University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The middle college high school: a case study

(USC Thesis Other)

The middle college high school: a case study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE MIDDLE COLLEGE HIGH SCHOOL: A CASE STUDY
by
Jami Ware Parsons
__________________________________________________________________
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 2007
Copyright 2007 Jami Ware Parsons
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my grandmother,
Mildred Hunt Fischer.
I want to thank her for her complete support, encouragement, unfaltering faith,
and continued belief in me as a future school leader. I could not
have accomplished this without her.
I want to also give a very special thank you to my fiance,
Dwight Steve Schmidt,
for without his love, patience, encouragement and incredible technical support,
this dissertation would not have been possible.
And, an additional and sincere thank you to my parents,
Raymond B. and Nancy Fischer Ware,
For their support of this endeavor, their love and
continual encouragement along the way.
I want to dedicate this dissertation in part and
extend a very special thank you to
Dr. Theresa Daem,
the Superintendent of Laguna Beach Unified School District,
For initially encouraging me to pursue a doctoral degree
and for providing me with a model of visionary leadership,
selfless dedication in service to others and an excellent example of the kind of
caring, strong and compassionate leader I hope to emulate one day.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A special thank you to my committee members for their advice and support:
Dr. Lawrence Picus, Chair
Dr. Gilbert Hentschke
Dr. John Nelson
To some very special fellow members of my thematic cohort without whom I
would never have completed this journey:
Jennifer Carter, Lisa Cain, Kevin Thompson and Katy Ramezani.
And a special thank you to the
Newport-Mesa Unified School District for allowing me to conduct this study.
iv
Table of Contents
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
Abstract viii
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study 1
Introduction 1
Background of the Problem 1
Statement of the Problem 5
Purpose of the Study 6
Research Questions 6
Importance of the Study 6
Summary of Methodology 7
Limitations 7
Delimitations 8
Assumptions 9
Definition of Terms 10
Chapter 2: Synthesis of the Literature 14
Introduction 14
P-16 Partnerships 15
Credit Based Transition Programs 30
History of the Middle College High School 32
The Accelerated Schools Project 40
Resource Allocations and Student Achievement 52
Summary of Literature Review 61
Chapter 3: Methodology 63
Introduction 64
Sample and Population 64
Process of Selection 65
Overview of School and District 65
District Leaders 66
Site Leaders 67
Teacher descriptions 67
School Facility 68
Instrumentation 68
Conceptual Framework 68
Data collection and Analysis 75
Summary 79
v
Chapter 4: Analysis of the Data 80
Framework for Research Question One 84
Data for Research Question One 85
Findings for Research Question One 87
Framework for Research Question Two 111
Data for Research Question Two 112
Findings for Research Question Two 113
Framework for Research Question Three 134
Data for Research Question Three 135
Findings for Research Question Three 136
Framework for Research Question Four 141
Data for Research Question Four 142
Findings for Research Question Four 142
Summary and Discussion of Findings 147
Major Theme One 147
Major Theme Two 149
Major Theme Three 149
Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions 151
Findings for Research Question One 160
Findings for Research Question Two 165
Findings for Research Question Three 166
Findings for Research Question Four 168
Conclusions 173
Importance of the Study 177
Suggestions for Future Studies 177
References 180
Appendices
Appendix A 183
Appendix B 186
Appendix C 189
Appendix D 192
Appendix E 195
vi
List of Tables
Table 2.1: 1995 and 1999 Comparison of International Math
Scores on TIMMS for eighth grade students 20
Table 2.2: 1995 and 1999 Comparison of International Science
Scores on TIMMS for eighth grade students 20
Table 3.1: Study Sample’s Demographics 67
Table 3.2: Study Sample’s Enrollment by Ethnicity 67
Table 3.3: Relationship between the Six Core Strategies
and the Research Questions 73
