas, influenced the decisions schools must make
about allocation of instructional time to different content areas (Reeves, 2000, 2003).
The written response format provided teachers with more specific diagnostic
information enabling them to identify obstacles to a particular student’s learning
such as: vocabulary concerns, misunderstood instructions or reasoning errors
generally missed by other assessment formats (Reeves, 2000, 2003).

65
Regular professional development meetings focused on collaborative scoring
of student work using grade-level scoring rubrics to ensure accurate evaluation.
Information gained through collaborative scoring enabled teachers to provide timely,
accurate and specific feedback to students, positively influencing student
performance (Reeves, 2003). The discovery of writing as a tool for learning in other
content areas required schools to focus on writing in the professional development.
Written responses on assessments created at the local school sites provide more
accurate measures of actual student knowledge than state or district assessments as
locally created assessments actually test students on the information taught in the
classroom (Reeves, 2000, 2003). Assessment information is a key element in the
identification of students for special education services. While many of the
assessments used in the special education evaluation process are nationally norm
referenced, locally developed assessments which assess the student’s grasp of the
material taught in the classroom that are considered as part of the identification
process may help provide a fuller picture of a student’s abilities, reducing over
identification of minority students, especially if the instruction and assessments are
culturally responsive and sensitive (Harry and Anderson, 1994; Gardener and
Miranda, 2001).
Student performance data revealed through assessments is used in many ways
in high performing schools. Systems of monitoring of student progress toward goals
and providing timely feedback to students positively impact student performance
(Marzano, 2001). Accurate identification of students for intervention or special

66
education services is made using multiple, unbiased assessments of students’
abilities. Current data from recent assessment is utilized to focus professional
development and improve instruction by providing teachers timely, specific feedback
on their students’ needs (Reeves, 2000, 2003). It is clear that these various elements
in school practice have to work in a coordinated and coherent manner to produce the
desired results.

Parental Involvement
The Parent Teacher Association established national standards for
Parent/Family Involvement Programs in 1997. The establishment of these programs
emphasized the need for systemic parent and community involvement in schools
(Marzano, 2003). Parents’ previous experiences with schools as students are likely to
color their relationship with their child’s school (Ogbu, 1998). Schools need to be
aware of the preconceived notions parents bring to school and ensure that all parents
are communicated with effectively and welcomed as equal partners into the school
community.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) illuminated the importance of schools’
awareness of the influence of the variety of parents’ cultural models of learning.
Goldenberg, Reese, and Gallimore (1992) studied the influence of sending home
books in Spanish, (Libros) on Latino kindergarteners. The purpose was for parents to
read the Libros with their children to build emergent literacy skills. In actual practice
parents remembered their own educational experiences and used the Libros for rote

67
practice and repetition to help their children learn and memorize the words. This
research brought attention to the impact of a parent’s cultural model of learning on
the way the parent works with their child at home. School reform efforts focused on
improving student outcomes must clearly understand and take into account the
cultural models of learning of the parent population to effectively involve parents as
part of the students’ educational support network (Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001).
School-home communication is essential to increasing parent involvement
and student achievement (Marzano, 2003, Gardner and Miranda, 2001). High
poverty schools where students are high achieving tend to establish effective ways of
communicating with parents and the community in the predominate languages of the
school’s linguistically diverse student population. A variety of communication
modes are used to make information simply and readily accessible: newsletters,
phone calls, parent-teacher conferences, meetings, and a school website to
disseminate information to parents (Marzano, 2003; Suárez-Orozco and Qin, 2006;
Zhou, 2003).
Providing parents opportunities to become involved as volunteers in the daily
life of the school is an important tool for building bridges between the home and
school cultures. Involvement helps parents build a sense of ownership in the school
(Marzano, 2003). Volunteers can help in classrooms or the library. Governance
structures, such as parent advisory councils or local school site councils, offer
parents an opportunity to become involved in the decision making processes
governing a school (Marzano, 2003). Schools need to offer involvement

68
opportunities to parents who do not have daytime availability to volunteer in the
school. Parents can support the school within the home environment through
conversations with their children about school and monitoring of school and
homework (Gutman and Midgley, 2000). Use of effective communications,
opportunities for parents to become involved in the daily life of the school, and
parent input on committees and councils support effective parent and community
involvement in, and collaboration with, schools.

Elementary and Middle School Structures
Elementary and middle schools have two very different cultures. Elementary
schools tend to be smaller. In elementary school students spend the majority of their
day with one teacher in one classroom, building a relationship with classmates and
the teacher that helps them connect to the school. Teachers have more time to spend
with individual students to address their needs. Students in elementary schools are
able to exercise more self-regulation and have more choices open to them within the
classroom strengthening their self-efficacy (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). The intimate
environment and structure of elementary school is left behind as students move on to
middle school. When the supportive conditions described in this chapter are present
in the elementary school for students of color and students of low-income status,
they provide a strong foundation for students transitioning to middle school;
however, when they are not present in schools, these students experience a greater
negative impact from this change than other students. Elementary schools that

69
implement appropriate structures and systems to support students’ achievement are
ideal settings to prepare students for middle school.
Middle school campuses are much larger and serve more students than
elementary schools. School discipline and rules are apt to be more rigid. Students
are required to adapt to new middle school rules and norms and a less-personal
environment quickly. They are challenged to learn the locations of classes,
restrooms, and lockers. The volume of students seen by teachers on a daily basis
leads to fewer opportunities for middle school students to receive guidance as they
develop new skills in self-regulated learning and choice making in the classroom
setting (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). Students’ rotation among classes and teachers
results in reduced opportunities for students and teachers to form connections
(Eccles, 1993, Schumacher, 1998). These personal connections are essential to
helping students develop a sense of belonging in middle school and feel supported in
a successful transition to the middle school (Schumacher, 1998, Gutman and
Midgley, 2000, Stensrud, 2006). The tighter structure and control, fewer personal
connections with adults, and other mismatches between the school and students
results in many students who were motivated and engaged in elementary school
losing their motivation and engagement when they transition to middle school
(Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). This new setting further intensifies the alienation from
school that some students already experienced in elementary schools where the
sociocultural context was hostile or alienating. Students of color are most likely to
fall into this category (Harry and Anderson, 1994; Gardener and Miranda, 2001).

70
Elementary School Structures and Systems that Support Transition
to Middle School
Middle school can be an exciting and yet stressful change in a student’s life.
Students experience numerous physical, emotional, and cognitive changes and
challenges at this time in addition to transitioning to a new school environment.
Puberty and new worries about body image, increased responsibility and declining
reliance on parents, and increased abstract processing ability all come at the time the
student is moving to the larger, less personal and more competitive middle school.
All students making the transition to middle school experience anxiety and
excitement about the change in school environment, finding classrooms and lockers,
as well as the more demanding academic requirements (Schumacher, 1998; Forgan
and Vaughn, 2000; Maras and Aveling, 2006).
A study of research on transition programs determined that students are more
likely to complete high school if they have established self-identities as learners
during elementary school and take part in programs that assist them in transitioning
from elementary to middle school (Kentucky Dropout Prevention Resource Guide,
2003). Gutman and Midgley (2000) determined that the academic performance of
many students declines as they transition from elementary to middle school. Students
of color, for reasons expressed throughout this chapter, may be especially vulnerable
to the negative effects of transition. Attention to the sociocultural setting of the
school is essential (Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1995a,
1995b). Elementary schools that have created structures and systems that result in a

71
positive school experience for students of color provide their students with self-
efficacy, strong identities as learners and skills to build interpersonal relationships
with adults in the new school setting.
Elementary school teachers can help relieve matriculating students’ stress
about middle school by creating systems that actively prepare students for the
transition. Collaborative discussions between middle and elementary school teachers
about academic expectations of middle school teachers and state content standards
can help elementary teachers focus instruction to prepare students to succeed in
middle school. Discussions provide middle school teachers with realistic
expectations of their entering students and enable them to understand the elementary
school standards so middle school teachers will know what skills and knowledge
students bring to middle school and can build on that existing knowledge base
(Gutman and Midgley, 2000; Maras and Aveling, 2006). Such discussions help to
build a culture of shared collaboration between the elementary and middle school
that will serve to more effectively support positive transition and sustain academic
performance by all students (Schumacher, 1996; Kentucky Department of Education
Dropout Prevention Resource Guide, 2003). This information is especially critical
for teachers of students of color as these students are even more vulnerable to
declining performance upon entry into middle school than students whose culture is
congruent with the school culture (Gutman and Midgley, 2000). Guidance
counselors and teachers in middle schools need to study high performing elementary

72
schools to learn about the effective pedagogies used in elementary school to support
and engage students of color in their learning (Schumacher, 1998).
All students, regardless of ability or ethnicity, need to be able to see the
impact of high achievement on their future options and choices. Classroom
instruction that is explicitly linked to future real-life applications highlights the
relationship of education to future opportunities (Zhang and Benz, 2006) as well as
their home and community cultural orientations. The focus on future real-life
applications may be an important tool to mitigate the disillusionment about prospects
for the future as described in the cultural-ecological explanation for low academic
achievement of students of color in high poverty neighborhoods, as historical job
discrimination and imposed generational poverty have placed these students at
greater risk of failing to see school as a means for social mobility (Ogbu, 1987;
Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). They are the most at-risk populations for dropping
out of school (Gutman and Midgley, 2000, Stensrud, 2006). The significance of
connecting school to real life experience was highlighted in Stensrud’s 2006 study of
prison inmates. Problems with school, such as the lack of connection with the real
world, were the most common factor in the prison inmates’ earlier decisions to drop
out of school. 74.5% of state inmates and 59.4% of inmates in federal prisons report
dropping out of high school (Stensrud, 2006). Elementary schools that connect
school achievement and future real-life application can enhance students’ success in
similar middle school settings.

73
Consistent with sociocultural theories of learning, students are dependent
upon cultural learning settings that respect and affirm their identities along with
linking school and home cultures (Gallimore and Goldenberg, 2001). Students who
attend elementary schools that value both student-teacher and student-student
interactions are more likely to build positive relationships with their peers and adults
in middle school and less likely to become disenfranchised and drop-out of school
(Stensrud, 2006). Positive relationships with teachers and peers, especially in middle
school, are critical to students’ successful transition and adjustment to the larger
middle school environment. A study of young adults who dropped out of school
identified a common theme of an absence of personal connections to others and
feelings of being different from other students (Stensrud, 2006). Students who have
experienced a sociocultural setting of strong interpersonal relationships in
elementary school may need these structures in middle school, but they may be less
dependent on these structures than students who experience alienation from the
school culture during elementary school.
A supportive school environment and caring teacher can help students
transition successfully to middle school (Gutman and Midgley, 1999). A sense of
school connectedness was positively and significantly related to school engagement
and motivation of low-income Hispanic and African American adolescents
(Goodenow and Grady, 1994).
A system of intentional collaboration between sending elementary and
receiving middle schools can ease the stress, facilitate more effective transitions, and

74
help sustain high levels of student performance in middle school for all students. In
the self-contained classrooms of elementary schools students and teachers more
easily establish personal relationships that are significant factors in building the
connection between the student and school leading to increased student interaction,
engagement, and achievement (Forgan and Vaughn, 2000). This foundation of
sociocultural learning is significant in creating and maintaining student engagement
in the learning process and strengthening students’ self-efficacy (Marks, 2000). The
middle school model of students moving to a different teacher for each subject
makes the establishment of this important connection more difficult for students and
teachers (Gutman and Midgley, 1999). Therefore, it is critical that elementary
schools provide sociocultural learning pedagogies that support formal and informal
positive teacher-student and student-student connections. This personal contact is
important as middle schools are larger and have very different school and classroom
environments from elementary schools (Schumacher, 1998; Forgan and Vaughn,
2000).

Conclusion
Today’s schools and teachers are charged with the task of preparing all
students to become responsible and productive participants in both the local and
global communities. Federal (NCLB) and state laws currently mandate educational
accountability for individual students as well as school wide performance. In
response to the requirement that all students achieve at high levels, states have put in

75
place content standards which describe the knowledge and skills students are to
master at each grade level. High stakes standardized assessments administered
annually measure students’ progress toward mastery of the grade level standards.
The current focus on school accountability brought about by No Child Left
Behind has shed a bright light on the continuing inequity of schools and the resulting
impact on student performance. High poverty urban schools are frequently associated
with low levels of academic achievement. Ogbu and Simons (1998) found that
differences in student performance were a result of long-standing discriminatory
treatment of minority groups by the dominant White, middle-class culture of society.
Discrimination is manifested in rundown schools, lack of and/or outdated books and
equipment, and inexperienced teachers.
Despite historical discrimination and segregation some high poverty urban
schools with large concentrations of students of color have implemented structures
and systems that promote and sustain high levels of academic achievement. Factors
that foster high levels of student performance include: school wide high expectations
for all students, a school culture and systematic professional development for staff
focused on improving the quality of classroom instruction, and involving students’
parents as active partners in the educational process.
The goal of professional development is to increase teachers’ knowledge of
state content standards and effective instructional methods. Teachers need to be
aware of the standards for the grades preceding and following the grade they teach in
order to have accurate expectations for entering students and to properly prepare

76
students to succeed in subsequent grades. This vertical awareness of the standards is
especially significant for elementary school fifth and sixth grade teachers to properly
prepare students for the transition to middle school.
The transition from elementary to middle school is a critical time during a
student’s educational career; the larger, less personal campus and culture of the
middle school contrasts sharply with the smaller, more personal environment of the
self-contained classrooms of the elementary school. Performance by all students
tends to decline during middle school; however students of color are particularly
vulnerable to decreased school engagement, lower beliefs in their academic self-
efficacy, decreased opportunities to develop positive connections with teachers, and
poorer levels of academic performance due to the dissonance between their home
and middle school cultures.
Research has identified specific systems that foster a positive attitude toward
school and support enhanced academic self-efficacy in elementary school, provide
important support for a successful transition of all students to middle school, and are
particularly significant for students of color. Students who have a positive attitude
toward school and feel efficacious tend to engage more during instruction and
perform at higher levels than students who do not engage. A supportive school
culture and caring teachers help all students move on successfully in middle school.

77
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Overview
The focus of this chapter is a description of the research methodology, the
sample, and population for this study. The chapter also addresses the
instrumentation, data collection techniques, and analysis. The purpose of this study
was to investigate the organizational structures and systems in one elementary school
that are perceived to facilitate high academic performance by students of color and
help sustain achievement in middle school. This study was conducted by exploring
the organization structures and systems of one high poverty urban elementary school
for the purpose of creating greater understanding of how instructional leaders and
classroom teachers in the elementary school build social and academic foundations
to foster students’ continued high levels of performance. The study identified trends
and patterns of achievement by students of color and documented the school’s
structures and systems from the perspectives of the elementary school
administration, classroom teachers, classified staff, and parents of students enrolled
in the elementary school. It also examined the policies and practices that formed
those systems by examining how the teachers engaged all students, including
students of color, in the instructional process on a school wide basis through
culturally relevant pedagogy and a school climate of mutual respect for the cultural
diversity of all students and staff.

78
To facilitate this study, four research questions were developed:
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of color?
2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to
contribute to high student performance in high poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color?
3. How are the organizational systems and structures implemented to support
school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?

Study Design
A qualitative case study approach was selected to provide descriptive data in
order to identify the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to
contribute to the maintenance of high academic performance and the development of
academic self-efficacy by students of color during elementary school and to support
achievement in middle school. Qualitative study was critical to this exploration as
qualitative research presses for “understanding the complex interrelationship among
all that exists” (Stake, 1995). Qualitative study involves a naturalistic, interpretive
attitude toward the subject matter requiring the use of multiple methods of
investigation. Patton (2002) explained that naturalistic inquiry allows the evaluator to
gather data in a real-world context with a focus on understanding what the
participants experienced. The case study approach was chosen because it permitted

79
the development of an in-depth examination of a single case by means of a variety of
data sources including interviews, observations, documents and physical artifacts.
Quantitative data was obtained to determine the trends and patterns of performance
addressed in research question one. The use of multiple sources of data and a variety
of methods of data gathering supported triangulation of data and analysis, increasing
the reliability and validity of the study (Patton, 2002).
A descriptive approach to data analysis was used, as it is consistent with a
case study methodology. Descriptive data analysis required the researcher to
discover themes or patterns and articulate propositions from the data gathered over a
period of time from a variety of instruments (Patton, 2002, Stake, 1995). Theoretical
frameworks provided structures for constructing meaning as well as identifying
patterns and themes from the data gathered. These theoretical frameworks guided the
type of data collected, the analysis of the data, and reporting the implications of the
study. The frameworks chosen were grounded in contemporary, relevant literature on
high poverty, high performing urban schools. Based on the literature, these
theoretical frameworks provided a reliable means of weighing the data in the report
of findings.
Figure 3-1 illustrates the theoretical framework that provided the foundation
for the study of high poverty/high performing schools that serve large concentrations
of students of color.

80
Figure 3-1: Theoretical Framework

Framework for the first research question. The first research question asked:
“What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of color?” This
question was based on the theoretical framework that high performing schools are
the result of multiple components interacting to form structures and systems;
therefore, it is necessary to review a variety of data to understand how a school
functions to support the academic achievement of students of color. The question
was designed to reveal the ways in which school staff and parents monitored student

81
performance and the types of evidence used to determine levels of student
performance (Creswell, 2003; Merriam, 1998; Patton, 2002; Stake, 1995).
Framework for the second research question. The second research question
asked: “What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to
contribute to high student performance in high poverty urban schools with large
concentrations of students of color?” Underlying this primary question were
interview sub-questions developed collaboratively by a team of doctoral students at
the University of Southern California chaired by Dr. Sylvia G. Rousseau to reveal
the multiple key school-level factors that must work in an integrated and coordinated
system to support high student achievement (Marzano, 2003; Elmore, 1995, 2001).
Framework for the third research question. The third research question
asked: “How are the organizational systems and structures implemented to support
school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?” This
question was grounded in a combination of socio-cultural and constructivist theories.
This question explored effective classroom instruction, the use of assessment data,
and support systems available to classroom teachers (Parker & Goicoechea, 2000;
Vygotsky, 1987).
Framework for the fourth research question. The final research questions
asked: “How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?” Looking through a sociocultural lens this question was designed to
illuminate the school climate as viewed through the school-wide discipline policy,
support provided to teachers to facilitate culturally relevant instruction that respects

82
the cultures of students of color, and the manner in which the school addresses the
issue of race and social capital (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Ladson-Billings, 1995).

Nomination and Selection Process
The schools selected for this case study were chosen through purposive
sampling based on criteria jointly determined by a research team of 17 Ed.D.
candidates from the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern
California. These schools were chosen as a means to construct a more in-depth
understanding of the organizational systems and structures that foster high levels of
performance by students of color in high poverty urban schools. The team identified
high performing, high poverty urban schools in California from a pool of schools by
applying the following criteria:
 60% of the students were identified as students of color.
 The API and AYP indexes demonstrated a trajectory of growth over the past
five years.
 75% of the students enrolled were eligible for free or reduced price meals
 The selected schools were identified as school-wide Title 1 schools in urban,
densely populated areas serving large concentrations of students of color.
 Numbers of students enrolled: elementary 400 or more students, middle 700
or more students, high schools 1,000 or more students enrolled
Data about schools were gathered from a variety of websites including the
California Department of Education, Schools Moving Up, and Just 4 Kids. Schools

83
that did not meet the criteria were eliminated from consideration. Schools considered
for the study were further examined to ensure they met the criteria. Schools that met
the criteria were identified and notified of the study.

Selected School
Lincoln Avenue Elementary School is located in a large school district in
California, Westham School District (WSD). The school is tucked into an arroyo just
inside the district’s western boundary which borders an upper middle class city that
is not part of WSD. To the west there is a large park down the street and
soccer/baseball fields which are part of the city to the west. To the east there is a
densely populated neighborhood with a large concentration of students of color.
Families live in apartments, single dwellings, or federally subsidized housing. The
level of parents’ education, among the 81% of parents who responded to this item
according to State Testing and Review (STAR) data (2006), varied from almost 30%
who did not complete high school to 9% with post secondary education. Seventy-
nine percent of the enrolled Pre-School through 6
th
grade students participate in the
free or reduced price meal program that includes breakfast and lunch. Eighty-five
percent of Lincoln students are Hispanic or Latino, the remaining 15% represent a
variety of ethnicities including African American, American Indian, Asian, Filipino,
and White (not of Hispanic origin). Upon graduation from elementary school most
students matriculate to Villa Middle School. Villa receives students from nine area

84
elementary schools and serves an ethnically diverse student body of just under 1,800
students.