Table 3.4: Relationship between the Data Collection Instruments
and the Research Questions 76
Table 4.1: 2005-2006 Newcrest MCHS Demographic Characteristics 103
Table 4.2: 2005-2006 Newcrest MCHS Participation Rates
for Special Programs 103
Table 4.3: 2005-2006 Urbana MCHS Demographic Characteristics 103
Table 4.4: 2005-2006 Urbana MCHS Participation Rates
for Special Programs 104
Table 4.5: NMCHS Average Teaching Load and Teaching Load
Distribution for 3 years 105
Table 4.6: NMCHS 2004-2005 Teacher Education Level 106
Table 4.7: NMCHS Instructional Minutes 107
Table 4.8: 2002-2004 Dropout Rate and Graduation Rate
for NMCHS, District and State 117
Table 4.9: SAT Reasoning Test Results for school, district and state 118
Table 4.10: Newcrest MCHS CST Data for 2003-2005 119
Table 4.11: 2002-2006 Comparison of NMCHS/District/State
API Base Scores 123
vii
Table 4.12: Newcrest MCHS API Scores 2001-2006 123
Table 4.13: Urbana MCHS SPI Scores 2001-2006 124
Table 4.14: 2005 AYP Comparisons for Four Alternative
Secondary Schools 126
Table 4.15: 2005-2006 Comparison of Newcrest Unified School
District High School API Scores 128
Table 4.16: 2003-2004 District and State Averages for Staff Salaries 133
Table 4.17: District and Site General Fund Expenditures and cost
per student 133
Table 4.18: Newcrest MCHS Fund Appropriations for 2005-2006 134
Table 4.19: Dollars received by NCMCHS per funding source for
2006-2007 137
Table 4.20: 2006-2007 Cost and Revenue for Community College 139
Table 4.21: Comparison of Staffing/Pupil Ratios for NUSD
High Schools 140
viii
ABSTRACT
THE MIDDLE COLLEGE HIGH SCHOOL: A CASE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to identify and examine the strengths and
weaknesses of the leadership and organizational structure, processes and student
level resource allocations at an alternative learning design high school, which
provides a wide variety of learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in
both high school and college level courses, and its perceived causality with regard
to student achievement. The focus was to better understand the relationship
between the variables of leadership, organizational structure, financial and human
resource allocation and student achievement, with a special focus on graduation
rates and college going rates for the non-traditional, at-risk or minority student.
This study used conceptual frameworks developed to guide data collection
and analysis for four research questions: (a) How is this school organized to
maximize student achievement? (b) How does the school choose to allocate
financial and human resources in order to maximize student achievement?
the How is the structure funded? and (d) How would this program be brought to
scale in other settings?
This descriptive-analytic case study was conducted in one Middle College
High School in a large K-12 school district located in a higher Socio-economic
status community in the western portion of Orange County, a large metropolitan
suburb of Los Angeles in Southern California. The district and school were selected
on the basis of: (a) A district and school that has a Middle College High School
option available for students (b) A district and school that has a relationship with a
ix
community college which supports its mission through the shared use of resources
and facilities and (c) A district and school that has the capacity in funding,
infrastructure, people and professional development to support this alternative
offering.
The data indicated that the district and school were not adhering completely
to the National Middle College Consortium rubric in that students accepted into the
program are not ethnically diverse or first generation college students. The
students are not making as much academic progress as might be expected due to
their comparatively low mathematics scores on both state standardized assessments
and on college readiness assessments such as the S.A.T. In contrast, their
graduation rates and drop out rates are impressive with all students graduating and
no students dropping out of school. With regard to resource allocations, the
program is costly for the K-12 school district compared to the cost of educating
students at the traditional comprehensive high schools, yet more than pays for itself
with regard to the costs incurred by the community college.