Interview Participants
Participants were chosen for the purpose of providing a range of perspectives
and information on the research questions. Access to the schools was arranged
through the WSD Research Department protocols. Interviews with the principal and
outgoing assistant principal identified teachers involved in fostering students’
maintenance of high levels of academic performance. The latter group would be
interviewed at a later time. These interviews were also used to gather relevant
information in preparation for the school site visit. The following members of the
school staff were interviewed:
Principal. The principal has held this position at Lincoln Avenue Elementary
School for the past 10 years. Previously he was the principal at a year-round
elementary school in Westham School District.
Former Assistant Principal, Elementary Instructional Specialist (APEIS):
The former APEIS filled the position for the past 4 years. This was a full-time
position during her tenure as Assistant Principal.
Current Assistant Principal, Elementary Instructional Specialist (APEIS).
The APEIS has only been at this school since September, 2007. The position was
reduced from full-time to half-time as of September, 2007. Previously he was the
APEIS at another elementary school in the district.

85
School Administrative Assistant (SAA). The SAA has been in this position for
the past 8 years. Her child attends Lincoln. Previously she was employed as an
office technician at Lincoln Elementary.
Classroom Teachers. The classroom teachers interviewed have differing
amounts of teaching experience. Classroom observations were conducted in all grade
levels.
Playground Supervisors: Playground supervisors from the First through Sixth
grade playground were interviewed.
School Health Aide: The school health aide has been in this position for many
years. Her child attended Lincoln.
Parents. The parents interviewed had students in a variety of grade levels at
Lincoln Elementary.

Instrumentation
The instrumentation for this study was developed by members of the research
study team of Ed.D. candidates from the University of Southern California that met
during the summer of 2007. This team was led by Dr. Sylvia Rousseau and Dr.
Kathy Stowe. The full team of 17 Ed.D. candidates jointly developed the
instrumentation before dividing into smaller teams to study high performing, high
poverty urban schools through a variety of lenses to construct a more in-depth
perspective on successful practices and polices employed by the identified schools.
After lengthy conversations regarding the current literature, the team finally reached

86
consensus on the conceptual frameworks to be used in the study. The agreed upon
conceptual frameworks were used to frame the study and develop data collection
instruments that addressed the four research questions. Several drafts of data
collection instruments were reviewed during the summer prior to the actual
collection of data. Creswell’s (2002) process of data analysis was selected to guide
the investigation of data gathered for the study.
The thematic dissertation group cooperatively developed observation
protocols for the purpose of collecting data to validate information gathered from the
interviews and documents. The classroom observation instrument was created to
obtain student-teacher interactions, classroom practice, and classroom culture
information (see Appendix E, Classroom Observation Protocol). The professional
development observation protocol was developed to capture teacher-to-teacher
interactions, the structure of the activities, content and materials, and systems that
enable students of color to learn and achieve (see Appendix F, Professional
Development Observation Protocol). A “Leadership Team Meeting Reflection
Guide” was created to facilitate exploration of the functioning of the leadership team
and role of distributed leadership at the school site (Appendix G: Leadership Team
Meeting Questions for Reflection). The observation guide of the physical setting was
written to facilitate the exploration of campus factors contributing to the school
culture (See Appendix H: School Observation Guide).
Table 3-1 shows the relationship of the research questions to the topics
addressed through each research question.

87
Table 3-1: Topics Addressed by each Research Question and Method of Data
Collection
Research Questions and Topics Addressed Interview Observation Artifact
Research Question 1: What are the trends and patterns of
performance among students of color?

How are the needs of students of color addressed in the
School Plan?
x x
Evidence of student performance other than test scores x x
Research Question 2: What are the organizational structures
and systems that are perceived to contribute to high student
performance in high-poverty urban schools with large
concentrations of students of color?

Policies and practices that contribute to high student
performance and the school environment
x x
Effective action taken to improve student performance
over the past five years
x
Obstacles encountered in maintaining the structures and
systems
x
Discipline policy and implementation x x x
Research Question 3: How are the organizational structures
and systems implemented to support school-wide effective
classroom instruction that promotes student learning?

Description of effective teaching x
Monitoring of student progress x x x
Differentiated instruction to meet the needs of all students x x x
Use of data to guide instruction x x x
Types of data used to guide instruction x x x
Research Question 4: How is the construct of race reflected in
the school’s structures and systems?

School climate that engages all students and respects
cultural diversity
x x
Communication of academic expectations to teachers and
students
x x
Impact of discipline policy on students of color x x x
Support for teachers’ implementation of culturally
relevant pedagogy
x x
Professional development and practices that support
student performance
x x x
Discussion of the issue of race with students, staff, and
community members
x
Selection of students for referral to GATE,
intervention/enrichment programs
x x
Importance of race at the school site x

88
Data Collection Process
Semi-structured structured interviews were held with all participants at the
elementary school. One interview was scheduled with a teacher from each grade
level (first through sixth), paraprofessionals, office technicians, and parents. The
principal and assistant principals were interviewed twice to ensure in-depth
collection of data and clarify questions generated during interviews with other
participants. The former assistant principal was interviewed to provide an in-depth
historical perspective of the school. The current assistant principal is half-time and
had been at the site for three months at the time of the interviews. He provided a
current view of the school’s efforts to support student performance. Interviews lasted
approximately twenty to forty-five minutes and took place at the participants’ school.
The interview with the former assistant principal took place off site. Interviews were
based on questions that were cooperatively developed by the members of the study
team (see Appendix A, Administrator Interview, Appendix B, Teacher Interview,
Appendix C, Classified Interview, and Appendix D, Parent Interview). Interview
questions were grounded in current educational research and conceptual frameworks.
Artifacts were collected to support information obtained through interviews.
Artifacts included:
 Schedules
 Data sets and protocols—California Standards Test and district tests
 Meeting agendas/minutes for School Site Council and Leadership Team
meetings

89
 School Plan
 Meeting agendas and documents from Professional Development meetings
 Attendance data for students
 Bulletins and other written communications

Ethical Considerations
The researcher studied the organizational structures and systems in place at
the school site that fostered continued high levels of performance by students of
color and students with special needs during their elementary school careers as well
as when they transitioned from elementary to middle school. All participation was
voluntary and participants were assured that all efforts would be taken to protect
their anonymity. In accordance with Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirements,
informed consent was received from the interviewees prior to the beginning of each
interview. Multiple qualitative methods were used to validate the data gathered by
means of interviews, observations, and artifacts. The use of a variety of sources of
data facilitated triangulation and strengthened validity of data sources. On-site
interviews were audio taped when possible and were transcribed and coded.

Data Analysis
The purpose of this study was to identify high performing urban schools
serving large concentrations of students of color and identify effective elementary
school structures and systems perceived to contribute to sustained academic

90
achievement in middle school. The study documented the efforts of one elementary
school to increase students’ performance in and the development of self-efficacy in
elementary school to support students in middle school. Four research questions
addressed the intention of the study and provided the basis for data collection and
analysis. Table 3-2 provides a description of the data analysis sequence.

Table 3-2: Process of Data Analysis
Step One:
Organize and
Prepare
• Sorting and arranging the data
• Transcribing interviews
Step Two:
General Sense
• Read through all data
• Reflect on the overall meaning
• Record general thoughts about data
Step Three:
Coding
• Create and label categories
• Organizing the material into “chunks”/categories
Step Four:
Description
• Generate a description of the
setting/people/categories/themes
• Detail rendering of information
• Generate small number of themes/categories
• Display multiple perspectives
Step Five:
Represented
• Narrative passage to convey the findings of the
analysis
• Detail discussion of themes
• Discussion with interconnecting themes
• Present a process model (grounded in theory)
Step Six:
Interpretations
• Meaning of the data
• Lessons learned
• Researcher’s personal interpretation
• Meaning derived from comparison of the findings to
literature/theories
Source: Creswell (2002)

91
Data were collected and recorded using the interview and observation guides.
Data were then sorted by research question and method of collection (interview,
observation, or artifacts). A triangulation matrix was created to guide data analysis.
The matrix put forth the research questions and how those questions were answered
by the data collection instruments. A table showing the relationship of the data
collection instruments to the research questions of the study can be seen in Table 3-3
below.

Table 3-3: Relationship of Data Collection Instruments to Research Questions
RQ 1:
Trends of
Achievement
RQ 2:
Structures &
Systems
RQ 3:
Implementation
RQ 4:
Construct of
Race
Interviews x x x x
Observations x x x x
Artifacts/Data x x x x

Conclusion
This chapter addressed the research methodology for the study. The
discussion included a description of the study design, the nomination and selection of
schools process, the sample and population selected, instrumentation and data
collection procedures, process, and analysis. Procedures for the study included
obtaining permission from the school district to conduct the study, visiting the
schools, conducting interviews, gathering documents and artifacts, and identifying
effective transition structures and systems to support students as they transition from

92
elementary to middle school. Results and an analysis of the data related to each
research question are provided in the next chapter.

93
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS, ANAYLSIS, AND DISCUSSION
Chapter Four presented the results from a case study of one elementary
school’s efforts to improve student achievement. Explicit selection criteria were
developed to learn more about how elementary schools with high concentrations of
students of color in high poverty urban neighborhoods improve student outcomes. A
case study approach was utilized to collect both quantitative and qualitative data
associated with how a specific school worked to improve student achievement over
five years from 2002-03 through the 2006-07 school years.
This chapter presented, analyzed and discussed the findings of the study in
reference to the following four research questions:
 What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of color?
 What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to
contribute to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools with
large concentrations of students of color?
 How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to support
school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student learning?
 How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and systems?
This study examined Lincoln Avenue Elementary School’s efforts to increase
student achievement. Trends and patterns of student performance, organizational
structures and systems, effective school-wide classroom instruction supporting
student learning, and the school’s construct of race as promoting student

94
achievement were investigated. Eight data collection instruments were developed for
this study and used to collect data germane to the research questions. The seven
instruments actually used included: (1) an Administrator Interview Protocol
(Appendix A); (2) a Teacher Interview Protocol (Appendix B); (3) a Classified Staff
Interview Protocol (Appendix C); (4) a Parent Interview Protocol (Appendix D); (5)
a Classroom Observation Protocol (Appendix E); (6) a Professional Development
Observation Protocol (Appendix F); and, (7) a School-Wide Observation Protocol
(Appendix H). Due to the time constraints of the study and Lincoln Elementary’s
circumstance of only one half-time math coach, one half-time literacy coach, and a
half-time assistant principal the researcher was unable to observe a leadership team
meeting; consequently the Leadership Team Meeting Observation Protocol
(Appendix G) was not used in this study. The data gathered for this study consisted
of information from:
 Interviews with school administrators, teachers, classified staff, and
parents of students
 Classroom observations
 Observation of professional development
 School-wide observations
 Data from source documents
 Quantitative data from the California Department of Education website.
Data were analyzed and interpreted using triangulation of multiple sources of
information whenever possible. Triangulation of available multiple sources of data

95
increased the validity and reliability of the findings. The findings presented in this
chapter are organized by the four research questions and are each followed by a
detailed analysis and discussion.

Data Findings
Research Question 1: Patterns and Trends of Performance:
The first research question asked, “What are the trends and patterns of
performance among students of color?” This question was grounded in the
theoretical framework that high performing schools are the outcome of multiple
components interacting to form structures and systems that support over time trends
and patterns of student performance. This question and the sub-questions were
designed to examine the trends and patterns of student achievement over the past
four years (Creswell, 2003; Patton, 2002, Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995).
Lincoln Elementary has a student body that is 96.7 % students of color. The
student body is:
 86.7 percent Latino
 2.4 percent Asian
 2.1 percent African American
 3.3 percent White
 3.6 percent Filipino students.
Almost the entire student body consists of students of color; therefore questions
addressing students of color revealed information about almost the entire student

96
body and visa versa. This concentration of students of color also qualified this school
for study based on the criteria set by the thematic dissertation group chaired by Dr.
Sylvia G. Rousseau.
An analysis of the data collected for this research question led to the
following findings:
1. School-wide CST data on Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO) for
statistically significant sub-groups reveals an upward trend of achievement in
both English language arts and mathematics.
2. Sixth grade students in the elementary school setting perform at higher levels
than sixth grade students in middle school settings.
3. The teaching staff is stable and experienced.
There is an upward trend in student achievement. Data from the CST reveal a pattern
of increased student performance and achievement over the past five years. In the
2002-’03 school year Lincoln Elementary’s Academic Performance Index (API) was
671; this index was used as baseline data. In the past five years the school’s API has
increased to 782 for the 2006-’07 school year. This change in API scores represents
a growth of 117 points.

97
Table 4-1: Lincoln Elementary API from 2002 to 2007
Year API
2002-’03 671
2003-’04 747
2004-’05 748
2005-’06 745
2006-’07 788

Comparison of School, District, and State API growth:
Figure 4-1: School, District-wide Elementary Schools, and State-wide Elementary
Schools Academic Performance Index (API) scores 2003-2007

Data from the California Department of Education (CDE) Data Quest website
revealed that over the same time period Lincoln Elementary School’s API exceeded
both the state and district mean API scores. Lincoln’s API was more similar to the
state’s mean API than to the District’s over this time period. Data on the 2002-2003
state API were not available.

98
School-wide Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) growth:
Figure 4-2: School-wide percent of students at or above proficient inEnglish
Language Arts and Math: AYP data 2003-2007 (Targets: ELA: 24.4; Math: 26.5
percent)

Source: California Department of Education Website

The AYP data showed a trend of increased levels of school-wide
achievement in both English language arts and math each year between 2003 and
2007. The AYP proficiency and above targets for 2002-2003 were 13.6 percent for
English language arts and 16.0 percent for math. In the 2003-2004 school year the
AYP targets were changed to 24.4 percent for English language arts and 26.5 percent
for math. Approximately 25 percent more students scored at proficient or above in
math than in English language arts during the time period studied.
The school-wide growth in achievement was supported by the growth among
sub-groups of students scoring proficient or above on the 2006 CST. All statically
significant sub-groups met and exceeded the AYP Percent Proficient Target for
2006-2007.

99
Table 4-2: Percent of Students at or Above Proficient on the 2007 CST
English Language Arts: 2006 Percent at or Above Proficient
School-wide 42.4
Latino 38.3
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 38.6
English Learners 31.3
2006 Percent Proficient Target: 24.4
Mathematics: 2006 Percent at or Above Proficient
School-wide 65.6
Hispanic 64.0
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 62.8
English Learners 58.9
2006 Percent Proficient Target: 26.5
Source: California Department of Education Website.

Performance by statically significant sub-groups:
Data on performance by students of color in both English language arts and
math showed a steady increase in the percent of students scoring at or above
proficient on the CST. Socioeconomically disadvantaged students’ data showed a
similar trend in performance in both content areas. English language learners scored
consistently lower than students of color and socioeconomically disadvantage
students in English language arts and math; however in 2003-2004 English learners
scored two percent higher than socioeconomically disadvantage students and one
percent higher than students of color in math.

100
Performance by students of color, socioeconomically disadvantaged, and English
learners in English language arts:

Figure 4-3: Percent of sub-groups at or above proficient in English Language Arts:
2003-2007 (Target: 24.4 percent)

English language learners’ achievement fluctuated from year to year in
English language arts (ELA). Performance in ELA varied within five percent; from a
low of 24.5 percent in 2004-2005 to a high of 31.1 percent of English language
learners scoring at or above proficient. In the 2003-2004 school year English
language learners scored comparably with students of color and socioeconomically
disadvantaged students in ELA. In 2004-2005 the gap between English language
learners and students of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged students
widened to close to ten percent fewer English Learners meeting the AYP target for
ELA than students of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged students. This
achievement gap continued in the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 school years. English
language learners were predominately Latino.

101
Data for students of color was influenced by the availability of data for
African-American students. Data on achievement be African-American students was
available for the 2002-2003 and 2005-2006 school years. The lack of available data
for the other three school years was due to the state policy that data for sub-groups of
ten or less are not released due to student confidentiality concerns. In 2002-2003 and
2005-2006 more students of color than English language learners or
socioeconomically disadvantaged students scored at or above proficient in ELA on
the CST. Specific information on performance by ethnic sub-groups is addressed in a
later section of research question one.

Performance by students of color, socioeconomically disadvantaged, and English
learners in math:

Figure 4-4: Percent sub-groups at or above proficient in Math: 2003-2007 (Target:
26.5 percent)

More students in all three sub-groups met the AYP target for the time period
studied in math than in English language arts. In 2002-2003 and 2005-2006 more
students of color, Latino and African-American, scored at or above proficient in

102
math than socioeconomically disadvantaged students or English learners. These two
school years were the only years data on performance by African-American students
was available; the other years reflect only data on performance by Latino students.
In 2003-2004 more English language learners met the math AYP target than students
of color or socioeconomically disadvantaged students. In 2004-2007 this outcome
was reversed. Students of color and socioeconomically disadvantaged students
showed similar increases in performance, with a difference of two percent between
the two sub-groups of students meeting the AYP math target. During the same time
frame English learners meeting the AYP target alternated increased and decreased
scores. The range in the percent of English learners meeting the AYP target for math
from 2003 through 2007 was between 50 and 61 percent of the students.

Performance by African-American and Latino sub-groups:
Figure 4-5: Percent of Ethnic Sub-groups scoring at Proficient or Advanced on
English Language Arts on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007 (Target: 24.4)

(Data for sub-groups with ten or fewer students tested were not available due to
confidentiality constraints.) Source: California Department of Education Website

103
Figure 4-6: Percent of Ethnic Sub-groups scoring at Proficient or Advanced on
Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007(Target: 26.5)
(Data for sub-groups with ten or fewer students tested was not available
due to confidentiality constraints.) Source: California Department of Education
Website

More in-depth disaggregation of the data on achievement by ethnic
subgroups revealed that Latino students met and exceeded the AYP targets for
percent of students scoring at or above proficient on both English language arts and
mathematics over the past five years. African-American students also met and
exceeded AYP math and ELA targets for 2002-2003 and 2005-2006, the only years
data were available on this sub-group. More Latino students scored at or above
proficient in math than in English language arts over the five year period. More
African American students scored higher in math than in ELA in 2002-2003;
however in 2005-2006 more students met the AYP target for English language arts
than math. Twenty percent more African American students scored at proficient or
above in ELA in 2005-2006 than in 2002-2003. Latinos showed a pattern of

104
increased achievement from 2003-2004 to 2006-2007 in both content areas. Eight
percent more Latino students scored at or above proficient in ELA in 2002-2003 than
African American students. The percent of African- American students who met the
2005-2006 APY target for ELA was seven percent higher than the percent of Latino
students meeting that target. More Latino students than African-American students
met the 2002-2003 and 2005-2006 AYP target for math. All second through fifth
grade students in the African American sub-group completed the CST during the
time period studied; however data on achievement by subgroups of ten or fewer at a
school is not released by the state in order to protect student confidentiality
(California Department of Education). Achievement data for the 2005-2006 school
year was from the School Accountability Report Card: 2005-2006.

Trends among English language learners in English language arts and math:
Figure 4-7: English Learners scoring at Proficient or Advanced on English Language
Arts and Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007(ELA Target:
24.4; Math Target 26.5)
Source: California Department of Education Website

105
Data on the percent of English language learners showed an upward trend in
the number of students scoring at or above proficient in English language arts and
mathematics. Over the past five years 50 percent or more of English language
learners have scored at proficient or above in mathematics, with that percent
increasing over the past two years. There was a trend of decreased performance in
both English language arts and math in the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 school years.
The percent of English language learners scoring at or above proficient in both
content areas increased by close to ten percent in the 2006-2007 school year. This
increase may be related to the increased number of English language learners
reclassified as fluent English speakers in the same year.

Trends in students reclassified as Fluent English Proficient:
Figure 4-8: Percent of English Learners Reclassified: 2003-2007

5 of 195 3 of 179 0 of 161 10 of 139 35 of 123

Source: California R30 Language Census Report; California Department of
Education Website

106
The increase in the number of English learners scoring at or above proficient
in English language arts and math was consistent with the number of English
learners who were reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) over the same
time period. There was a sharp increase in the number of students reclassified in the
2006-2007 school year, double the percent of students reclassified throughout the
entire Westham Unified School District.

Trends in performance in English language arts and math by students with
disabilities:

Figure 4-9: Percent of Students with Disabilities scoring at Proficient or Advanced
on English Language Arts and Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-
2007(Target for percent at or above proficient: English language arts 24.4, Math
26.5)

Source: California Department of Education Website

Students with disabilities, as a sub-group, did not meet the Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) targets for scoring at or above proficient on the statewide
assessments.

107
The percent of students with disabilities meeting the AYP English language
arts target showed an upward trend:
 2002-2003: no students met the AYP target for ELA
 2003-2004: no students met the AYP target for ELA
 2004-2005: no students met the AYP target for ELA
 2005-2006: 8 percent of students met the AYP target for ELA
 2006-2007: 9.1 percent of students met the AYP target for ELA
The percent of students meeting the AYP math target varied from year to
year:
 2002-2003: 17.6 percent of students with disabilities met the AYP
target
 2003-2004: 11.7 percent of students with disabilities met the AYP
target
 2004-2005: 5.9 percent of students with disabilities met the AYP
target
 2005-2006: 12 percent of students with disabilities met the AYP
target
 2006-2007: 9.1 percent of students with disabilities met the AYP
target
Overall more students with disabilities met the AYP target in math than in
English language arts. This higher percent of students meeting the state performance
targets in math was consistent with other data comparing English language arts and

108
math performance, both school-wide and by sub-group, at Lincoln Elementary.
Nonetheless, the percent of students with special needs who met the APY targets in
ELA and math is quite low in comparison to other identified sub-groups and school-
wide data.
The number of students with special needs increased from 17 in 2002-2003
school year to 26 in the 2006-2007 school year. The increase in the number of
students identified as eligible for special education services was due in part to the
addition of the sixth grade in September of 2005 or students who received special
education services such as speech therapy or adapted physical education. Lincoln
Elementary did not provide special day classes on site. A Resource Specialist
Program (RSP) provided support for students with mild learning disabilities. The
addition of sixth grade accounted for the increased number of students who received
RSP support. Data from the California Department of Education website revealed
that in the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 school years ten percent of the students who
completed the CST at Lincoln were identified as students with disabilities.

109
Trends in performance in English language arts and math by males and females:
Figure 4-10: Percent of Males and Females Scoring at or above Proficient or
Advanced in English Language Arts on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007
(Target for percent at or above proficient: English language arts 24.4)

Source: California Department of Education Website

A review of the data on male and female achievement revealed that 16
percent more females met the AYP target for English language arts in the 2003-2004
than males. The achievement gap in ELA between males and females decreased
continuously from 2004 through 2007. The difference in achievement between males
and females in ELA decreased to three percent in the 2006-2007 school year.
Following a five percent decrease in from 2002-2003 to 2003-2004, the
percent of males meeting the AYP target for ELA increased steadily from 25 percent
in 2003-2004 to 41 percent in 2006-2007:
 2002-2003: 30 percent of males met the AYP target for ELA
 2003-2004: 25 percent of males met the AYP target for ELA
 2004-2005: 30 percent of males met the AYP target for ELA

110
 2005-2006: 36 percent of males met the AYP target for ELA
 2006-2007: 41 percent of males met the AYP target for ELA
This pattern of increased performance by males in ELA was reflected in the school-
wide ELA data for the 2003-2007 school years.
Performance by females was more sporadic:
 2003-2003: 41 percent of females met the AYP target for ELA
 2003-2004: 41 percent of females met the AYP target for ELA
 2004-2005: 39 percent of females met the AYP target for ELA
 2005-2006: 49 percent of females met the AYP target for ELA
 2006-2007: 44 percent of females met the AYP target for ELA
In summary, males showed greater growth (eleven percent increase from
2003-2007) in the percent of students scoring at or above proficient in ELA over the
past five years than females. Both males and females showed increased levels of
performance in English language arts as measured by the CST over the past five
years.

111
Figure 4-11: Percent of Males and Females Scoring at or above Proficient or
Advanced in Mathematics on the California Standards Test: 2003-2007 (Target for
percent at or above proficient: Math 26.5)
Source: California Department of Education Website

There was a very small difference in the percent of males and females scoring
at or above proficient in mathematics in the 2003-2004, 2004-2005, and 2006-2007
school years.
 2002-2003: 61 percent of males met the AYP target for math
 2003-2204: 53 percent of males met the AYP target for math
 2004-2005: 58 percent of males met the AYP target for math
 2005-2006: 62 percent of males met the AYP target for math
 2006-2007: 63 percent of males met the AYP target for math
Performance by females showed continuous growth until the 2006-2007 school year:
 2002-2003: 52 percent of females met the AYP target for math
 2003-2204: 56 percent of females met the AYP target for math
 2004-2005: 58 percent of females met the AYP target for math

112
 2005-2006: 69 percent of females met the AYP target for math
 2006-2007: 60 percent of females met the AYP target for math
The years of 2002-2003 and 2005-2006 showed the greatest difference
between males and females. In 2002-2003 nine percent more males met the math
AYP target than females. Seven percent more females in 2005-2006 met the AYP
target for math than males, the same year Lincoln added sixth grade. The trend of
females outscoring males (2003-2004 through 2005-2006) was reversed in 2006-
2007 with three percent more males meeting the AYP math target. Both groups
showed an overall increase in the percent of students meeting the AYP target for
math over the past five years.
Males showed a steady upward trend in achievement in both English
language arts and math from 2003-2004 to the 2006-2007 school year. Achievement
by females increased from 2002-2003 through 2005-2006, but declined in both math
and English language arts in the 2006-2007 school year. This may be due to the
proportion of males and females.

113
Figure 4-12: Number of males and females who received special education services:
2005-2006 through 2006-2007

Source: Lincoln Elementary School

Data on the number of males and females in special education was available
only for the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 school years. In the 2005-2006 school year
twice as many males as females received special education services. The number of
males in special education decreased by twenty five percent in the 2006-2007 school
year; while the number of females in special education remained constant; however
the number of males in special education remains larger than the number of females.

Trends in student attendance:
Figure 4-13: Actual Attendance Rate 2002-2003 through 2006-2007

Source: California Department of Education Website; School Accountability
Report Card

114
Student performance can be related to a combination of factors, including
attendance. Attendance at Lincoln Elementary has shown an overall increase over
the past four years, with an average actual attendance rate of 95.27%. The school’s
API score has shown a similar upward trend over the same time period.

Higher achievement by sixth grade students in elementary schools.
Figure 4-14: Percent of sixth graders scoring at or above proficient in English
language arts 2005-2006 to 2006-2007 (Target 24.4 percent)

Source: California Department of Education Website

115
Figure 4-15: Percent of sixth graders scoring at or above proficient in math 2005-
2006 to 2006-2007 (Target 26.5 percent)

Source: California Department of Education Website

More students who stayed in the Lincoln Elementary School setting for sixth
grade scored at or above proficient in both ELA and math on the CST than students
who attended Villa Middle School for sixth grade. There was more than a 20 percent
difference in the number of students who met the AYP targets for ELA and math for
the two years of this study that Lincoln Elementary kept sixth grade on site. Sixth
grade at Villa Middle School showed a two percent increase in ELA and a three
percent increase in math for students scoring at or above proficient on the CST. Sixth
graders at Lincoln showed a four percent increase in ELA and a twelve percent
decline in math for students scoring at or above proficient on the CST from 2005-
2006 to 2006-2007.

116
Table 4-16: Actual Attendance Rate for Villa, Park, and Green Middle and Lincoln
Elementary Schools
Source: California Department of Education Website

Villa Middle School is the receiving school for Lincoln Elementary School
and nine other surrounding elementary schools. The student demographics are very
similar in all nine elementary schools and reflect the surrounding community. Villa
has a student body of 1,800 sixth through eighth graders and is on a traditional
school calendar, like Lincoln. Parent involvement, as measured by students’
attendance, at Villa is lower than similar middle schools and Lincoln Elementary.
Attendance at Villa for the past five years ranged between 92.94 percent in 2005-
2006, the year sixth graders were kept at Lincoln Elementary, and 93.44 percent in
2006-2007; a 1.5 percent variation.

117
Figure 4-17: Comparison of number of suspensions in three ethnically similar middle
schools: 2003-2007

Source: California Department of Education Website

Student suspensions, as a measure of students’ adjustment to middle school,
revealed that Villa Middle School suspended students between 500 and 450 times a
year over that past five years. The number of suspensions is approximately one-
fourth of the number of students enrolled at Villa Middle School. Available data
showed only the number of suspensions; therefore it was not possible to determine if
each suspension was connected to a different student, or if a student had been
suspended more than once.

118
Figure 4-18: Number of student suspensions at Lincoln Elementary School: 2003-
2007
Source: California Department of Education Website

Suspensions at Lincoln Elementary decreased markedly in 2005-2006, the
year the school began housing sixth grade; however suspensions increased seven-
fold in the 2006-2007 school year. The number of suspensions during 2006-2007
represents approximately one twenty-fifth of the student body that year. Available
data showed only the number of suspensions; therefore it was not possible to
determine if each suspension was connected to a different student, or if a student had
been suspended more than once.
Use of data. Data is utilized in multiple ways at Lincoln Elementary. The
principal studies the CST data prior to the start of the school year in order to pinpoint
trends, monitor achievement, identify the school-wide instructional focus for the
year, and determine two foci for each grade level. This information is shared with the
staff and parents.
The principal reads all student writing assessments and practice assessment
responses to identify trends, professional development needs, and monitor student

119
progress. He shares this information and provides related instructional support during
professional development meetings. The principal’s constant question regarding data
and instruction is,
“Do we teach in light of the data, or in spite of the data…direct reflection by
the school…it’s everything that goes on…it’s about the standards, it’s about
the discipline…it’s about the multi-cultural…it’s a formula that has worked
pretty well for me….”

This comment by the principal represents his perspective on the significance
of recurrent reflection on data by the school staff.
The teaching staff is stable and experienced. Lincoln Elementary School
employs twelve register-carrying teachers. The majority of these teachers have six or
more years of teaching experience at Lincoln; there are no first year teachers on the
staff:

Table 4-3: Teaching Staff Stability at Lincoln Elementary School

Assigned to Lincoln Elementary School N
1 Year
2 - 5 Years
6 - 10 Years 3
11 or more Years 9

Source: 2006-2007 School Profile, Westham School District

120
Table 4-4: Teaching Experience in Westham School District

Teaching Experience N
Less than 1 Year
1 Year
2 - 5 Years 4
6 - 10 Years 5
11 or more Years 11

Source: 2006-2007 School Profile, Westham School District

The second graph, Teaching Experience in WSD, included information regarding
administrators, instructional coaches, and non-register-carrying teachers.

Summary of trends in performance:
In summary, findings from the first research question reveal a school-wide
upward trend in student achievement. The school API has increased by 117 points
over the past five years. The school API was consistently and markedly higher than
the District’s API for the same time period. School-wide the AYP targets have been
met or exceeded for both English language arts and math. Students of color,
socioeconomically disadvantaged, and English language learners have met and
exceeded state targets in both content areas. Almost all sub-groups achieved at
higher levels in math than English language arts. Although all eligible (second
through sixth grade) African American students at Lincoln Elementary participated
in the CST annually, data was only available for the 2002-2003 and 2005-2006

121
school years. Sub-groups of ten or fewer students are not considered statistically
significant nor are AYP data released, due to student confidentiality concerns.
Consequently, progress by “statistically insignificant” sub-groups is not monitored
by the state or federal departments of educations and the schools may not be held
accountable for addressing the needs of the students in those sub-groups.
More sixth grade students at Lincoln Elementary School met or exceeded the
AYP targets for English Language arts and math than sixth graders at Villa Middle
School. There was a greater than 20 percent difference in ELA and math
achievement between sixth graders at the two schools.
The teaching staff is stable and for the most part experienced.
Connections to Prior Research:
The upward trend of student achievement at Lincoln Elementary School
corroborates Delpit’s (2006) finding that effective schools have significant influence
on student performance. Student achievement, school-wide and sub-group, increased
during the time period studied. The exception to trend of increasing achievement was
the number of students with disabilities who scored at or above proficient on the
math portion of the CST from 2002-2003 to 2004-2005. Sixth grade was added to the
school in September, 2005, the year students with disabilities showed a distinct
increase in the number of students scoring at or above proficient in math and ELA on
the CST.
Data from the CST in ELA and math showed that sixth grade students who
remained in the Lincoln Elementary School setting performed markedly higher than

122
sixth graders attending Villa Middle School. Gutman and Midgley (2000) found that
the academic performance of many students declined when they entered middle
school. The stronger performance of sixth graders at Lincoln confirmed this finding.
Sociocultural theories of learning postulate that students are dependent upon cultural
learning settings that respect their identities and connect the home and school
cultures (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Observations and interviews confirmed
the presence of a culture of respect at Lincoln Elementary. This connectedness was
particularly significant for low-income Latino and African American students’ level
of school engagement and motivation (Goodenow & Grady, 1994).
Lincoln Elementary is an identified school-wide Title I school and receives
funds based on the number of students in poverty at the school. The trend of
increased levels of high performance by Lincoln students refutes claims (Harry &
Anderson, 1994) that economic status is a predictor of the quality of education to
which a child has access.
The high levels of academic performance at Lincoln support student
engagement and positive interactions with the school culture and act as protective
factors against placement in special education and a higher likelihood of dropping-
out of school confirming findings by Gardner & Miranda (2001).
The school’s system of consistent use of data from both summative and
formative assessments to focus professional development aligns with Massell’s
(2000) claim that systematic use of data is a significant factor in high performing
schools.

123
Futernick (2007) noted that high performing schools tend to experience high
rates of teacher retention. This is true of the Lincoln teaching staff. Most of the
teachers have six or more years, many with twelve or more years, of teaching
experience at the school.
The remaining parts of this chapter will examine the structures and systems
the school perceives to be contributors to the upward trend in students’ academic
performance. Some of the structures and systems the school has identified include
thoughtful use of data, effective instruction, and substantive teacher-student and
home-school communication. The school also attributes this upward trend to the
practice of frequent reflection by administrators and teachers. This study examines
the systems and structures the school has put in place in relation to the theoretical
frameworks the researcher has identified through an intensive literature review
presented in chapter 2.
Research Question 2: Organizational Structures and Systems
The second research question asked, “What are the organizational structures
and systems that are perceived to contribute to high student performance in high-
poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of color?” Interview sub-
questions and observation protocols for this research question were developed to
reveal the multiple key-school-level factors that must work in coordinated and
integrated systems and structures to support high student achievement (Marzano,
2003; Elmore, 1995, 2001). Marzano (2003, p. 15) identified the following elements
as key school-level factors:

124
 Guaranteed and viable curriculum
 Challenging goals and effective feedback
 Parent and community involvement
 Safe and orderly environment
 Collegiality and professionalism
Elmore (1995) noted principles of best practice in teaching. The focus of
these principles was the connections among the ideas of best practices, school policy
and organization. Many of Elmore’s principles echo Vygotsky’s (1987) theories of
sociocultural learning; that learning is developed through ongoing, context situated
development of skills during social interactions. Elmore listed the following as
principles for best practice in teaching and learning:
 The purpose of teaching is to foster understanding
 Understanding comes about in the context of specific bodies of knowledge
 Understanding entails the active construction of knowledge by learners
 Understanding requires the increase of basic and higher order knowledge
concurrently
 Learners differ considerably in what they bring to understanding particular
bodies of knowledge
 Learning is a social, as well as an individual process
Structures are the institutional mechanisms, policies, and procedures put in
place by federal, state or district procedures and legislation or policies widely
accepted as the official structure of the schools and not subject to change at the local

125
school site. Structures include, but are not limited to, district mandated curriculum,
required number of instructional minutes, or state required assessment (e.g. CST or
CAT-6). Systems are implemented at the school site, within the externally imposed
structures, to support the coordinated and coherent use of school resources to help
ensure the school’s vision, mission, and goals are achieved. An analysis of the data
led to the findings below for research question two:
1. The principal is a very strong instructional leader with a clear vision of the
educational mission of the school.
2. Data from annual high stakes testing (California Standards Test; CAT-6) and
periodic assessments are used to monitor students’ progress.
3. Professional development is aligned to student data
4. Classroom instruction is standards based.
5. A clear discipline policy in a sociocultural context is in place and consistently
implemented by all staff members.
The principal as a strong instructional leader. Interviews with the administrator,
teachers, classified staff, and parents revealed that the principal has a clear vision of
the mission of the school. Student achievement is the primary purpose of the school,
and all efforts are focused on increasing achievement. High performing schools have
instructional leaders that implement systems that integrate a school-wide focus on
high student performance and professional development focused on improving
instructional practices. Reeve’s (2002) study of high performing schools documented

126
the significance of school-wide implementation of these attributes. When asked
about how school decisions are made, the principal stated that,
“Only things that have to do with the mission of education… weigh
everything against the mission… what are we here for…”

This perspective was supported by classroom observations showing of current
student work samples, teacher-student interactions, and an observation of
professional development; all showing strong evidence o f a school-wide focus on
student learning and achievement. A study by Miles and Darling-Hammond (1998)
of five effective schools underscored the significance of aligning decisions and
resources with the mission of the school.
Comments from the assistant principal and a teacher confirmed that the
principal frequently plans and leads professional development, provides techniques
to increase student engagement with instruction and is constantly searching for ways
to improve classroom instruction. As mentioned in the section on data in research
question one, the principal had read many of the students’ recent writing
assessments, made comments, and during the Reading-Language arts professional
development told the teachers to review the writing during grade level meetings to
plan future instruction. Regular teacher collaboration that focused on instructional
planning was determined to be a significant contributing factor of high performing
schools (Marzano, 2003).
Use of data. Data are used extensively to drive and support instruction. Both
summative and formative data are utilized to determine student needs and monitor

127
progress toward goal attainment. The data are outcomes of the state’s annual
assessments and periodic assessments provided as an element of the district’s
mandated curriculum. The school’s philosophy on data as stated by the principal:
“the data tells you where you are… then look at instruction … adjust as
necessary to move the students forward…”

speaks to the significance of effective use of data at Lincoln Elementary. The
principal reviews data from the CST prior to the start of the school year, determines
a school-wide area of focus and two focus areas for each grade level. The principal
reviews these data with the teachers prior to the start of the school to identify school-
wide and grade-level trends. The teachers reflect on this data to determine which
instructional strategies were effective in the previous school year and those
pedagogies that need to be changed to support students’ mastery of the standards
more effectively.
The principal’s emphasis on reflection permeates the school culture.
Reflection is regularly used during professional development as a means to view
what is happening at the school and in the classrooms. The principal referred to
“windows and mirrors” meaning that rather than looking for factors outside the
school that impede student achievement; the staff must look at factors within the
school and adjust instruction to meet the needs of the students.
All students’ assignments are standards based and learning is assessed with
standards-aligned assessments. Each quarter the principal provides each teacher a list
of all standards addressed during the quarter for each student. Teachers note whether

128
each student has mastered each standard addressed. These data are systematically
used to monitor performance and communicate student progress to parents.
Formative data from standards-aligned periodic assessments in English
language arts, math, writing, and English language development are used to monitor
the effectiveness of classroom instruction, student progress and provide information
for planning professional development. Studies by Cotton, (2003) and Marzano,
Waters & McNulty in 2005 found that effective use of data to inform the design of
professional development was significant factor in meaningful professional
development. This linkage of student data to professional development and the
school-wide instructional focus supports and sustains cohesive and coherent
professional development (Guskey and Sparks, 1996). These are highly integrated
activities in the school largely due to the principal’s systemic approach to supporting
learning.
Teachers review data from the assessments to determine students’ progress
toward mastery of the standards addressed during prior instruction and identify
standards that need to be retaught. A comment by a teacher illustrated the importance
of effective use of data in enhancing student outcomes,
“…really focused on what he (the principal) wants…uses data to see if it’s
working… that has made me a better teacher and helps students too.”