1
CHAPTER ONE
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Background of the Problem
America is currently in the midst of serious reform efforts linked to
increasing accountability for the improvement of student performance. As national
and international assessments consistently point to an overall decline in student
achievement and recent statistics demonstrate an alarming increase in high school
drop out rates, particularly among minority students, concern increases across
sectors about the eventual impact on the job market and the national economy
(High Schools of the new Millenium: Imagine the Possibilities, 2004; Orfield,
2004). While the population of Latino and African American students is growing
in American schools, the drop out rate for these students is also increasing at an
alarming rate, both in California and across the country (National Center for
Educational Statistics, 2000). By the year 2010, Latinos are expected to be the
largest minority group in the United States. About half of the Latino high school
population enrolls in college, but few finish. If these rates don’t change, out of
every 100 Latino kindergartners, only 11 will obtain at least a bachelor’s degree
(www.edtrust.org, 2002). The increase in Latino student drop out rate, if left
uninterrupted, is clearly a cause for concern among educators and policymakers
alike (ERIC Development Team, 1995). Of greater concern, neither the college
enrollment rates nor completion rates of Latinos have increased over the last 20
2
years. In particular, Latino students are dropping out at a disproportionate rate to
their enrollment numbers. For example, when looking at sub-group populations
within the Latino population, second language or English Language Learner drop
out rate is 1.5 times that of any other group. These startling statistics suggest that
we need to make some dramatic changes in our instructional approaches in the
American high school system when working with minority students, and
particularly, when working with Latino and African American students and those
students who are limited in English proficiency (Huebner & Corbett, 2004).
Today in the United States, accountability for all students achieving
proficiency levels is held to a high standard through the implementation of the
federal No Child Left behind Act (NCLB). This school reform act, which has been
in place since January 8, 2002, states that each school, and all of its sub-groups,
will make Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) in meeting each state’s academic
achievement standards. A critical part of this policy emphasizes that every child
must reach proficiency level in reading and math (again, for formalities sake, in a
document such as this you should use “mathematics” but are by no means obligated
to do so) by the year 2014. The proficiency level is the level in which the student
meets the grade level standard for reading and math. This law requires that all
students will be successful according to the (i would say: standards established by
the state terms stated above) regardless of a child’s ethnicity or English language
proficiency. The government’s expectations are high for all students and secondary
3
schools must determine the best ways to help those students become not only
academically proficient, but graduate and enter colleges and universities in
increasing numbers.
Schools are grappling with ways to increase student achievement and
graduation rates and provide an adequate and equitable education so that all
students will demonstrate proficiency in all subjects by the year 2014. In trying to
insure that no child will, in fact, be left behind, or performing below grade level,
schools face a daunting task.
Since the eighties, several indicators have illustrated the critical status of the
current condition of American schools. Since the A Nation at Risk report alerted
our country to the “rising tide of mediocrity” (1983, p.1) in our educational system,
a growing concern for improvement efforts has intensified. It was not surprising
that the National Educational Goal Panel, in an examination of the progress that
individual states have made towards the eight national goals, (this last bit is run-on,
I think I know what you’re wanting to say: which also called for greater efforts in
United States, was ironically the only country in the TIMSS (spell out since this is
the first time you’re referencing this) whose students dropped in ranking from
above average performance at the eighth grade level. Furthermore, by the twelfth
grade our students fell even further behind, particularly in mathematics, as
compared to much smaller and economically weaker countries (N.C.E.S., 2000).
In the nineties, international comparisons with students in the United States
were discouraging. The International Mathematics and Science Study(TIMSS) in
4
1995 and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat (TIMSS-
R) in 1999 were very ambitious cross-national educational research study which
compared over half a million students’ scores in mathematics and science across
five continents and forty-one countries. The United States was the only country in
TIMSS whose students dropped in ranking from above average performance at the
eighth grade level. Furthermore, by the twelfth grade our students fell even further
behind, particularly in mathematics, as compared to much smaller and
economically weaker countries (N.C.E.S., 2000). Since you repeat this information
here, where it seems more appropriate, I suggest you delete it above, where the
sentence was also more confusing.
Summarizing the grim report from TIMSS, National Education Goals Report
and A Nation at Risk, recommendations were made by the United States Business
Roundtable, the National Alliance of Business, and the United States Chamber of
Commerce for more aggressive reform (Goodlad, 2004). Thus, it is no surprise that
the successful education of all American students has become a national concern
for many.