The principal and instructional coaches review data to monitor students’
progress toward the standards and determine specific topics for professional
development. The effectiveness of the implementation of instruction is monitored by

129
regular classroom observations by the administrators and instructional coaches. The
observational data along with data from periodic assessments forms the basis for
professional development.
Professional Development. Weekly professional development is grounded on
data collected from periodic assessments in English language arts, math, writing, or
English language development and CST/CAT-6. This use of data to inform
professional development is in alignment with Marzano, Waters, & McNulty’s
(2005) finding that effective professional development is based on information from
student assessment data. Teachers reflect on data individually, as grade levels, and in
a school-wide forum to inform and drive effective instruction. Grade levels were
observed working to plan instruction for the next English language arts unit.
Teachers identified specific skills that needed to be re-taught or pre-taught and
information that students would need in order to relate to and understand the stories
and concepts in the upcoming unit. These observations reflected Massell (2000) and
Reeves (2003) findings that high performing schools systematically use data to
inform instruction and identify students’ needs. Mc Laughlin (1992) noted that one
of the key differences between low and high performing schools was the
development of a professional community that provided teachers opportunities to
reflect on their practice. These opportunities for reflection occur regularly during
professional development at Lincoln Elementary.
Development of a professional learning community affords an opportunity
for teachers to collaborate with peers and strengthen their knowledge and skills. This

130
sociocultural learning echoes Vygotsky’s theory that learning is a shared process and
is most successful within a social context (Vygotsky, 1987). The system of regularly
providing teachers time to reflect on data and plan meaningful instruction may
contribute to the high teacher retention rate at Lincoln. Futernick (2007) found that
many teachers who left the teaching profession identified lack of time for
professional development and instructional planning as a reason for their decision to
leave teaching.
Standards-based classroom instruction. The state standards provide the
structure of and express the knowledge and skills within each content area that
students are expected to master by the end of each grade level. The systematic
pedagogy used to teach the standards is determined by the school and implemented
by the classroom teacher. Effective instruction and a tight alignment between the
curriculum and standards have shown increased levels of student achievement (Billig
et.al, 2005; Shannon & Bylsma, 2003). Lincoln Elementary uses curricula that are
closely connected to the state standards in all content areas. Classroom observations
confirmed the alignment of instruction and the standards through the evidence of
posted standards, student work based on relevant standards and with a scoring rubric
attached.
“I use a directly specific ELD standards directed program…everything that is
in the standards is in the program..”

stated the principal when asked about practices that contribute to high student
performance. Selection and implementation of an effective ELD curriculum has

131
shown to be effective as 28 percent of English learners were re-designated as fluent
English proficient over the 2006-2007 school year.
Professional development connects directly to the academic standards and
provides regular opportunities for teachers to collaboratively plan instruction. The
English language arts (ELA) unit planning, worked on by each grade level, focuses
on the standards addressed in the unit and the resources available to support
instruction. Teachers are required to identify the specific writing strategies and
writing application standards addressed in the unit when planning instruction for
ELA unit writing assessments. The principal is given copies of all grade level
planning documents to support his observations and monitoring of standards-based
classroom instruction. To help increase students’ awareness of the standards there is
school-wide use of the Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI) pedagogy. One of the
elements of EDI is the teacher’s description of the concept and standard that the
students will learn about during the lesson as well as the importance of learning the
information. Taylor, et al (2000) determined that clear communication of learning
goals was a critical element in high student achievement.
The increased expectation of school accountability created by NCLB for
student performance through annual high stakes testing of progress toward mastery
of grade level standards has intensified the school’s focus on alignment of teaching
and resources to the standards. All curriculum and supplementary materials (e.g.
English language arts and math) are aligned to the standards and instruction is well
planned to support the standards. This systemic approach is consistent with the

132
findings by Billig, et.al (2005) and Shannon & Bylsma (2003) that schools that
tighten the alignment between the standards and the curriculum demonstrate
improved student performance on standards-based assessments. A comment from
the principal reinforced this focus,
“…being explicit in teaching the standards, having material all aligned with
teaching the standards…”

Consistent implementation of a clear discipline policy. The underlying purpose of
the disciplinary system at the school is to create and maintain a positive learning
environment conducive to student learning. All students at Lincoln Elementary are
held accountable for following the school and classroom expectations for student
behavior. The Westham School District requires that the Student-Parent Handbooks,
which include District rules, are sent home with each student at the beginning of the
school year or upon enrollment during the year. Students and their parents are
responsible for reading the handbook and signing and returning confirmation of
receipt and reading the handbook.
This philosophy of supporting students in learning appropriate school
behavior was summarized by the assistant principal,
“We begin with a structure of behavior that is acceptable at school…remind
kids that they are at school and here to learn… they need to act like young
scholars.”

Classroom behavior expectations are posted in all classrooms. Teachers explicitly
teach the rules at the beginning of the year and review them as needed.

133
Students who break school rules on the playground are re-taught the
appropriate rule by playground supervision staff or an administrator on the
playground. Students are then asked to “show me what you should be doing” giving
them a chance to demonstrate an understanding of the rule. These opportunities
reflect Vygotsky’s (1988) theory of sociocultural learning; that learning is developed
through ongoing, context situated use of developing skills during social interactions
(Santrock, 2006).
More serious offences are also treated as learning opportunities for students.
The principal counsels and works with students on writing reflections about the
inappropriate behavior. He contacts families as necessary to ensure that the school
and home are working together to support the student and maintain a safe learning
environment for all students. Families of students experiencing chronic behavior
challenges meet weekly with the assistant principal and principal to formulate
behavior support plans. Community agencies and resources, such as Aviva Family
Services, are made available as appropriate to each situation. The school, family, and
student continue to work together until the problem is resolved. The assistant
principal spoke strongly about the importance of working with families to support
students.
“When a problem arises it is not ignored…it is addressed quickly…we talk to
parents, grandparents if we need to…we bring in outside help like family
counseling…we deal with problems as best we can…”

The school recognizes students who demonstrate behavior that supports
learning, including regular school attendance. Monthly recognition assemblies honor

134
students for perfect attendance, good citizenship, academic achievement and
academic effort. Pictures of students with perfect attendance are displayed in the
school office during the next month.
Summary. The findings related to the second research question confirmed that
Lincoln Avenue School has structures and systems in place that support students: (a)
strong instructional leadership; (b) consistent use of data to inform instructional
decisions (c) professional development that is aligned to student data (d) standards-
based instruction; (d) positive discipline policy. The school has created a
sociocultural structure that places a high value on the individual student. The
sociocultural structure encourages the students’ development and learning
throughout the school. This supportive environment corroborates Vygotsky’s theory
of sociocultural learning and many of Elmore’s principles of best practices for
teaching and learning.
Interwoven with systems designed to support students is the school-wide use
of formative and summative assessment data to inform professional development
that supports effective classroom instruction. Effective classroom instruction, in
turn, enhances student achievement. Teddlie, et al. (1989) found that effective
schools implement similar systems to support high student achievement.
 Teachers focused on students’ mastery of basic skills.
 There were important and visible displays of student work products
representing academic excellence throughout the school.

135
 The school site principal insisted on an obvious academic focus during the
school day and maintained a high level of presence in hallways and
classrooms.
 There was a school-wide concentration on increasing the amount of
interactive teaching in all classrooms.
 That the classroom was the essential core of the school was evident through
the “child as client” values, beliefs, and feelings of the entire school.
These systems were supported by structures of, the California State Content
Standards, a district mandated English language arts curriculum, and the CST.
Connections to Prior Research:
Reeves (2002) noted that high performing schools incorporated structures and
systems that involved a school-wide focus on high student achievement. Teddlie
et.al. (1989) identified strong instructional leadership by a highly visible principal
who insist on a school-wide academic focus as a key component of an effective
school. These findings corroborate the instructional leadership style of the principal
of Lincoln Elementary.
Data from periodic assessments and the CST are consistently used to monitor
students’ progress. Reeves (2002, 2003) found that frequent, content related
assessment of student’s progress was essential to enhancing students’ performance.
However, a study by Marzano (2003) revealed that assessments designed to measure
a specific school’s curriculum were less likely to underestimate students’ actual
learning than standardized or external tests. Most of the assessments used in the

136
Westham School District are provided as part of the district adopted curriculum;
therefore they can be considered “external tests”. The exceptions to the use of
external tests are the practice writing prompts for each of the English language arts
unit assessments developed by the principal to help prepare students for the writing
assessments.
There is a structure of weekly, standards-based professional development in
place at Lincoln. This allows teachers to build and strengthen instructional skills over
time, corroborating with research by Cohen & Hill (1998a) and Darling-Hammond
(2000) that professional development which occurs over time results in increased
achievement for all students. During professional development teachers review data
to monitor students’ progress toward grade level standards and collaborate to plan
instruction, aligning with findings by the Michigan Department of Education (1997)
and Marzano (2003) that high performing schools foster cultures that support teacher
collaboration in monitoring student progress and instructional planning. Schools with
structures in place that foster problem solving and planning that supports a school-
level professional community and provides teachers time to reflect on practice was
identified as a critical difference between high and low performing schools
(McLaughlin, 1992; Louis et.al., 1996).
A study by Futernick (2007) identified strong collaborative relationships and
professional collegiality as significant reasons veteran teachers stay in the classroom.
This was confirmed by the teaching staff stability noted in research question one.

137
Classroom instruction and curricula are closely aligned to the state content
standards for each grade level. Tightened alignment between curricula and the
standards have shown increased student outcomes as measured by standards-based
assessments (Billig et.al, 2005; Shannon & Bylsma, 2003). The principal reviews
materials under consideration for purchase to ensure that the materials align with the
school’s mission, to increase student achievement. Miles & Darling-Hammond
(1998) found that high performing schools aligned instructional materials with the
mission of the school.
While many structures and systems identified in prior research were observed
at Lincoln Elementary School, some were not. Classroom observation and interviews
revealed that teachers regularly use small, cooperative groups as a sociocultural
pedagogy; however there was no evidence during professional development of
support for teachers’ implementation of other culturally relevant or responsive
pedagogies as mentioned by Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b).
Structures and systems that support students’ transition to middle school were
discussed in the literature review of this dissertation. The researcher did not observe
evidence of systematic communication between the elementary and middle school.
Gutman & Midgley (2000) and Maras & Aveling (2006) found that discussions
between the sending elementary school and receiving middle school supported a
culture of collaboration that effectively supported a more positive transition to
middle school by all students.

138
Research Question 3: Support for Effective Classroom Instruction
The third research question asked, “How are organizational structures and
systems implemented to support school-wide effective classroom instruction that
promotes student learning?” This question was based on Vygotsky’s (1987) theories
of socio-cultural learning. It is also based on constructivist theories of learning that
postulates that students construct knowledge through their own behavior and
exchanges with the world around them (Parker & Goicoechea, 2000). Data collected
illuminated the areas of effective classroom instruction, the use of assessment data to
enhance teaching and learning, and support systems available to enhance teachers’
effectiveness in the classroom. An analysis of the data collected for this research
question led to the following major findings:
1. High, clear academic and behavioral expectations are regularly
communicated clearly to teachers, students, and parents.
2. Instructional pedagogy is aligned with sociocultural learning theory.
3. There are regular classroom observations by the administrators and
instructional coaches.
4. Implementation of standards-based instruction.
5. Data is used consistently to inform all decisions.
Expectations are communicated. Clear, explicitly stated expectations are an
instructional foundation of the school (Marzano, 2003; Taylor, Pressley, & Pearson,
2000). At the beginning of a lesson teachers share academic expectations of what
students will learn and how that learning will be assessed at the end of the lesson as

139
well as for behavior that will support students’ learning (e.g. moving into small
groups for part of the lesson). A second grade classroom observation revealed that
teachers provide clear expectations regarding the content of the lesson:
“…we will be talking about adjectives…describing words…you will write
sentences using adjectives…”.

An example of clear high expectations for students’ behavior was seen in a
third grade classroom when the teacher asked students to review the procedures for
the small group work that followed a directed lesson. This example illustrated the
teachers’ expectations that all students know and understand the classroom routines
as well as the teachers’ respect for their ability to verbalize the routines. All
classrooms observed had behavioral expectations posted on a wall. Teachers
explicitly teach behavior expectations, for the classroom and playground, at the
beginning of the school year and review expectations as needed throughout the
school year.
Teachers and the principal share their expectations for student achievement
and behavior with parents at the beginning of the school at Back-to-School night and
specific suggestions of ways (e.g. timely arrival, reviewing homework, or reading
with their students) families can support their students are discussed, laying the
foundation for a system of continued communication during the school year. Positive
teacher-student and school-home connections enhance communication and support
student performance (Gardner & Miranda, 2001; Marzano, 2003).

140
Instructional pedagogy is aligned to sociocultural learning theory. Many
teachers utilized small heterogeneous group instruction or work, such as literature
circles that allowed all students the chance to contribute to a discussion or project at
their own current level of ability as well as learn from their peers. This pedagogy
allowed students to learn from each other in a social context (Vygotsky, 1987) and
construct knowledge through interaction with their environment thus demonstrating
Piaget’s constructivist theory (Parker & Goicoechea, 2000).
Evidence of implementation of sociocultural learning theory was seen during
an observation of a third grade discussion of a picture during an English language
development lesson. One student made a comment about the picture that triggered a
thought and subsequent comment by another student. Students learned from each
other and constructed an understanding of the concept shown in the picture. Sixth
grade teachers implemented reading journals utilizing response prompts of
differentiated complexity to provide entry points for all students to reflect on the
class’s reading and enhancing students’ self-efficacy. Gutman and Midgley (1999)
and Ormrod in 2006 found that students’ belief in their academic self-efficacy may
be an important factor in sustaining high levels of performance in middle school.
The principal uses classroom observation data to monitor instruction. During
observations he looked specifically for clear expectations of what students are to
learn and do, well-crafted lessons, student engagement, frequent checking for
understanding, and multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate understanding
of the lesson concepts contributing to students’ increased self efficacy. The relation

141
between the positive influence of student engagement on a student’s academic
success and attitude toward school was identified by Marks (2000). Marks
determined that students who were engaged in instruction showed increased
cognitive and social development. This increased development may be a contributing
factor to the trend of increased levels of performance over the past five years on the
CST by Lincoln students. Students are provided with lessons that challenge them to
access critical thinking and problem solving skills to demonstrate mastery of a
concept. These are processes that lead to students’ ability to construct knowledge,
thus conforming to constructivist theories on teaching and learning.
The students are expected to be active participants in acquiring knowledge.
This was evident in the displays of student work and writing, in which students were
required to articulate their thought processes and justify their solutions or answers, in
many classrooms. This underscores the high expectations that teachers have for all
students. Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b) found that the communication of high
expectations and student engagement in challenging work through the use of
culturally relevant pedagogies, such as cooperative learning, was critical to student
performance.
Regular classroom observations by the administrators and instructional
coaches. The principal is involved in all facets of the school, maintaining a high
level of visibility in classrooms and on the playground. Frequent observations of
instruction enable the principal to provide regular written and verbal feedback to
teachers. He coaches teachers individually on specific ways to improve their

142
teaching and provides techniques to enhance classroom effectiveness during
professional development. Both teachers and the assistant principal confirmed the
principal’s knowledge of effective instruction and his ability to share that
information. The assistant principal remarked,
“…I went through classrooms with him. He knew exactly how that lesson
worked or didn’t …and could articulate it clearly to the teacher.”

These ongoing professional conversations regarding student performance and
teaching pedagogies contribute to the maintenance of the professional learning
community at Lincoln. Marzano (2003) noted that effective teachers implement a
variety of instructional pedagogies, such as cooperative learning groups, to reach all
students.
The half-time math coach and half-time literacy coach visit classrooms to
support teachers and instruction through demonstration lessons, co-teaching lessons,
and feedback from observations. The availability of the coaches is constrained by the
time allotted to the school.
Implementation of standards-based instruction. Teachers used a variety of
instructional techniques to sustain students’ engagement in instruction. Small group
work in literature circles provided students an opportunity to work together to
construct knowledge and strengthen their perception of academic self-efficacy. An
increased perception of academic self-efficacy was identified by Gutman and
Midgley (1999) as contributing to the maintenance of high levels of school
achievement during the transition to middle school. Working in small groups allows

143
all students to contribute at their own level to the work of the group. This
sociocultural learning opportunity reaffirms Vygotsky’s theory that learning is a
shared process and is most successful within a social context (Vygotsky, 1987). The
sixth grade teachers utilize heterogeneously grouped literature circles and reading
journals as a means to engage all students. Journal response prompts are
differentiated to allow all students to respond in writing to the book the class is
reading. As the principal mentioned;
"not all the students speak or write well, and need multiple opportunities to
demonstrate their understandings”

these numerous chances to show mastery provide students occasions to increase their
academic self-efficacy.
Students’ written explanation of their solution to a math problem challenged
them to employ critical thinking skills and demonstrate understanding of the
standards addressed through the assessment. Teachers reviewed and reflected upon
the writing and other work to identify effective teaching pedagogies as well as
standards and skills that need to be re-taught. Review was provided either to the
whole class or to a small group as determined by the demonstrated needs of the
students. The use of data from students’ writing and other sources, the school-wide
focus on mastery of the standards and monitoring of performance is consistent with
Gardner and Miranda’s (2001) stance that effective teachers focused on students’
mastery of state content standards, increased amounts of students’ time on-task,

144
regular monitoring of student performance, and employed culturally relevant
pedagogies.
Teachers maintain records on each student’s progress toward each standard
for each reporting period. Grade level standards provide the structure and criteria for
teachers to measure students’ progress toward mastery of grade-level concepts and
skills. This information forms the basis of parent conferences, identification of
students for intervention programs, and is used during lesson planning to identify
concepts and skills that need to be retaught (Reeves, 2003).
Consistent use of data. The principal makes all instructional decisions based
on students’ needs as framed by the data from the CST and periodic assessments. His
philosophy, as mentioned in research question two:
“the data tells you where you are…then look at instruction and adjust as
necessary to move forward”

effectively states the significance of effective use of data at Lincoln Elementary.
Data from standardized assessments, publishers’ assessments, student work and
writing are considered as instructional decisions are made. Student writing,
especially in the upper grades, is used as an instrument to measure students’
understanding of math concepts as well as English language arts. Students’ written
responses to a math word problem were observed in sixth grade classrooms. As
Marzano (2003) pointed out student writing allows teachers to give students more
effective, formative feedback to improve their performance. Students’ writing is
scored using rubrics during grade level meetings to help ensure accurate evaluation

145
of student work and resulting data. Teachers reflect on the data from students’
writing both individually and in grade level meetings to inform instruction. The
principal also reviews students’ writing using the data collected to identify teachers’
needs for professional development to support effective instruction, determine
patterns of students’ misunderstandings, and identify goals for the next school year.
An example of students’ misunderstanding was evident during a professional
development when the principal mentioned that many third graders had responded to
a writing prompt asking for a narrative by writing a simple sequence of events. The
third grade teachers reviewed the writing identifying areas appropriate for reteaching
and planned instruction as consistent with Reeves’ (2000, 2003) findings that high
performing schools used students’ writing as an assessment tool.
Data from multiple sources were used to monitor individual students’
progress toward grade level standards. The principal used formative assessment data
in addition to data from the CST to determine the budget allocation for outside
resources (e.g. the purchase of laptop computers and LCD projectors as part of the
Single Plan for Student Achievement to support high levels of achievement by
students of color), drive professional development, monitor the effectiveness of
instruction, and determine the school-wide focus and two grade level areas of focus
for the school year. This is consistent with Marzano’s (2001) finding that systems of
monitoring students’ progress toward goals positively impacts student achievement.
Summary. The findings for this research question validated that the structures
and systems perceived by the school to support high levels of student performance

146
are implemented in classrooms. The systems listed below supported implementation
of those structures discussed under the second research question:
 Clear, high expectations are communicated to all students, teachers, and
parents.
 Instructional pedagogies reflect sociocultural and constructivist learning
theories.
 Administrators and instructional coaches regularly observe instruction.
 Instruction and curriculum are tightly aligned to the state content standards.
 Data from a variety of sources informs all decisions.
High performance by all students is the primary focus of the school. All staff
express clear, high expectations for all students. Teachers share academic
expectations with students at the beginning of lessons. The teachers and
administrators communicate these expectations to families through newsletters,
meetings, and conferences.
Many teachers implement teaching pedagogies that corroborate sociocultural
learning theory. Small cooperative groups were observed in many classrooms.
Students learned from each other through social, context-based situations (Vygotsky,
1987). Piaget’s theory of construction of knowledge (Parker & Goicoechea, 2000)
was mirrored by the differing levels of complexity of the journal prompts observed
in an upper grade classroom.
Frequent classroom observations by instructional coaches and administrators
provide opportunities to monitor instruction. During observations the principal

147
looked for communication of clear expectations of what students are expected to do
and learn during the lesson, frequent checking for understanding, and multiple
opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding of the lesson concepts.
There is a clear expectation that all students are to be active participants in acquiring
knowledge.
Instruction is standards-based in all classrooms. District adopted curriculum
and supplementary resources are tightly aligned to the state content standards.
Teachers implement pedagogies that support students’ mastery of the grade-level
standards: (a) small, cooperative learning groups, such as literature circles; (b)
differentiated writing prompts to allow all students to respond to the book the class
was reading; and (c) multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate mastery of
concepts and skills. These pedagogies aligned with Gardner & Miranda’s (2001)
stance that effective teachers emphasized students’ mastery of the standards,
increased students’ time on task, regularly monitored students’ performance, and
implemented culturally relevant pedagogies.
Data are used school-wide to inform decisions. Data from multiple sources
informs teachers about students’ progress and administrators and coaches about
school-wide or grade-level trends. Students’ writing is a significant source of data.
Marzano (2003) noted that students’ writing provides teachers a wealth of diagnostic
information, enabling them to provide students more effective feedback and helps
improve performance. Reeves (2000, 2003) determined that high performing schools
used students’ writing as an important assessment tool. The principal used data from

148
the CST and periodic assessments to determine budget allocations, inform
professional development, and monitor the effectiveness of instruction.
Connections to Prior Research:
High expectations are shared with students at the beginning of each lesson.
The state content standards and classroom teachers provide challenging academic
achievement goals for all students. The significance of challenging goals was
identified in research by Marzano (2003) and Taylor et.al. (2000). Observation of
student writing and classroom discussions corroborated the communication of high
expectations; that students are challenged to explain and justify their answers and
solutions to problems, as suggested in the California Standards for the Teaching
Profession (1997). Questioning strategies that push students to move beyond mere
recall of knowledge on to analyzing or evaluating information and support
substantive discussions imply that teachers have high expectations of students’ who
have been historically represented as incapable of higher order thinking skills
(Marks, 2000). Clear communication of high expectations of all students contributes
to a school culture of high achievement (Taylor, et.al, 2000).
Marzano (2003) determined that effective teachers implement a variety of
instructional pedagogies that support standards-based instruction and make wise
choices about when to use a given method of instruction. Classroom observations of
whole group instruction; small groups of students working with a teacher or para-
professional; as well as observations of students working individually with a teacher
confirmed the informed use of various pedagogies. These formats allowed students

149
multiple opportunities to respond and receive feedback on their response, experience
a high rate of success and, demonstrate mastery of standards resulting in enhanced
academic self efficacy (Ormrod, 2006). The implementation of a variety of
appropriate teaching strategies supported students’ engagement in the lesson (Marks,
2000; Ormrod, 2006; Santrock, 2007). These pedagogies provided opportunities for
formal and informal positive teacher-student and student-student interactions and
engaged students through culturally relevant pedagogies, in alignment with
sociocultural learning theory (Forgan & Vaughn, 2000). Sociocultural-based
teaching and learning pedagogies allow students to learn from each other (Vygotsky,
1988; Miles & Darling-Hammond, 1998) and support increased perceptions of
students’ self efficacy, particularly critical to the successful transition of students of
color and students with disabilities to middle school (Gutman & Midgley, 1999;
Marks, 2000; Ormrod, 2006).
Delpit (2006) found that effective instruction incorporated students’ culture
as a means for student engagement and learning. While no evidence of incorporation
of specific cultures was observed in classrooms, most students appeared to be
engaged in instruction. Teachers utilized the district adopted language arts
curriculum, which features passages and stories about a variety of cultures and
people. Students are frequently asked to make connections from the story to their
own lives, relating the school to their home cultures corroborating Zhang & Benz
(2006) theory that instruction should highlight the relationship between education
and students’ home culture. Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b) mentioned the

150
importance of systematically incorporating students’ home culture into the classroom
in meaningful ways. The integration of students’ home cultures appeared to be on a
surface level rather than a meaningful level.
Regular assessment provides multiple opportunities for students to
demonstrate improved performance strengthening their academic self efficacy
(Reeves, 2000, 2003). Students in kindergarten through sixth grade complete
reading-language arts assessments every six weeks and math assessments every ten
weeks. Both the math and reading-language arts assessments include multiple choice
and written responses. The inclusion of students’ writing in the assessments aligns
with Marzano’s (2003) finding that student writing provided teachers with more
specific diagnostic information and enabled them to identify obstacles to a particular
student’s understanding such as vocabulary concerns or reasoning errors generally
missed by other assessment formats (Reeves, 2000, 2003). Observation of students’
writing on a math assessment confirmed that the process of writing helped students
clarify their own thinking process (Marzano, 2003). Reeves (2000, 2003) found that
assessments created by the school site staff provide more accurate measures of
students’ knowledge than externally created assessments. The only school site
created assessments observed were practice writing prompts created by the principal
for each reading-language arts unit assessment.

151
Research Question 4: The Construct of Race
The final question asked, “How is the construct of race reflected in the
school’s structures and systems?” The data gathered for this question illuminated the
school climate as viewed through a sociocultural lens. School-wide discipline
policies, support provided to teachers to facilitate culturally relevant instruction that
respected the home cultures of students of color, social capital, and the manner in
which the school addressed the issue of race (Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Ladson-
Billings, 1995) were areas that were explored through interviews, observations, and
documents relevant to the fourth research question.
One of the study’s criteria for school selection was that the school studied
had a student body of over 60% students of color. Lincoln Avenue Elementary
School had a student body that is 96.7 % students of color. The Lincoln Elementary
student body was:
 86.7 percent Latino
 2.4 percent Asian
 2.1 percent African American
 3.3 percent White
 3.6 percent Filipino students.
As a result almost the entire student body consisted of students of color; therefore
questions dealing with “students of color” addressed close to the entire student body.
An analysis of the data gathered for research question four led to the following
findings:

152
1. The school climate created a safe and positive learning environment for all
students.
2. School discipline was seen primarily as a positive learning opportunity for
students
3. There was a positive connection between teachers and students as well as the
school and students’ home.
A safe and positive learning environment. Lincoln Elementary School’s
campus was clean and well groomed. The tree-studded playground was inviting and
equipment, such as basketball hoops and handball walls were intact and well
maintained. The playground is bordered by both old and new bungalows that serve
as classrooms. The large oak trees and lawn frame the entrance to the main building
of the school. The hallway in the main building was lined with displays of students’
written work and colorful art. The bulletin board in the school office displayed
pictures of students recognized for academic achievement or perfect attendance that
month. The school office staff was friendly and welcoming; the door to the
principal’s office was wide open. The wall outside the office displayed posters of
pictures of students participating in school events and field trips. There was a table
outside the school office with flyers and information for parents attractively
displayed.
Both parents and classified staff described Lincoln Elementary as a closely
knit community that is growing in diversity. With the increase in diversity has come
some tensions between Latino and African American students; however the efforts

153
by the school staff kept the school a place where “students can get a break from that
(the outside world) and be themselves…” as the assistant principal remarked.
Interviews with the assistant principals and classified staff showed a sense that
students feel they can approach any adult for help and receive support; “…there is no
my kids/your kids” as the assistant principal mentioned. All children are seen as
valued members of the school community, demonstrating a positive construct of
race.
Teachers overtly teach both school and classroom expectations for behavior
as students, reviewing and re-teaching rules as necessary to ensure all students
understand and know how to comply with the rules. These stated expectations help
sustain an atmosphere of mutual respect between students as well as between adults
and students, provide high, clear expectations for all students, and support
responsible behavior choices by students. All students are held accountable for their
behavior.
The clearly stated expectations provide students a structure of behavior and
ways of interacting with others that are appropriate to the school context. This
supports students’ building of social capital within the school environment (Stanton-
Salazar, 1997). The implied expectation is that students are capable of understanding
the rules and monitoring their behavior, reflecting the schools’ respect for the
students as individuals.

154
Most teachers are genuinely concerned about their students’ performance and
work with students to support their learning. An interview with one of the
paraprofessionals highlighted this commitment,
“I’ve seen a teacher pull kids off to the side when they have been dismissed
for recess to ask them individually if they understand and the student is
honest and says ‘no’… the teachers say ‘OK nobody has to know’ and
reassures the student that the lesson will be reviewed…it makes the student
feel good...” Teachers value the student as an individual (Delpit, 2006).

Further evidence of teachers’ valuing of individual students was observed in
sixth grade classrooms during literature circles and classroom interactions between
students and teachers. Teachers consistently checked for understanding of concepts,
asking students to state concepts in their own words or relate a personal experience
to the topic of discussion. The teacher circulated among the groups, squatting down
beside students to quietly check their understanding of the text, asking “What is your
reaction to this passage?”
After a brief discussion she moved on to check in with other students and
groups. This pedagogy corroborates Vygotsky’s theory that learning takes place in a
social context through interaction with a more knowledgeable adult or peer. The
assistant principal noted that teachers’ demonstrated respect for the students results
in students talking more openly with teachers and seeking out teachers to talk with,
“Adults make an effort to make every kid feel valued and it shows.”
In one classroom at the end of the literature circle block the teacher debriefed
the literature circle protocol with the students; asking for suggestions for improving
the process. When one student mentioned that some group members (no names were

155
mentioned) were not prepared to discuss the text the teacher responded by saying,
“You see what happens to the group when one member is not prepared,” returning
the responsibility for preparation to the group and individual (Ladson-Billings,
1995a, 1995b). During a whole class discussion of the text this same teacher praised
students who brought to light divergent viewpoints of how passages connected to the
story or to their own lives and encouraged discussion supporting differing
perspectives. This type of mutual respect and trust between teachers and students
supports and strengthens a positive, safe learning environment (Ormrod, 2006;
Delpit, 2006).
Discipline as a teaching and learning opportunity. “This is a great group of
kids here” was the response of the assistant principal when asked about the school’s
discipline policy. All students are treated with respect and held accountable for
following school and classroom rules. Observations revealed that all classrooms
visited had school and classroom behavior expectations posted. School rules are
explicitly taught at the beginning of each school year and reviewed throughout the
year. Playground supervisors, either classified staff or administrators, monitor
students during recess providing reminders and instruction about school rules as
needed.
When students are observed breaking a rule they are asked “what should you
be doing in this situation,” if the student does know the appropriate behavior he is
given the opportunity to demonstrate that; or provided guidance if he is unable to
articulate the correct behavior then he is given an opportunity to show the

156
appropriate behavior. This corroborates Vygotsky’s theory of sociocultural learning
within situated contexts (Santrock, 2006). The student also builds social capital as he
learns and demonstrates contextually appropriate behavior (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Consistent and fair reinforcement of the discipline policy contributes to a positive
school climate for all students.
The school recognizes students’ efforts of self-discipline at monthly
assemblies. Students from each class are recognized for academic achievement,
academic effort, citizenship, and attendance. The recognition not only strengthens
the students’ self efficacy, it provides positive peer role models for other students.
Families of honored students are invited to the assemblies and are thanked for their
support of their students during the assemblies. This kind of event enhances the
connection between the home and school and emphasizes the importance of family
involvement in the students’ education (Marzano, 2003; Gutman & Midgley, 2000;
Gardner & Miranda, 2001).
Connection between teachers, students, and home. The culture of respect at
the school supports the connection between teachers, students and teachers, and the
school and home as mentioned by Ladson-Billings (1995). The connection and
respect between the school and home is a significant factor in high performing
schools (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Respect and connections were evident in answers to
interview questions from administrators, teachers, classified staff, and parents.
Teachers are genuinely concerned about students’ learning and performance.
Teachers were observed frequently checking for understanding during instruction

157
and correcting misunderstandings as needed. There is a focus on strong “first
teaching” rather than shunting students into remediation underscoring the school-
wide belief that all students have the ability to master the grade level content
standards and achieve at high levels, a strong indictor of the school’s positive
construct of race (Delpit, 2006). Teachers were observed quietly conversing with
students from all sub-groups, providing evidence of the school’s positive construct of
race. Most of the adults at Lincoln Elementary make a sincere effort to connect
positively with students and their families. There was a focus on helping students
learn academic lessons in addition to the appropriate behavior for the school context,
building social capital. Ormrod, (2006) and Santrock (2007) both emphasized the
importance of information conveyed during information conversations between
adults and students.
The small size of the school facilitates adult-student interactions, and the
principal, many teachers and para-professional know most students by name. A
classified staff member and the assistant principal each observed that students seek
out teachers to talk with or teachers take a student aside to confidentially check for
understanding of an earlier lesson and reassure the student that the lesson concept
would be reviewed.
As mentioned in the above section, the school recognizes students at monthly
assemblies. The recognition not only strengthens the recognized students’ self
efficacy, a protective factor in middle school; it provides positive peer role models
for other students. This enhances the communication and connections between the

158
home and school and emphasizes the importance of family involvement in the
students’ education.
Parent-school communication is essential to support positive school-home
connections. The school sends home monthly newsletters, holds Back-to-School
Night and Student/Parent/Teacher conferences. Parents and families are invited to
special school-wide events such as the Halloween Festival, Celebration of Cultures,
and monthly recognition assemblies. Many parents volunteer to help sponsor and
help at these events. Parents are valued members of school committees such as the
School Site Council, Compensatory Education Advisory Committee, and Local
School Leadership committee; however parental attendance is minimal. These
committees oversee budget decisions and confirm certain policy decisions as well as
provide input from parents and families to inform school site decisions. Many of the
classified staff are or were parents of students and a few teachers have children
currently attending Lincoln Elementary school.
Summary. The findings associated the Research Question four revealed that
the construct of race is not addressed specifically through the school’s structures and
systems. However systems of interaction between students and adult-and-students
provided evidence of a climate of mutual respect, open communication, and trust.
There is a safe and positive learning environment at Lincoln Elementary that respects
and facilitates the learning and achievement of all students. This environment is
supported and sustained by: (a) adults who are working hard to support student
performance through the consistent use of relevant data to drive instruction and

159
monitor student learning; (b) a fair and consistent discipline policy; (c) the explicit
teaching of school and classroom rules by all adults; (d) a climate of respect and
friendliness that is conducive to building teacher-student and school-home
connections.
Connections to Prior Research:
Lincoln Elementary School provides a safe and positive learning environment
for all students. All students are valued as individuals and supported in their
development of self-identities as learners. A study by the state of Kentucky (2003)
determined that students who have established self-identities as learners during
elementary school were more likely to complete high school. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) found that students are dependent upon cultural learning settings
that respect their identities, school-wide observations confirmed that Lincoln
provides an environment that supports sociocultural learning and teaching through
pedagogies such as cooperative small group learning. Stensrud (2006) found that
students who attend elementary schools that value student-student and student-
teacher interactions are more likely to construct positive relationships with adults and
peers in middle school and less likely to become alienated from school or drop-out of
school.
Displays of students’ work in classrooms provided evidence that all teachers
create classrooms that incorporate norms of positive communication and respect
(California Standards for the Teaching Profession, 1997). An example was seen in a
sixth grade room. At the beginning of the year the teacher asked students to use the

160
classroom computers to research quotations and select one they felt spoke to them
personally. The teacher wrote the quotation on each student’s name card and taped it
to their desk. The name cards were in perfect condition in late October, the time of
the researcher’s observation. This observation and others provided ample proof that
teachers at Lincoln have a positive construct of race and share a strong belief that all
students can learn and succeed in school, and the job of the teacher is to work to
support the success of each student (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b).
The positive discipline foundation of the school supports students’
development of identities as learners. Rules are explicitly explained and taught to all
students. As students understand the behaviors that are appropriate to the school
context and valued by the dominate school culture they increase their social capital
(Stanton-Salazar, 2002). The purpose of the rules is to provide a safe learning
environment for all students and adults. Although not addressed in the literature
review of this dissertation, school safety is a critical factor in the school’s ability to
positively affect student performance (Marzano, 2003). The National Education
Goals Panel, 1994 declared that by the year 2000 all schools will provide a
disciplined environment conducive to learning (Marzano, 2003 p. 53).
Observations of interactions between adults and students as well as
interviews with teachers, para-professionals, parents, and administrators provided
ample evidence that the culture of respect exists at Lincoln Elementary. Students are
treated as unique individuals with strengths and needs, not simply as group with
similar abilities, demonstrating a school-wide positive construct of race. This

161
corroborated Reeve’s (2000, 2003) finding that high performing schools treat all
students as distinct individuals.
Interviews with para-professionals revealed the connections between students
and adults. Teachers frequently check-in informally with students to determine their
understanding of recently taught lessons and students approach teachers just to talk.
These connections were significantly and positively related to school engagement
and motivation of low-income African American and Latino adolescents (Goodenow
& Grady, 1994).
Lincoln has incorporated structures and systems that involve parents as
partners in the educational process. Reeves (2002) found that parent involvement
was a key element in high performing schools. The school uses a variety of
communication modes to make information available to parents: (a) monthly
newsletters, (b) parent-teacher-student conferences, (c) phone calls and, (d) meetings
(Marzano, 2003; Suárez-Orozco & Qin, 2006; Zhou, 2003). The school has a limited
website provided by the district with basic information; however it does not link to a
school website with more detailed information. Parents are involved in governance
structures; however many parents have limited daytime availability to serve on these
committees that meet at the beginning or end of the school day. Marzano (2003)
cited parent involvement in governance bodies as an important factor in involving
parents in the decision making processes governing a school. Back to School Night
and parent-teacher-student conferences provide opportunities for teachers to suggest
ways parents can support the school within their home environment (e.g.

162
conversations with their children about school or reading with their children), but
this does not take into account the powerful influence of the parents’ cultural model
of learning on the way the parent works with the child at home (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001).
While there are definite connections and respect between the school and
home cultures of students the researcher did not observe any teachers using the
students’ home culture as a medium for learning (Ladson-Billings, 1995).

Summary
There was a school-wide upward trajectory of student achievement in both
English language arts and math as measured by the CST over that past five years at
Lincoln Elementary School. This upward trend was reflected in the disaggregated
data for all sub-groups. More sixth grade students at Lincoln Elementary met or
exceeded the English language arts and math AYP targets for 2005-2006 and 2006-
2007 school years than sixth graders at Villa Middle School. The existing structures
and systems at Lincoln Elementary School supported increased levels of
achievement. Structures included:
 State content standards
 Weekly professional development
 District positive discipline policy
 Annual high stakes state required assessment (CST and CAT-6) and resulting
data from assessments

163
 Strong instructional leadership
The systems used to implement the above structures included:
 Frequent communication by all staff of high expectations of all students
 Use of pedagogies aligned to sociocultural and constructivist learning theory
 Regular classroom observations by administrators
 Consistent use of data from multiple sources to inform all decisions
 Implementation of standards-based instruction
There was a school-wide culture of respect and trust between adults and
students that enabled students to approach teachers for help or just to talk. Teachers
and staff valued students as distinct persons with unique needs and strengths,
demonstrating a positive construct of race. The school worked to involve parents as
partners in the education of their children; however few parents are involved on a
regular basis.
The connection between the school and home cultures is one of respect;
however there was little evidence in classrooms that teachers incorporated the
students’ home cultures into regular instruction.
This chapter reviewed the findings, analysis and interpretation of the data
gathered for this case study. The data from interviews, observations, and artifacts
was analyzed and provided evidence to answer the study’s four research questions.
Included in this report was description of the organizational structures and systems
that were perceived to contribute to high student achievement, how the construct of
race was reflected in the school’s structures and systems, school systems that

164
supported effective classroom instruction, and trends and patterns of performance
among students of color. The subsequent discussion also addressed these four
research questions. The discussion provided the researcher’s reflections on
connections to the literature reviewed in Chapter 2, the meaning of the findings, and
noted items for future consideration. A summary, conclusions, implications, and
recommendations are presented in the next chapter.

165
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The foundational mission of all schools is to prepare students to become
responsible, contributing members of the local and world-wide community. Schools,
as complex organizations are required to identify structures and implement systems
that facilitate the effective education of all students, without regard for students’
ethnicity, race, or special needs. This study was grounded in the conceptual model
that despite historical societal and educational influences schools with large
concentrations of students of color in high poverty urban communities can create the
conditions that enable their students to achieve at high levels.
The combined elements of the accountability requirements of No Child Left
Behind, the demands of a competitive global society, and the basic human right of all
children to be educated shines a bright light on the urgent need for our schools to
implement effective structures and systems to support all students’ learning and
achievement.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate and make known the structures
and systems in an elementary school that are producing high achievement in high
poverty urban schools with large concentrations of students of color The study
looked at one public elementary school’s efforts to support and increase students’
academic performance. The research focused on the structures and systems utilized

166
at the school site to enhance students’ learning and achievement. Four research
questions were developed to guide researchers in determining the organizational
structures and systems implemented in targeted high performing schools.
1. What are the trends and patterns of performance among students of color?
2. What are the organizational structures and systems that are perceived to
contribute to high student performance in high-poverty urban schools
with large concentrations of students of color?
3. How are the organizational structures and systems implemented to
support school-wide effective classroom instruction that promotes student
learning?
4. How is the construct of race reflected in the school’s structures and
systems?