Nationally, and within each state, there are ongoing efforts to allocate
additional financial resources and more highly qualified school leaders and teachers
in pursuit of the solution. In much of the conversation around improving student
achievement and in discussing the provision of an adequate education for all
students, the focus is on school reform that meets the needs of a variety of learners
and the effective allocation and strategic use of existing resources is critical.
5
The Statement of the Problem
The question for schools and districts throughout the country focuses on
how school districts can create alternative learning organizations that are
successful, particularly with a minority population. However, their challenge will
be to not only focus on performance at grade level, but it should reach beyond that
to include the goal of increasing high school graduation rates and college going
rates and finding ways to bring successful schools or programs to scale using their
existing resources.
Not surprisingly, over the last few years, efforts to increase student
achievement outcomes have dominated educational policies at the federal, state and
local levels. Indeed, a review of the literature in the area of P-16 partnerships,
accelerated learning, credit-based transition programs, accountability, school
finance and leadership reveals that broad policy development and implementation
issues at all three levels continue to play an important role for the establishment of
schools that will be successful in educating a wide variety of learners and in
meeting the goals intended by the No Child Left Behind Act by the 2014 deadline.
Research indicates that school finance models based on student level resource
allocations and innovative ideas regarding collaborative partnerships between
business, community college districts and schools can provide a positive alternative
to the traditional secondary school paradigm that has seen an increase in student
drop out rates and a decline in overall student achievement.
6
The Purpose of the Study
The purpose of my study is to identify and examine the strengths and
weaknesses of the leadership and organizational structure, processes and student
level resource allocations at an alternative learning design high school, which
provides a wide variety of learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in
both high school and college level courses, and the perceived causality with regard
to student achievement.
Research Questions
1. How is this school organized to maximize student achievement?
2. How does the school choose to allocate resources in order to maximize
student achievement?
3. How is the structure funded? From where do these funds originate?
4. Is it possible to bring this school structure to scale in other settings?
Importance of the Study
A formative evaluation of a Middle College High School program, as it is
implemented with a variety of learners, will be conducted. This study will explore
information about a type of alternative learning design in which a school district
works in partnership with a community college district to provide a P-14 option so
that secondary students can be concurrently enrolled in high school courses and
community college level courses during their junior and senior years. This is a
qualitative case study that is emergent in design. Therefore, the study aims at
thoroughly exploring the purposeful case selected so that categories can be revealed
7
from the data collected. The findings of this study will be of use to practitioners in
the educational field. This is beautifully written Jami: succinct yet doesn’t lose the
complexity of the study.
Summary of Methodology
The purpose of this study was to investigate resource allocation, leadership
and organizational structure in an alternative design school that is working in
partnership with a community college district to share resources and facilities. The
focus was to examine the relationship and practices of the two districts and
understand how the alternative learning design is actually implemented in practice
at the site and district level. Particular attention will be focused on administrative
decisions about staffing, resource allocation and student achievement, graduation
rates and college acceptance for non-traditional and minority students. Qualitative,
descriptive-analytic case study research methods will be used in collecting the data.
Limitations
This study was conducted using one qualitative case study design. The data
collection will take place over a six month period of time at a selected district and
school site. The results may not represent other similar schools or districts.
The sample was purposive because the researcher sought a secondary
school in an urban district that has a partnership with a local community college
district, thereby allowing two distinctly separate organizations to share fiscal,
human and physical resources. There may be other factors in this district and
8
school site that will affect student achievement results that may not be a part of this
study.
Delimitations
This study used evidence-supported observations, interviews and document
analysis to gather qualitative data and presents it in a case study format. The data
was gathered in one Southern California high school located on a community
college campus in an urban setting that has a high socio-economic status and
increased parental and community involvement. The size of the sample in this
study was small and due to the demographics of the area did not include a high
percentage of minority students, who are normally targeted for enrollment in this
type of school. Due to these limitations, the study may not allow for a
generalization to other districts and schools that are not similar demographically.