Methodology
A case study approach was used and mainly qualitative data were collected in
order to investigate one school’s organizational structures and systems that are
perceived to support high academic performance by students of color and help to
sustain continued high achievement in middle school. Data collection instruments
included observations, physical artifacts, source documents, and interviews.
Quantitative data from the California Department of Education website was used to
initially identify schools that met study criteria. Data regarding the middle school the
selected elementary school feeds to were also gathered from the Department of

167
California Education website. The broad variety of data sources facilitated
triangulation of the data and reinforced the validity of the findings. The conceptual
framework, interview questions, and observation guides were developed
collaboratively by a team of doctoral students at the University of Southern
California chaired by Dr. Sylvia G. Rousseau. The observation guides and interview
questions used in data collection were meant to be responsive to each of the four
research questions.
Sampling
The unit of analysis in the study was one public elementary school in
southern California. The school was purposively selected based on criteria jointly
developed by the research team. The criteria required:
o At least 60% of the student body was identified as students of color
o The API and AYP indexes demonstrated a trend of growth over that past five
years
o Seventy-five percent of the students enrolled were eligible for free or
reduced price meals
o The school was identified as a school-wide Title 1 school in an urban
community serving large concentrations of students of color
o The enrollment of the school was at least 400 students
This purposive sampling enabled the researcher to examine the structures and
systems in depth, develop a thick description of the particular efforts by the school to
increase and sustain student achievement, and identify emerging themes of inquiry.

168
Data Collection and Analysis
The data for this research were collected in October and November of 2007.
Conceptual frameworks were created for each research question and provided the
basis for the instrumentation. The first research question was intended to reveal
trends of performance by students of color. Quantitative data were collected to
respond to this question.
The conceptual framework of the second research question proposed that
multiple key school-level factors must work systematically in an integrated and
coordinated system to support high student achievement (Marzano, 2003; Elmore,
1995, 2001).
Sociocultural and constructivist learning theories served as the foundation for
the third research question (Vygotsky, 1987; Parker & Goicoechea, 2000). This
question examined: (a) effective classroom instruction, (b) the use of assessment
data, and (c) the support systems available to the teaching staff.
The fourth question explored the school’s construct of race and how it was
reflected in the structures and systems of the school. This question focused on: (a)
the school climate as viewed through the school-wide discipline policy, (b) the
support provided to teachers to facilitate effective instruction, and (c) the manner in
which the school addresses the issues of race and social capital (Stanton-Salazar,
1997; Ladson-Billings, 1995).
The frameworks provided the basis for the development of eight data
collection instruments. The instruments used in the data collection process were:

169
1. The Administrator Interview Guide (Appendix A) was used to interview
the principal and two assistant principals, one currently placed at the
school as of September, 2007 and the immediate past assistant principal.
The questions were designed as open-ended to allow the interviewees to
speak about what they believed had supported student achievement.
2. The Teacher Interview Guide (Appendix B) was used to interview
teachers from various grade levels. Again, the questions were
intentionally designed to be open-ended to allow the teachers to talk
about what they believed contributed to student achievement.
3. The Para-Professional Interview Guide (Appendix C) was used to
interview classroom paraprofessionals who support instruction in a range
of grades. The questions were open-ended.
4. The Parent Interview Guide (Appendix D) was employed to interview
parents of currently enrolled students. These questions were also open-
ended to allow parents to share their impressions about the school.
5. The Classroom Observation Guide (Appendix E) provided a list of
artifacts and evidences of the classroom culture to look for during
observations.
6. The Professional Development Observation Guide (Appendix F) used a
list of administrator and staff behaviors to watch for during the
observation.

170
7. The Leadership Team Meeting Questions for Reflection (Appendix G)
was intended to provide the researcher a guide to use for reflection on an
observation of the meeting. This guide was not used as the researcher was
unable to observe a Leadership Team meeting due to the time constraints
of the school visitation.
8. The School-Wide Observation Guide (Appendix H) consisted of a list of
artifacts to look for as well as document the overall physical environment
of the campus.
In conjunction with the data gathering process and source documents, a data
collection matrix (Appendix I) helped with data collection and analysis. The source
documents confirmed information shared during the interviews and provided
additional information beyond that obtained during interviews and observations.
English language arts unit planning documents and grade level improvement goals
from the previous school year confirmed the stated school-wide goal of increasing
student achievement in English language arts. Additional significant source artifacts
included copies of the school’s Single Plan for Student Achievement Update and
Justification for Equipment Purchased/Leased through Categorical Programs that
detailed how laptops and LCD projectors purchased will support closing the
achievement gap, professional development agenda corroborating collaborative
planning time for teachers, and school newsletters that communicated important
information to students’ families. Appendix I was a matrix which aligned the
research and interview questions with the data sources. Populating the matrix with

171
the sources of interview data made triangulating and comparing responses from
different sources more efficient.
Some of the emergent themes resulting from data analysis were the existence
of systems of strong instructional leadership; fair and consistent discipline;
connection between the teachers, students, and home; regular and consistent use of
data to inform decisions; and school-wide as well as classroom practices that
supported effective instruction.

Selected Findings and Connections to Prior Research
The data gathering and analysis process revealed discrete systems related to
the four research questions. Many of these findings corroborated the prior research
reviewed in Chapter Two of this dissertation. This section summarizes five emergent
systems and notes the principle data sources and prior research that led to the
findings.
The principal as a strong instructional leader.
An analysis of the data that informed identification of this system included
the following findings:
1. The principal was very knowledgeable about effective instruction.
2. The principal was highly visible on campus.
3. The state content standards, teaching pedagogies, and curricula were
tightly aligned.
4. The principal is the primary decision maker at the school.

172
Although instructional leadership was not thoroughly addressed in Chapter
Two of this dissertation it surfaced as a distinct system during the analysis of
elements perceived to contribute to high achievement at Lincoln Elementary. The
principal reviewed student data to determine needs and plan professional
development. Research by Cotton (2003) and Marzano, Waters, & McNulty (2005)
revealed that effective use of data to inform professional development was a critical
component in meaningful professional development.
The principal monitored implementation of instructional strategies and the
influence of those pedagogies on students’ engagement and learning through
frequent classroom observations. In their study of effective schools, Teddlie et al
(1989) corroborated increased student achievement with a highly visible principal
who insisted on an academic focus during the instructional day. The study also
identified interactive teaching as a trait shared by effective schools. This
corroborates with Piaget’s constructivist theory of learning (Parker and Goicoechea,
2000).
Increased requirements for school accountability, NCLB and yearly high
stakes testing have sharpened the school’s focus on a tight alignment of the state
content standards with teaching and resources. Billig, et. al. (2005) and Shannon &
Bylsma (2003) found that schools that tighten the alignment between the content
standards and curriculum materials demonstrated increased student achievement on
standards-based assessments. Provision of relevant curriculum materials supported

173
the sociocultural learning theory that material and language artifacts serve as cultural
mediators of students’ learning (Parker and Goicoechea, 2000).
Selection of relevant curriculum to supplement the state adopted texts
required reflection on students’ needs as viewed through assessment data and other
student work. This focus on strong “first teaching,” rather than remediation
highlighted the positive attitude of the principal and school toward the students’
ability to master the grade level standards and achieve at high levels, a strong
indicator of the school-wide positive construct of race and refuting a deficit construct
of race (Delpit, 2006).
The principal’s style of decision making approaches autocratic. While he
believed there was distributed leadership, it was evident only on a surface level.
Teachers reported information gathered from meetings. Families and teachers had
limited input on expenditure of funds. The principal selected supplementary
curriculum based on his review of the data. This principal is within a few years of
retirement, whether or not the structures and systems he implemented have been
institutionalized remains to be seen.
A consistent school-wide discipline policy.
An analysis of the data that informed the identification of the school-wide
discipline system included the following findings:
1. The discipline policy was grounded in a culture of mutual respect.
2. Rules were explicitly taught to students.
3. All school staff had high expectations for students’ behavior.

174
4. Administrators worked cooperatively with families of students who
repeatedly broke school rules.
The National Education Goals Panel highlighted the importance of a safe
learning environment in their statement that by the year 2000 all schools “will offer a
disciplined environment conducive to learning” (Marzano, 2003). Lincoln
Elementary School implemented their school-wide positive discipline policy in a
way that communicated respect for students and adults. The school’s perspective on
discipline was based on a positive attitude toward students, and rules were focused
on positive, rather than undesired, behavior.
Using student achievement as an indicator of the influence of the school’s
positive discipline policy revealed that the policy positively affected student
performance. However; a review of the suspension data revealed an increase from
two suspensions in 2005-2006 to fourteen suspensions in 2006-2007. The
identification of students as young scholars supported students’ development of
identities as learners and a positive attitude toward school (Eccles & Midgley, 1989;
Marks, 2000). Students who attended elementary schools that supported the
development of a positive attitude toward school were less likely to experience
difficulties transitioning to middle school (Marks, 2000).
There was a school-wide emphasis on helping students learn and display the
appropriate behavior for the school context, helping students to build social capital.
Santrock (2006) and Ormrod (2006) stressed the significance of information
communicated during informal conversations between adults and students. This

175
provided students the opportunity to build new knowledge within a social context of
working with a more knowledgeable adult (Vygotsky, 198; Santrock, 2006). Positive
interactions between adults and students in elementary school help support students’
performance in middle school (Stensrud, 2006). Furthermore, the same study found
that students who transitioned successfully to middle school demonstrated positive
social skills. Currently, Villa Middle School does not communicate information back
to Lincoln Elementary regarding the social adjustment of the students the elementary
school sends on to middle school; therefore it is not known whether students retained
and practiced the positive social skills developed in elementary school when they
matriculated to the middle school.
Students who repeatedly disregarded the expectations for student behavior
worked with the principal or assistant principal. These conversations were treated as
learning opportunities for students, as opposed to punishment or a means to coerce
desired behaviors. This reflected Vygotsky’s sociocultural learning theory as well as
constructivist learning theory as the student constructed new knowledge on a social
plane then internalized that information in future behavior choices. The connection
between discipline and teaching was evident in the Merriam-Webster dictionary
definition of discipline as “training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental
faculties or moral character.”
The school-wide high expectation that all students will learn, understand and
meet behavioral expectations, along with the respectful relationships between
students and adults reflected the school’s positive construct of race.

176
Connection between teachers, students, and the home.
An analysis of the data that informed the identification of the systems that
supported the connection between the school and students’ homes included the
following findings:
1. A climate of mutual respect between the school and students’ families
existed.
2. The school communicated effectively with families.
3. The school offered parent/family involvement opportunities.
A climate of mutual respect pervaded the campus and supported the
connection among students, teachers and families (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Evidence
of the positive relationships between the school and students’ families was observed
in multiple contexts. The cooperative group work and interactions with teachers
observed in classrooms aligned with Vygotsky’s (1987) theory of sociocultural
learning and zone of proximal development. Students’ perception of self efficacy and
confidence in their ability to interact with teachers is an important indicator of the
student’s ability to transition successfully to middle school (Stensrud, 2006).
The larger campus, students’ rotation among multiple teachers and less
personal environment of the middle school provides fewer opportunities for students
to approach teachers for guidance or develop personal connections than in the
elementary school setting (Pintrich & Schunk, 2000; Eccles, 1993; Schumacher,
1998). Such connections are critical factors in helping students develop a sense of
belonging in middle school (Stensrud, 2006). Elementary schools that implement

177
structures and systems that provide positive school experiences for students of color
helped students build strong identities as learners and strengthen students’ self
efficacy and abilities to build positive relationships with adults in the middle school
setting (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Clear communication between the school and students’ families was
identified as fundamental to increased parent involvement and student achievement
(Gardner and Miranda, 2001; Marzano, 2003). Lincoln Elementary primarily used a
traditional monthly newsletter, in English and Spanish, to communicate with
families. Parental involvement, though minimal at Lincoln, through school councils
helps parents develop a sense of ownership in the school and enhances students’
performance (Marzano, 2003).
Observations of communication and mutual respect and trust confirmed a
connection between the school and home. This connection helped decrease the
dissonance between the school and home cultures and supported high levels of
student achievement in elementary school and students’ transition to middle school
(Schumacher, 1998; Gutman and Midgley, 2000; Stensrud, 2006). While there was a
shared respect between the home and school, generally parents’ involvement at the
school was on a surface level.
The assets of the home cultures of students were not accessed as a pathway to
instruction (Ladson-Billings, 1995a, 1995b). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001)
emphasize the significance of integrating the home culture of the students into

178
instruction. In this sense Lincoln elementary is not completely consistent with
Vygotsky’s theories of sociocultural learning.
Use of data to inform decisions
An analysis of the data that revealed the systematic use of data included the
following findings:
1. The school accessed multiple sources of data to inform decisions
2. Professional development was planned to reflect students’ needs based on
data from periodic benchmarks and the CST.
3. Students used data from periodic benchmarks to monitor their own
progress.
4. Data was used by the School Site Council to determine budget
allocations.
The principal and staff at Lincoln Elementary used data from a variety of
sources to guide instructional and financial decisions. Trends of performance were
identified through data from the CST and CAT-6; subsequently school-wide and
grade level goals were determined. Written responses, embedded in periodic
assessments, provided specific diagnostic information allowing teachers to identify
obstacles to an individual student’s learning and enabled teachers to give students
effective, formative feedback to help improve performance (Marzano, 2003). This
was consistent with Reeves’ (2000, 2003) finding that high performing schools
employed students’ writing as an assessment tool.

179
Data from both formative and summative assessments were used to support
the planning of professional development. An observation of a professional
development meeting confirmed the significant role of data in the planning process.
Massell (2000) emphasized the importance of using data to identify professional
development needs.
Teachers also used data from daily class work to monitor students’ progress
toward grade level standards. Marzano (2001) determined that systems of monitoring
students’ progress toward goals positively impacted student achievement. Students
were aware of their performance and progress on periodic assessments. This
awareness of their progress increased students’ perceptions of self efficacy, enhanced
a positive attitude toward school, and contributed to higher levels of engagement in
instruction (Marks, 2000). Students with higher academic self efficacy transitioned
more successfully to middle school (Delpit, 2006).
The principal and School Site Council used student performance data to
determine budget allocations for outside resources such as supplementary materials
or the after school intervention program. Students’ eligibility for the after school
intervention program was determined through assessment data.
Consistent use of data and ongoing monitoring enabled teachers to contact
families of students who exhibited a decline in performance. This supported the
school to home connection which has been identified as key to increased student
performance and supported the students’ successful transition to middle school.
Goodenow and Grady, (1994) found that a sense of school connectedness was

180
positively and significantly related to school engagement and motivation of low-
income Latino and African American adolescents.
Effective and Culturally Relevant Instruction
An analysis of the data that informed the identification of the systems that
supported effective classroom instruction included the following:
1. The curricula were tightly aligned to the state content standards.
2. There was school-wide implementation of specific instructional pedagogies.
3. The principal regularly observed instruction and coached teachers
individually as necessary to improve instruction.
4. All teachers communicated high expectations for all students.
5. Teachers emphasized effective first teaching of content and provided multiple
opportunities for students to build and demonstrate mastery of concepts and
skills.
6. A culture that respected students and contributed to their identities as learners
was present in all classrooms.
Effective instruction and a close alignment between the curriculum and
standards have shown increased levels of student performance (Shannon and
Bylsma, 2003; Billig et.al, 2005). Lincoln Elementary utilized curricula that were
tightly aligned to the content standards. The principal noted that implementation of a
new standards-based English language development program during the 2006-2007
school year, resulted in the redesignation of 28 percent of the English learners as
fluent English proficient.

181
The teachers shared that specific instructional pedagogies, such as Explicit
Direct Instruction (EDI) were implemented school-wide. Teachers were supported in
the use of instructional techniques through professional development. The principal
was very clear in stating his expectation that techniques and pedagogies
demonstrated during professional development will be faithfully replicated in
classrooms. In response to the intense focus on replication of specific pedagogies a
teacher mentioned that
“…sometimes teachers feel like they are being run over…there is not a lot of
space for us to express our own thoughts on things…there is a lot of
frustration under the surface…”

Another comment by a different teacher corroborated that perspective, “He
really hounded us about how we taught writing,” on the principal’s emphasis on all
teachers using the same pedagogy. The principal coached selected teachers
individually to “…move them forward to greater depth in their professional skills…”
Teachers provided clear expectations regarding the purpose of each lesson
and what students were expected to learn during instruction. There was an emphasis
on effective and meaningful first teaching of subject matter, as opposed to
remediation as a primary teaching tool. Multiple opportunities were supplied for
students to build and demonstrate skill and concept mastery contributing to increased
student engagement, a more positive attitude toward school, and higher levels of
academic success (Marks, 2000).
Sixth grade teachers engaged and motivated students through literature
circles. “I want them to be able to read for pleasure and share at whatever level

182
they’re at…” was the comment shared by a teacher. Students are dependent upon
cultural educational settings that affirm and respect their identities (Gallimore and
Goldenberg, 2001).
Displays of student work provided ample evidence that students were
provided with lessons that challenged them to access critical thinking and problem
solving skills (Marzano, 2003; Elmore, 1995, 2001) to demonstrate a thorough
mastery of a concept illuminating the high expectations teachers have for all
students. Ladson-Billings (1995a, 1995b) found that student performance increased
when teachers shared high expectations and provided engaging, challenging work
through culturally relevant instructional techniques. Engaged students showed
increased cognitive and social development; which may be a contributing factor to
the trend of increased student achievement on the CST by Lincoln students over the
past five years.
The difference in sixth graders’ at the elementary and middle schools
performance on the 2006 and 2007 CST confirmed the significant influence of
students’ engagement on achievement at this grade level. Findings by Forgan and
Vaughn (2000) determined that the personal relationships connecting teachers and
students, more easily established in elementary than middle school, positively
affected student engagement and achievement. A sense of school connectedness is
significantly and positively linked to student engagement and motivation of low-
income African American and Latino adolescents (Goodenow & Grady, 1994). This
suggests that middle schools and high performing elementary schools need to

183
collaborate and share structures and systems that may help support students’
identities as learners and continued high levels of performance in middle school
(Schumacher, 1996; Kentucky Department of Education Dropout Prevention
Resource Guide, 2003).

Conclusions
Based on the data gathered pertaining to Research Question One, there was
substantial evidence supporting the finding that students at Lincoln Elementary
School showed more growth in English language arts(ELA) and mathematics on the
CST than did their peers district-wide. The school’s results in both areas were more
comparable with state-wide scores than those of the district. Students of color and
English language learners met and exceeded the state targets for percent of students
proficient or above in ELA and math over the past four years. There was a pattern of
more students meeting or exceeding the state target on the math section than the
ELA section of the CST. This may be due in part to a historically large portion of the
student body that was identified as English learners; however the number of
identified English learners has declined over the past five years. During the 2006-
2007 school year, 28 percent of the identified English learners were reclassified as
English language proficient.
African American students scored higher in English language arts than Latino
students in 2005-2006, but lower in 2002-2003. More Latino students met the AYP
benchmark in math than African American students during the 2002-2003 and 2005-

184
2006 school years. This calls into question the effectiveness of the current
instructional pedagogies for African American students and cultural dissonance
between the home and school cultures (Delpit, 2006).
Students’ actions in the classroom provided evidence that their awareness of
their progress contributed to a more positive attitude toward school, increased
perceptions of academic self efficacy, higher levels of engagement in instruction, and
identities as learners (Marks, 2000). Students’ perceptions and beliefs about their
academic self efficacy may be a critical element in sustaining high levels of student
achievement in middle school (Gutman & Midgley, 1999; Ormrod, 2006).
The elementary school met the criteria for supporting high levels of student
achievement suggested in the review of literature. It was not possible to disaggregate
the middle school achievement data by feeder school therefore no firm conclusion
can be drawn regarding the influence of the elementary school structures and
systems on middle school achievement. However, according information gathered in
the literature review it is possible to predict that students who attend elementary
schools that implement the noted structures and systems are more likely to do well in
middle school if similar structures and systems are implemented in the middle school
setting.
Data collected relevant to Research Question Two supported findings that
provided evidence of organizational structures and systems that supported high
levels of student performance. Intertwined systems of consistent use of assessment
data and data from students’ work informed the planning of professional

185
development. Practices and instructional pedagogies demonstrated during
professional development were noticed during classroom observations and
mentioned during interviews with teachers and administrators.
A school-wide discipline policy helped ensure a safe and positive learning
environment for all students. This policy was underscored by a culture of mutual
trust and respect that was evident throughout the school; particularly during
classroom observations. The culture of trust and respect that supports the disciple
policy observed at Lincoln Elementary stands in contrast to traditional approaches to
discipline that seek to punish students for undesired behaviors rather than teach
behaviors appropriate for the school context.
The systems mentioned above were integrated through strong instructional
leadership. The principal dedicated professional development time for teachers to
reflect on data and plan effective instruction designed to address students’ needs and
enhance achievement. Classroom implementation of pedagogies demonstrated
during professional development was monitored through classroom observations by
the principal and assistant principal.
Based on the data gathered pertaining to Research Question three there was
strong evidence of effective systems that worked in concert to support school wide
effective classroom instruction. Students were told what they were expected to learn
during the lesson as well as how that learning would be assessed. This supported
students monitoring their own learning and progress toward grade level standards
and an increased perception of self efficacy, a protective factor for students in middle

186
school (Gutman & Midgley, 1999). Teachers communicated high academic and
behavioral expectations for all students and families. Positive home and school
connections increase communication and support students’ performance (Gutman &
Midgley, 1999; Ormrod, 2006).
Relevant instruction was evident during observations of lessons requiring
students to apply knowledge and skills to real-life situations such as cooperative
group work. Mutual respect was apparent in all classrooms. Students felt a sense of
ownership in the classroom and the instruction. In one classroom each name card on
the students’ desks contained a handwritten quote chosen as meaningful by that
particular student, this contributed to positive teacher and student connections.
Elements like the name cards and publicly acknowledged successes by all students
create a positive cultural learning environment that enhanced students’ identities as
young scholars, built students’ perception of self efficacy, and supported student
performance in middle school (Gutman & Midgley, 1999; Ormrod, 2006). Students
who attend elementary schools that provide socioculturally relevant pedagogies that
support positive teacher and student connections are more likely to build positive
relationships with adults in middle school and less likely to feel disenfranchised or
drop out of school (Stensrud, 2006).
Data collected in support of the final research question reflected the schools’
firm belief that all students can learn. The school’s positive discipline policy helped
ensure that all students have the opportunity to learn in a safe environment. Both the
principal and assistant principals described discipline as an opportunity for students

187
to learn behaviors that are appropriate to the school environment, building social
capital and refuting the deficit theory of race.
Teachers implemented instructional techniques that provided students
multiple entry points to a lesson and opportunities to build and demonstrate mastery
of skills and concepts. Students frequently worked in cooperative groups that
enabled all students to participate in the lesson at their level and simultaneously learn
from more knowledgeable peers. These pedagogies supported students’ identities as
learners, built students’ perception of self efficacy, and supported students’
sustaining high levels of performance in middle school (Gutman and Midgley, 1999;
Ormrod 2006). Forgan and Vaughn (2000) determined that students’ perceptions of
their academic self efficacy were significant predictors of achievement during their
first year of middle school.
Many parents are involved at the school, but much of their involvement is on
a superficial level. Parents’ attendance at daytime committee and council meetings is
minimal. However; many parents attend or support school-wide special events.
An examination of the interview data revealed an underlying sense of
frustration on the part of some teachers with the principal’s insistence on faithful
replication of specific pedagogies in all classrooms. Teachers expressed a feeling of
being “hounded” to implement these techniques. As the principal is within a few
years of retirement it remains to be seen whether the effective structures and systems
currently in place will be sustained following his retirement.

188
Data on student achievement and suspensions showed that while the API
score increased by forty-three points from 2005-2006 to 2006-2007, the number of
suspensions increased from two to fourteen for the same time period. This was an
unexpected finding and did not align with the school-wide increase in student
achievement.

Implications for Practice
In light of increased school accountability for high levels of achievement by
all students it is essential that schools implement structures and systems that support
and increase all students’ learning and performance. Elementary school education is
the first formal educational experience for children. Elementary schools need to
provide all students with a solid academic foundation in an environment that respects
families and students and enhances the development of students’ identities as “young
scholars”.
This study has produced findings and considerations that may provide
significant insights to all educational researchers, practitioners at all levels and
policy makers. Based on the findings of this study in conjunction with prior research
on high performing high poverty urban schools serving large concentrations of
students of color, elementary and middle schools should reflect on the following
recommendations for practice:
1. School leaders must maintain a highly visible presence in classrooms
enabling them to monitor classroom instructional practices. In order for

189
monitoring to be effective administrators need to be very knowledgeable
about effective instructional pedagogies that will successfully support
their student population.
a. Instructional pedagogies should be presented to teachers in a way
that promotes teachers’ ownership of the pedagogies.
2. The state content standards, curriculum materials, and instructional
pedagogies should be tightly aligned. A close alignment of these key
factors will help ensure that students have the tools to support high levels
of performance.
3. All adults, administrators, teachers, para-professionals, and parents
should clearly communicate high expectations for academic achievement
and behavior to all students.
a. Behavioral expectations must be supported by a positive school-
wide discipline policy that focuses on teaching students
appropriate behavior for the school context and providing
opportunities for students to demonstrate appropriate behavior
rather than controlling or coercing desired behaviors.
4. Schools should provide and nurture a culture of mutual respect and safety
for all stakeholders.
a. A culture of respect enhances communication among students,
students and teachers, parents and the school.

190
b. Effective communication between the school and students’
families increases the likelihood of higher levels of parental
involvement in students’ education and helps parents build a sense
of ownership in the school.
i. Effective communication should incorporate a variety of
communication modes: a school specific website and
meetings scheduled to facilitate parent involvement.
c. Schools need to incorporate the assets of all students’ home
cultures, not just the dominate group, as pathways for meaningful
instruction.
5. Data should be the primary factor driving and informing decisions.
a. Students should to use data to monitor their progress toward grade
level standards.
b. Student performance data, formal and informal, should be used to:
i. Prepare meaningful professional development that will
support teachers’ instructional planning.
ii. Monitor students’ progress toward grade level standards
c. Data from annual high stakes testing should be used to identify
school-wide trends in student performance.
i. An annual school-wide instructional focus and grade level
foci should be determined through analysis of the above
mentioned data.

191
ii. Discretionary budget allocations should be guided by
student needs as identified by an analysis of summative
data.
6. Elementary schools and the receiving middle schools should collaborate
and articulate their programs to ensure that the practices in effective
elementary schools are maintained and continue to be effective in middle
school.
a. Elementary schools serving sixth grade students should
collaborate with high achieving middle schools to identify
structures and systems that provide effective social support to
sixth grade students and adapt those structures and systems to the
elementary school setting to better support sixth grade students
academically and socially.

Recommended Future Research
The analysis of the data led to both findings and more questions suggesting
the need for further research in the following areas:
1. This study focused on organizational systems and structures perceived to
support high student performance in one elementary school. While students
achieved at high levels in elementary school, the performance of many
students declines when they enter middle school. The limited findings of this
study revealed that students who remained in the elementary school selected

192
for this research for sixth grade performed at significantly higher levels on
the CST than students who attended sixth grade in a middle school
environment. Additional study is needed in the middle school setting to
determine whether those students from other elementary schools that have
effective structures and systems in place to support high student achievement
continue to achieve at similar levels in middle school.
2. Future study is needed to determine whether student performance data for
middle school students would reveal higher levels of achievement when the
effective elementary school and the receiving middle school are involved in
articulation that helps the middle school build on the practices of an effective
elementary school.
3. This study was limited to one elementary school, but many elementary
schools are under pressure to support high levels of student performance due
to the increased demand for accountability under the No Child Left Behind
Act. A broader study of multiple schools would shed light and contribute
significant insights into effective structures and systems in other schools as
well as confirm the structures and systems identified in this study.

193
REFERENCES
Ali, R. a. J., C (2001) "Dispelling the myth in California: Preliminary findings from
a state and nationwide analysis of "high-flying" schools." Volume, DOI:

Anderman, E., M.; Midgley, Carol (1997) "Changes in achievement goal
orientations, perceived academic competence, and grades across the
transition to middle-level schools." Contemporary Educational Psychology
Volume, 269-298 DOI:

Anderson, L. W. K., David R.; Airasian, P.W.; Cruikshand, K.A.; Mayer, R.E.;
Pintrich, P.R.; Raths; J. Wittrock M., Ed. (2001). A taxonomy for learning,
teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational
objectives. New York, Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Ball, D. C., D. and Raudenbush, S (2000) "Resources, instruction, and research."
Volume, DOI: from: http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/Resources-
CRB-12-2000.pdf.

Bandura, A. (1986). "The Explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory."
Special Issue: Self-efficacy theory in contemporary psychology: Journal of
Social Clinical Psychology 4: 359-373.

Bartolome, L. I. (1994). "Beyond the methods fetish: Toward a humanizing
pedagogy." Harvard Educational Review 64(2): 173.

Bechtold, D. A. (2000). The Effects of possible selves, cultural frame of reference,
and structural barriers on the educational outcomes of castelike and
immigrant minority students. Social Psychology. Reno, University of
Nevada. Doctor of Philosophy in Social Psychology: 119.

Billig, S. H. J., I.I.; Abrams, A.; Fitzpatrick, M. & Kendrick, E. (2005). Closing the
achievement gap: lessons from successful schools Washington, DC, Office of
Vocational and Adult Education.

Brooks-Gunn, J. D., Greg J. (1997). "The Effects of Poverty on Children." The
Future of children: children and poverty 7(2): 55-71.

Brownley, B. S. (2004). An ethnographic case study of classroom learning
environments in a school once identified as a high-poverty/high-achieving
urban school. United States -- District of Columbia, The George Washington
University.

194
Carter, L. M. (2002). The leadership acts of district-level administrators that create,
promote, and sustain successful students in an urban high-poverty school
district. United States -- Texas, The University of Texas at Austin.

Carter, S. (2000). No excuses: Lessons from 21 high-performing, high-poverty
schools. Washington DC, Heritage Foundation.

Catterall, J. (1998) "Risk and resilience in student transitions to high school."
American Journal of Education Volume, 302-333 DOI:

Cohen, D. a. H., H. (1998a) "Instructional policy and classroom performance: The
mathematics reform in California." CPRE Research Report Series, RR-39
Volume, DOI: from: www.cpre.org/Publications/rr39.pdf.

Commission, C. D. a. S. M. (1999). Reading/Language arts framework for California
public schools. D. o. Education, California Department of Education.

Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and student achievement. Alexandria, VA, Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Covington, M. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation
and school reform. New York, Cambridge University Press.

Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English learners: language diversity in the classroom.
Los Angeles, Bilingual Education Services Inc.
.
Credentialing, C. C. o. T. (1997). California standards for the teaching profession. C.
D. o. Education: 1-33.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design, qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.

Crosnoe, R. (2006). Mexican roots, American schools: Helping Mexican immigrant
children succeed. Stanford, Stanford University Press.

Cummins, J. (1986). "Empowering minority students: a framework for intervention."
Harvard Educational Review 56(1): 18-36.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999) "Teacher quality and student achievement: A review
of state policy evidence." Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy
Working Paper #R-99-1 Volume, DOI: from:
http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/LDH_1999.pdf.

195
Delpit, L. (2006). "Lessons from Teachers." Journal of Teacher Education 57(3):
220-231.

Denton, J. a. L., L (1984). "Quantity of professional education coursework linked
with process measures of student teaching." Teacher Education and Practice:
39-64.

Dika, S. a. S., K. (2002). "Applications of social capital in educational literature: A
critical synthesis." Review of Educational Research 72(1): 31-60.

Dillard, D. (2006). Leadership perceptions of improved achievement for African
American students in Title I academic award-winning schools. United States
-- California, Alliant International University, San Diego.

Eccles, M., Buchanan, Flanagan, Mac Iver, Reuman, and Wigfield (1993).
"Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on
young adolescents experience in schools and family." The American
Psychologist 48(2): 90-101.

Education, K. D. o. (2003, September 9, 2003). "Student support/engagement,
transition-middle." Retrieved April, 2007.

Education, M. D. o. (1997). Michigan education assessment program (MAEP)
handbook 1996-1997 results. Lansing, MI.

Educational, T. (2003) "Achievement in America." Volume, DOI:

Elias, M. J., M. Gara, et al. (1985). "Sources of stress and support in children's
transition to middle school: An empirical analysis." Journal of Clinical Child
Psychology 14(2): 112-118.

Elmore, R. F. (1995). "Teaching, Learning, and School Organization: Principles of
Practice and the Regularities of Schooling." Educational Administration
Quarterly 31(3): 355-374.

Elmore, R. F. (1996). "Getting to scale with good educational practice." Harvard
Educational Review 66(1).

Elmore, R. F. a. F., S. H (2001). "Holding schools accountable: Is it working?" Phi
Delta Kappan 83(1): 67-72.

196
Embler, S. D. (2006). Evaluating schools based on the performance of students with
disabilities: A comparison of status and value-added approaches. United
States -- Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park.

Ferguson, P. W., S. (1993) "The impact of subject matter and education coursework
on teaching performance." Journal of Teacher Education Volume, 55-63
DOI:

Ferguson, R. (1991). "Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why
money matters." Harvard Journal on Legislation 28(2).

Flowers, N. M., S; Muhall P (1999) "The Impact of teaming: five research-based
outcomes of teaming." Middle School Journal Volume, DOI:

Forgan, J. W. V., Sharon (2000) "Adolescents with and without LD make the
transition to middle school." Journal of Learning Disabilities Volume, 33-43
DOI:

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, Lynn, Fernstrom, Pamela (1993) "A conservative approach to
special education reform: Mainstreaming through transenvironmental
programming and curriculum-based measurement." American Educational
Research Journal Volume, 149-177 DOI:

Fullan, M. (2000). "Three stories of educational reform: Inside; inside/out; outside/in
(Electronic Version)." Phi Delta Kappan 81(8): 581-584.

Futernick, K. (2007). A possible dream: retaining California teachers so all students
learn, Sacramento: California State University.

Gallimore, R. G., Claude (2001). "Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research." Educational
Psychologist 36(1): 45-56.

Gardner, R., Miranda, Antoinette (2001) "Improving outcomes for urban African
American students." Journal of Negro Education Volume, 255-263 DOI:

Gauvain, M. (1999). The social context of cognitive development. New York,
Guilford Press.

Goodenow, C. a. G., K. E. (1994). "The relationship of school belonging and friends'
values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students." Journal of
Experimental Education 62: 60-71.

197
Gottlieb, J. W., Sharon (1999) "Comparison of students referred and not referred for
special education." The Elementary School Journal Volume, 187-199 DOI:

Greene, J. P. a. W., M.A. (2005). Public high school graduation rates and college
readiness rates: 1991-2002: Center for civic innovation at the Manhattan
institute. Manhattan, Center for Civic Innovation at the Manhattan Institute

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA,
Corwin Press.

Guskey, T. R. (2002). "Professional development and teacher change." Teachers and
Teaching: Theory and practice 8(3 ).

Guskey, T. R. a. S., Dennis (1996). "Exploring the relationship between staff
development and improvements in student learning." Journal of Staff
Development 17(4).

Gutman, L., M.; Midgley, Carol (2000) "The role of protective factors in supporting
the academic achievement of poor african american students during the
middle school transition." Journal of Youth and Adolescence Volume, 223-
248 DOI:

Hanson, M. (2001). "Institutional theory and educational change." Educational
Administration Quarterly 37(5): 637-661.

Hanushek, E. (1972). Education and race. Lexington, MA, DC Heath.

Harry, B. A., M.G. (1994). "The Disproportionate placement of African American
males in special education programs: A critique of the process
" Journal of Negro Education 63(4): 602-619.

Hasazi, S. B., Furney, Katharine S., and Destefano, Lizanne (1999). "Implementing
the IDEA transition mandates." Exceptional Children 65(4): 555-566.

Haycock, K. (1998) "Good teaching matters: How well qualified teachers can close
the gap." Volume, DOI: from:
http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/89D93152-2BFE-42E8-BDA8-
C748846573D6/02003openplen.ppt.

Holme, J. J. (2002). "Buying homes, buying schools: School choice and the social
construction of school quality." Harvard Educational Review 72(2): 177-205.

198
Honawar, V. (2007) "Curriculum -Development group urges focus shift to whole
child." Education Week Volume, DOI:

Horn, S., Sanders, W., and Wright, S. (1997) "Teacher and classroom context effects
on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation." Journal of
Personnel Evaluation in Education Volume, 57-67 DOI: from:
www.sas.com/govedu/educationevaas/teacher_eval.pdf.

Johnson, B. A. (2005). A study of effective school characteristics in a select high-
poverty and high-performing school. United States -- District of Columbia,
The George Washington University.

Joyce, B., and Showers, B. (2002). Designing training and peer coaching: Our needs
for learning. Alexandria, VA, Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Kamil, M. L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century.
Washington DC, Alliance for Excellent Education.

Konstantopoulos, S. (2006). "Trends of school effects on student achievement:
evidence from NLS: 72, HSB: 82, and HELS: 92." Teachers College Record
108(12): 2550-2581.

Kosobud, K. (2005). "Understanding special education from multiple conceptual
perspectives: A review." Equity & Excellence in Education 38: 376-380.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995a) "But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally
relevant pedagogy." Theory into Practice Volume, 159-165 DOI:

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995b). "Toward a theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy."
American Educational Research Journal 32(3): 465-491.

Little, J. (1993). "Teachers' professional development in a climate of educational
reform." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 15(2): 129-151.

Louis, K. S. M., Helen, M.; Kruse, Sharon (1996). "Teachers' professional
community in restructuring schools." American Educational Research Journal
33(4): 757-798.

Loveless, T. (2001). How well are American students learning? . Washington D. C.,
The Brookings Institution.

199
McIver, D., J.; Epstein, Joyce L. (1991) "Responsive practices in middle grades:
teacher teams, advisory groups, remedial instruction, and school transition
programs." American Journal of Education Volume, 587-622 DOI:

Madaus, G. K., T.; Rakow, E.; King, D (1979). "The sensitivity of measures of
school effectiveness." Harvard Educational Review 49(2): 207-230.

Maras, P. a. A., Emma-Louise (2006). "Students with special educational needs:
transitions from primary to secondary school." British Journal of Special
Education 33(4): 196-203.

Marks, H. M. (2000) "Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the
elementary, middle and high school years." American Educational Research
Journal Volume, 153-184 DOI:

Marsh, D. (1995). Restructuring for results: High performance management in the
Edmonton public schools. Washington DC, National Center on Education
and Economy.

Martin, E. W. M., R.; Terman, D.L. (1996). "The legislative and litigation history of
special education." The Future of Children: Special Education for Students
with Disabilities 6(1): 25-39.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action.
Alexandria, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J. M., Jana S., Pickering, Debra J. (2003). Classroom management that
works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. Alexandria, VA,
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. W., T.; McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works. Alexandria,
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Massell, D. (2000). The district role in building capacity: Four strategies. CPRE
policy briefs, Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Graduate School
of Education, University of Pennsylvania, 3440 Market St., Suite 560,
Philadelphia, PA 19104-3325. Tel: 215-573-0700.: 9.

McLaughlin, M. (1992). "How district communities do and do not foster teacher
pride." Educational Leadership 50: 33-35.

McLaughlin, M. a. T., J. (2003) "Reforming districts: How districts support school
reform." CTP Research Report #R-03-6 Volume, DOI:

200
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study: Application in education.
San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Miles, K. H. D.-H., Linda (1998). "Rethinking the allocation of teaching resources:
Some lessons from high-performing schools." Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis 20(1): 9-29.

Miller, M. J. (2005). Accounting for student and school success in high poverty, high
minority schools: A constructivist approach. United States -- Texas, The
University of Texas at San Antonio.

Myklebust, J. O. (2006) "Class placement and competence attainment among
students with special educational needs." British Journal of Special Education
Volume, 76-81 DOI:

National, R. P. (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching children to
read. Bethesda, MD, National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development.

Oakes, J. (1989). "What educational indicators? The case for assessing the school
context." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(2): 181-199.

Odden, A. A., Sarah (2000). A Case study of resource reallocation to reduce class
size, enhance teacher planning time, and strengthen literacy: Clayton
Elementary School. Madison, Consortium for Policy Research in Education:
Wisconsin Center for Education Research, Madison: 33.

Odden, A. A., Sarah (2001). Reallocating resources: How to boost student
achievement without asking for more. Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press
Inc.

Ogbu, J. U. (1981) "Origins of human competence: A cultural-ecological
perspective." Child Development Volume, 413-429 DOI:

Ogbu, J. U. (1987) "Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search
of an explanation." Anthropology and Education Quarterly Volume, 312-334
DOI:

Ogbu, J. U. (1992) "Understanding cultural diversity." Educational Researcher
Volume, 5-14+24 DOI:

201
Ogbu, J. U. a. S., Herbert D. (1998) "Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A
cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for
education." Anthropology and Education Quarterly Volume, 155-188 DOI:

Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners, 5th ed. Upper
Saddle River, Pearson Education.

Osher, D. M. G. B., Wanda (2003) "Exploring the relationship between student
mobility and dropout among students with emotional and behavioral
disorders." The Journal of Negro Education Volume, 79-96 DOI:

Panasuk, R. M., Todd, Jeffery (2005) "Effectiveness of lesson planning: factor
analysis." Journal of Instructional Psychology Volume, 215-232 DOI:

Parker, M. G., Jessie (2000) "Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning:
Ontology, not just epistemology." Educational Psychologist Volume, 227-
241 DOI:

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks,
Sage Publications.

Purkey, S. C. S., Marshall S. (1983). "Effective schools: A review." The Elementary
School Journal 83(4): 426-452.

Qin, D. B. (2006). ""Our child doesn't talk to us anymore": alienation in immigrant
Chinese families." Anthropology and Education Quarterly 37(2): 162-179.

Reeves, D. B. (2000). Accountability in action: A blueprint for learning
organizations. Denver, Advanced Learning Press.

Reeves, D. B. (2003). "High performance in high poverty schools: 90/90/90/ and
beyond." Center for Performance Assessment: 20.

Repetto, J. B. a. C., Vivian I. (1996). "Expanding views on transition." Exceptional
Children 62(6): 551-563.

Reynolds, A. J. W., Barbara (1999) "Special education and school achievement: an
exploratory analysis with a central-city sample." Education Evaluation and
Policy Analysis Volume, 249269 DOI:

Richard, F. E. (1996). "Getting to scale with good educational practice. ." Harvard
Educational Review 66(1).

202
Rost, J. a. R., M. (1999) "Evaluating the effectiveness of the charger connection
class." Volume, DOI:

Rousseau, S. (2007). Equitable opportunities to learn: Addressing the access gap.
California Council for Social Studies.

Rowan, B. C., Fang-Shen; Miller, Robert J. (1997) "Using research on employees'
performance to study the effects of teachers on students' achievement."
Sociology of Education Volume, 256-284 DOI: from:
www.sii.soe.umich.edu/documents/EcologyPaper.pdf.

Rowe, K. (2003) "The importance of teacher quality as a key determinant of
students' experiences and outcomes of schooling." Interim committee for a
NSW Institute of Teachers-Discussion paper Volume, DOI: from:
http://icit.nsw.deu.au/library/flies/Rowe-
The_Importance_of_Teacher_Quality.pdf

Santrock, J. W. (2007). Lifespan development. New York, McGraw Hill.

Schumacher, D. (1998). "The transition to middle school." Clearing House on
Elementary and Early Childhood Education.

Schunk, D. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and cognitive skill learning. Research on
Motivation in Education. R. E. a. A. Ames, C. New York, Academic Press. 3:
13-44.

Shannon, G. S. B., P. (2003). Nine characteristics of high-performing schools.
Olympia, WA, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Smredar, C., E.; Owens, Debra, E. (2003) ""It's a way of life for us": High mobility
and high achievement in department of defense schools." Journal of Negro
Education Volume, 165-177 DOI:

Snell, L., S. (2005). Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and
learning: A case study of district efforts in the Media unified school district.
Rossier School of Education. Los Angeles, University of Southern California.
Doctor of Education: 280.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Houston, Sage Publications.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). "A social capital framework for understanding the
socialization of racial minority children and youths." Harvard Educational
Review 67(1): 1-40.

203
Statistics, N. C. f. E. (2000a). Highlights from the third international mathematics
and science study. U. S. D. o. Education, NCES 2001-027.

Steele, C. (1992). "Race and schooling of black Americans." The Atlantic Monthly
269: 791-798.

Stensrud, R. (2006) "Moral hazards and disenfranchisement: Why do so many kids
with disabilities end up going nowhere?" Guidance and Counseling Volume,
97-106 DOI:

Stephan, W. G. (1980). "A brief overview of school desegregation" (pp. 3-23). New
York, Pleum Press.

Stiefel, L. S., Amy Ellen; Ellen, Ingrid Gould (2006) "Disentangling the racial test
score gap: Probing the evidence in a large urban school district." Journal of
Policy Analysis and Management Volume, 7-30 DOI:

Suarez-Orozco, C. a. Q., B. (2006). "Gendered perspectives in psychology:
Immigrant origin youth." International Migration Review 40(1): 165-198.

Summers, A. a. W., B. (1975). Which school resources help learning? Efficiency and
equity in Philadelphia public schools. Philadelphia, PA, Federal Reserve
Bank of Philadelphia.

Taylor, B. M. P., Michael; Pearson, David (2000). Effective teachers and schools:
Trends across recent studies. Ann Arbor, Center for the Improvement of
Early Reading Achievement: 19.

Teddlie, C. K., Peggy; Stringfield, Sam (1989). "Effective versus ineffective schools:
Observable differences in the classroom." American Journal of Education
97(3): 221-236.

Valencia, R., Menchaca, M., & Donato, R. (2002). Segregation, desegregation, and
integration of Chicano students: old and new realities. Chicano School
Failure and Success: Past, Present, and Future
70-108.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1 In R. W.
Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.). New York, Plenum.

Walters, M. L. (2006). Visual and performing arts and the academic achievement of
English language learners and students in poverty. United States --
Mississippi, The University of Southern Mississippi.

204
Wheeler, M. J. (2006). A comparison of school readiness for preschool children with
and without disabilities in inclusive environments. United States -- New
York, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Yell, M. L. R., D.; Rogers E.L (1998). "The legal history of special education: What
a long, strange trip it's been!" Remedial and Special Education 19(4): 219-
228.

Young, B. L. (2004). Perceptions of school leaders toward the potential of
educational success given structural change in a diverse urban educational
setting. United States -- Pennsylvania, The Pennsylvania State University.

Zhang, D. B., Michael R. (2006) "Enhancing self-determination of culturally diverse
students with disabilities: current status and future directions." Focus on
Exceptional Children Volume, DOI:

Zhou, M. (2003). "Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse
children." The Teachers College Record 105: 208-225.

205
APPENDIX A: ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW GUIDE
1. Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe
contribute to your students’ high performance. How does the school maintain
those policies and practices?
a. What are the 3 most effective things you have done over the past 3 to
5 years to improve student performance?

2. How do you create and maintain a climate in the school that engages all
students and respects cultural diversity?

3. Describe how expectations for meeting academic achievement goals are
made clear for teachers/students/parents.
a. How do you monitor student progress?
b. What assessment tools do you use?

4. How are the needs of students of color addressed in the School-wide Plan?

5. How would you describe effective teaching at your site?
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate instruction in order to meet the
needs of all students?
b. What is your role in helping teaches provide effective instruction?

6. Describe how your school uses data to guide instruction.
a. What evidence do you look for, besides assessment scores that
demonstrate high student performance?
b. What is your role as a school leader in guiding the use of data to
improve the school climate, classroom instruction?

7. Describe your school-wide discipline policy and how it impacts students of
color.
a. Does your discipline policy help students adopt behavior that
contributes to their learning?

206
APPENDIX B: TEACHER INTERVIEW GUIDE
1 .Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe contribute
to your student high performance.
a. Has your school encountered any obstacles maintaining these
practices and policies? If so, how did the school overcome them or
maintain them?
b. What are the three most effective things you have done over the past 3
to 5 years to improve student performance?

2. What role do teachers play in maintaining a climate in the school that
engages all students and respects cultural diversity?

3. Describe how expectations for meeting academic achievement goals are
made clear for teachers.
a. For students?
b. Parents
c. How do you monitor student progress?
d. What assessment tools do you use?

4. How familiar are you with the School Plan?
a. How are the needs of students of color addressed in the School-Wide
Plan?
b. How have you modified your instructional practices to reflect the
School-Wide Plan for students of color?

5. How would you describe effective teaching at your site?
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate instruction in order to meet the
needs of all students?

6. Describe how your school uses data to guide instruction.
a. What evidence do you look for, besides assessment scores, that
demonstrate high student performance?

7. Describe your school-wide discipline policy and how it impacts students.

207
APPENDIX C: CLASSIFIED STAFF INTERVIEW GUIDE
1 .Describe the practices and policies at your school site that you believe contribute
to the high student high performance.
a. Has your school encountered any obstacles in maintaining these practices
and policies? If so, how did the school overcome them or maintain them?
b. What are the three most effective things the school has done over the past
3 to 5 years to improve student performance?

2. How would you describe the school climate here?
a. In what ways does the school engage/involve all students and respect
cultural diversity?
b. What do you think your role is in contributing to the school climate?

3. What are the expectations for meeting academic achievement goals here?
a. Do you know how the students here are doing academically?
b. What indicators let you know how they are doing?

4. How are the needs of students of color being met at your school?
a. What is in place to support these students?
b. What is in place to support the staff?

5. How would you describe an effective teacher at your site?

6. How do you know when a teacher is doing a good job?

7. How do you see teachers and administrators using data?
a. Do you know when testing will occur?
b. How do the students react to testing?
c. How do teachers react?
d. Is known throughout the school what is done with the data? How is it made
known?

8. Describe your school-wide discipline policy and how it impacts students.
a. What happens when a student breaks a rule or makes a bad choice?
b. Does the discipline policy help students engage in behavior that
contributes to their academic success?

208
APPENDIX D: PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE
1. What is the school doing to help all students succeed?

2. How would you describe the atmosphere at the school?

3. How do you know what your child needs to learn?
a. How does the school communicate that information to you?

4. How does the school address the needs of all sub-groups of students?

5. How do you describe a good or effective teacher?

6. What are some of the ways the school lets you know how your child is doing?

7. Describe the school’s discipline policy.
a. How does it support the learning of all students?
b. Do you consider the discipline policies to be fair to all children? Can you
give me an example of fairness?

209
APPENDIX E: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION GUIDE

Guiding Questions and Artifacts RQ 1: Structures
and Systems
RQ 2: Race
RQ 3:
Implementation
RQ 4:
Achievement
Is there a range or variety of instructional
practices/strategies used? Are they
appropriate for the content and students?

Cooperative grouping X X X X
Use of time X X X X
Differentiated Instruction X X X X
Feedback to students X X X X
Culturally relevant and responsive
instruction
X X X X
What visuals, symbols, and other items are
posted in the classroom?

School wide discipline policy X
Images of people of color X
Classroom library X
School vision X
Physical Class Environment
Seating arrangement X
Teacher-student interaction X
Discipline X
Student-student interaction X
Student work posted X
Feedback/rubric X
Standards-based X
Student engagement X

210
APPRENDIX F: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OBSERVATION
GUIDING QUESTIONS

Guiding Questions
RQ 1: Structures and
Systems
RQ 2: Race
RQ 3: Implementation
RQ 4: Achievement
Does collaboration occur during and after
professional development
X X X X
Is there engagement among the staff X X X X
What types of data are being used? X X X X
How is data used X X X X
Is professional development aligned to the
vision?
X X X X
How are students discussed among teachers
and other staff?
X X X X
Is the professional development geared
toward teaching to standards mastery or
performance?
X X X X
Is the professional development practical
and adaptable
X X X X
Are the expectations clear for
implementation of the professional
development?
X X X X
How are teachers held accountable for the
professional development provided?
X X X X
Is an evaluation tool used for the
professional development?
X X X X

211
APPENDIX G: LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETING
QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION

 To what extent was the meeting focused on the implementation of the school
plan?

 Does the leadership team analyze student achievement data in order to take
informed actions?

 Did (or does) the leadership team discuss and plan for diversity-sensitive
(culturally relevant and responsive) learning environments?

 How are the roles/work distributed among members of the leadership team?

 Structure: Is the meeting for information or systems planning?

 Is the meeting operational- or instructional-focused?

212
APPENDIX H: SCHOOL-WIDE OBSERVATION GUIDE
Physical Setting:
School grounds
 Wall postings
 Samples of students’ work
 School calendar for academic year
 Visual of school goals/mission/vision
 Symbolic representations (drug free zone, anti-violence, college
paraphernalia, culturally relevant items)
 Cleanliness (trashy, odor, graffiti, insects)
Classroom specific
 Wall postings
 Samples of students’ work
 Classroom calendar
 Classroom schedule
 Classroom rules or expectations
 Culturally relevant items
 Location of classroom (bungalow, main building, isolated, included)
 Cleanliness (trashy, odor graffiti, insects)
 Classroom spacing (proximity of students’ desks to one another and teacher)

213
APPENDIX I: MATRIX ALIGNING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS WITH DATA SOURCES

Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
R.Q.1: What are the trends and patterns of
performance among students of color?
X X X X
I.Q.: Describe how expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals are made clear for
teachers/students/parents.
X X
a. How do you monitor student progress? X X
b. What assessment tools do you use? X X
I.Q.: What are the expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals here?
X
a. Do you know how the students here are
doing academically?
X
b. What indicators let you know how they are
doing?
X
I.Q.: How do you know what your child needs to
learn?
X
a. How does the school communicate that
information to you?
X
I.Q.: Describe how your school uses data to guide
instruction.
X X
a. What evidence do you look for, besides
assessment scores, that demonstrate high
student performance?
X X
b. What is your role as a school leader in
guiding the use of data to improve the school
climate and classroom instruction?
X
I.Q.: How do you see teachers and administrators
using data?
X
a. Do you know when testing will occur? X
b. How do the students react to testing? X
c. How do teachers react? X
d. Is it known throughout the school what is
done with the data? How is it made known?
X
I.Q.: What is the school doing to help all students
succeed?
X

214
Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
I.Q.: What are some of the ways the school lets
you know how your child is doing?
X
R.Q.2: What are the organizational structures and
systems that are perceived to contribute to high
student performance in high-poverty urban
schools with large concentrations of students of
color?
X X X X
I.Q.: Describe the practices and policies at your
school site that you believe contribute to your
students' high performance. How does the school
maintain those policies and practices?
X X X
a. What are the 3 most effective things you
have done over the past 3 to 5 years to
improve student performance?
X X X
b. Has your school encountered any
obstacles maintaining these practices and
policies? If so, how did the school overcome
or maintain them?
X X X
I.Q.: What is the school doing to help all students
succeed?
X
I.Q.: Describe your school-wide discipline policy
and how it impacts students of color.
X X X
a. Does your discipline policy help students
adopt behavior that contributes to their
learning?
X X
b. What happens when a student breaks a
rule or makes a bad choice?
X
I.Q.: Describe the school's discipline policy. X
a. How does it support the learning of all
students?
X
b. Do you consider the discipline policy to be
fair to all children? Can you give me an
example of fairness?
X
I.Q.: How does the school address the needs of a
sub-groups of children?
X
I.Q.: How are the need of students of color being
met at your school?
X
a. What is in place to support these students? X
b. What is in place to support the staff? X

215
Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
R.Q. 3: How are the organizational structures and
systems implemented to support school-wide
effective classroom instruction that promotes
student learning?
X X X X
I.Q.: How would you describe effective teaching
at your site?
X X
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate
instruction in order to meet the needs of all
students?
X X
b. What is your role in helping teachers
provide effective instruction?
X
I.Q.: How would you describe an effective teacher
at your site?
X
I.Q.: How do you know when a teacher is doing a
good job?
X
I.Q.: How do you describe a good or effective
teacher?
X
I.Q.: Describe how your school uses data to guide
instruction.
X X
a. What evidence do you look for, besides
assessment scores, that demonstrate high
student performance?
X X
b. What is your role as a school leader in
guiding the use of data to improve the school
climate and classroom instruction?
X
I.Q.: How do you see teachers and administrators
using data?
X
a. Do you know when testing will occur? X
b. How do the students react to testing? X
c. How do teachers react? X
d. Is it known throughout the school what is
done with the data? How is it made known?
X
I.Q.: Describe how expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals are made clear for
teachers/parents/students.
X X
a. How do you monitor student progress? X X
b. What assessment tools do you use? X X
I.Q.: What are the expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals here?
X

216
Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
a. Do you know how the students here are
doing academically?
X
b. What indicators let you know how they are
doing?
X
I.Q.: How do you know what your child needs to
learn?
X
a. How does the school communicate that
information to you?
X
I.Q.: How do you create and maintain a climate
in the school that engages all students and
respects cultural diversity?
X
I.Q.: What role do teachers play in maintaining a
climate in the school that engages all students
and respects cultural diversity?
X
I.Q.: How familiar are you with the School Plan? X
a. How are the needs of students of color
addressed in the School-Wide Plan?
X
b. How have you modified your instructional
practices to reflect the School-Wide Plan
students of color?
X
I.Q.: How are the needs of students of color being
met at your school?
X
a. What is in place to support the students? X
b. What is in place to support the staff? X
I.Q.: How does the school address the needs of all
sub-groups of students?
X
I.Q.: What is the school doing to help all students
succeed?
X
R.Q. 4: How is the construct of race reflected in
the school's structures and systems?
X X X X
I.Q.: How do you create and maintain a climate
in the school that engages all students and
respects cultural diversity?
X
I.Q.: What role do teachers play in maintaining a
climate in the school that engages all students
and respects cultural diversity?
X
I.Q. How would you describe the school climate
here?
X

217
Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
a. In what ways does the school
engage/involve all students and respect
cultural diversity?
X
b. What do you think your role is in
contributing to the school climate?
X
I.Q.: How would you describe the atmosphere at
the school?
X
I.Q. How does the school address the needs of all
sub-groups of students?
X
I.Q.: Describe how expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals are made clear for
teachers/students/parents.
X X
a. How do you monitor student progress? X X
b. What assessment tools do you use? X X
I.Q.: How are the needs of students of color being
met at your school?
X
a. What is in place to support these students? X
b. What is in place to support staff? X
I.Q.: What are the expectations for meeting
academic achievement goals?
X
a. Do you know how the students here are
doing academically?
X
b. What indicators let you know how they are
doing?
X
I.Q.: How do you know what your child needs to
learn?
X
a. How does the school communicate that
information to you?
X
I.Q. What are some of the ways the school lets
you know how your child is doing?
X
I.Q. What is the school doing to help all students
succeed?
X
I.Q: Describe your school-wide discipline policy
and how it impacts students of color.
X X X
a. Does your discipline policy help students
adopt behavior that contributes to their
learning?
X X
b. What happens when a student breaks a
rule or makes a bad choice?
X

218
Data Source
Research and Interview Questions Administrator Teacher Classified Parent
I.Q.: Describe the school's discipline policy. X
a. How does it support the learning of all
students?
X
b. Do you consider the discipline policy to be
fair to all children? Can you give me an
example of fairness?
X
I.Q.: How would you describe effective teaching
at your site?
X
a. In what ways do teachers differentiate
instruction in order to meet the needs of all
students?
X
b. What is your role in helping teachers
provide effective instruction?
X
I.Q.: How are the needs of students of color
addressed in the School-Wide Plan?
X
I.Q.: How familiar are you with the School Plan? X
a. How are the needs of students of color
addressed in the School-Wide Plan?
X
b. How have you modified your instructional
practices to reflect the School-Wide Plan for
students of color?
X

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to learn about the structures and systems that support high levels of performance in high poverty urban schools serving large populations of students of color. In this case study of an urban elementary school in the Los Angeles area of Southern California four research questions focused on the trend of achievement among students of color, the identification of organizational structures and systems that supported high levels of student achievement, the classroom implementation of the identified structures and systems, and the school 's construct of race. The results of the study indicated five emergent systems worked in concert to support high levels of student achievement.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from a high-performing, high-poverty urban school

PDF

Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

A case study: school-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from a high-performing, high poverty urban school

PDF

Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty ubran schools

PDF

Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty urban school

PDF

A study of academic success with students of color: what really matters? Lessons from high-performing, high-poverty urban schools

PDF

Overcoming a legacy of low achievement: systems and structures in a high-performing, high-poverty California elementary 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

PDF

School-wide implementation of systems and structures that lead to increased achievement among students of color: a case study of a high-performing, high-poverty urban school

PDF

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

PDF

Organizational systems school leaders implement to facilitate effective classroom instruction in urban schools: a case study

PDF

The impact of leadership on student achievement in high poverty schools

PDF

Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study

PDF

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

PDF

Effective STEM initiatives in high-poverty elementary schools

PDF

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

Asset Metadata

Creator Dryden, Kathleen Knox (author)

Core Title School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lesson from a high performing high poverty urban elementary school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 05/24/2008

Defense Date 04/15/2008

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

Tag effective structures and systems,high student performance,OAI-PMH Harvest,student engagement,students of color

Place Name Los Angeles County (city or populated place)

Language English

Advisor Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee chair), Marsh, David D. (committee member), Stowe, Kathy Huisong (committee member)

Creator Email kdryden@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1246

Unique identifier UC1121023

Identifier etd-Dryden-20080524 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-79533 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1246 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Dryden-20080524.pdf

Dmrecord 79533

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Dryden, Kathleen Knox

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