The sample was not randomly selected. It was selected based upon the following
characteristics:
1. A district and school that has a Middle College High School option
available for students.
2. A district and school that has a relationship with a community
college which supports its mission through the shared use of
resources and facilities.
3. A district and school that has the capacity in funding, infrastructure,
people and professional development to support this alternative
offering.
9
Other districts that had Middle College High School options were
considered for selection in this study. The Middle College High School concept is
still relatively new and many districts do not yet have this alternative option
available for students. It was important for this study to look at longitudinal data
related to student achievement, graduation rate and college acceptance rates,
therefore the Middle College High School selected would have had to be in
operation for a period of at least three years to have this data available. This factor
also provided the opportunity to study funding fluctuations and stability of the
partnership, site and district leadership, staffing and organizational structure as it
relates to student achievement. The district and school in this case study met the
above criteria and was identified to be suitable for selection in this qualitative
research study.
Assumptions
It is assumed that the school is implementing content standards in alignment
with the state standards. Furthermore, the selection of the school for this study was
made because the district and school selected for this study are believed to have
high capacity and are implementing this Middle College High School model in
agreement with the principles and beliefs of the funding intermediary organization.
It is also assumed that the evidence-supported interviews and document analysis
provides for valid data and the respondents are expected to be honest and
forthcoming with their responses related to the purposes of the study.
10
Definition of Terms
Academic Pipeline. A term used in academia denoting the systematic transitioning
of students from one level of education to another in order to better prepare
students for the academic demands of college.
Accountability. The notion that people or organizations should be held responsible
for improving student achievement and should be rewarded or sanctioned for their
success or failure to do so.
Adequacy. A term used in school finance that denotes a process of determining
how much funding is necessary, or adequate, to bring all students (based on
individual student needs of language proficiency, academic deficiencies and
learning disability) to proficiency level in order to meet the requirements of the No
Child Left Behind Act of 2002.
Advanced Placement Courses/Exams (A.P.). The Advanced Placement Program
series consists of 29 tests in humanities, sciences, social sciences, and mathematics.
These tests were designed to accompany accelerated high school course
descriptions and teaching materials and may result in the granting of college credit
from participating colleges to students who score well on these tests. Stude’ts'
grades are reported to the colleges of their choice, but tests are administered at
participating high schools.
Alignment. The degree to which assessments, curriculum, instruction, textbooks,
technology other instructional materials, teacher preparation, professional
11
development, and systems of accountability all reflect and reinforce the educational
program’s objectives and standards.
Alternative Education. An educational program that is dissimilar to traditional
educational options. This can include Continuation High Schools, Schools serving
incarcerated populations, magnet schools, charter schools, performing arts schools
or any school wishing to provide another option for students to pursue academic
interests.
Assessment. A tool, instrument, process, or exhibition composed of a systematic
sampling of behavior for measuring a student’s competence, knowledge, skills or
behavior. An assessment can be used to measure differences in individuals or
groups or changes in performance from one occasion to the next.
Authentic Data. Data arising from real-world situations as opposed to contrived
situations or simulations.
California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP). Interrelated standards for
the teaching practice: engaging and supporting all students in learning; creating and
maintaining effective environments for student learning.
Credit based transition programs. Programs that are designed to facilitate the
transition to college and allow high school aged students to earn college credit
while still enrolled in high school. Programs of this type include Advanced
Placement (AP) classes, International Baccalaureate (IB) classes, Technology
Preparation classes under the Carl D. Perkins Act authorized by congress in 1990
12
and Dual Enrollment programs like the Early College or Middle College High
school concepts.
Dual Enrollment. Refers to high school students who earn college credits for
courses taken through a postsecondary institution; also called dual credit,
concurrent enrollment, or joint enrollment.
International Baccalaureate program (I.B.). This program is a rigorous pre-
university course of study leading to a series of exams for motivated high school
students between the ages of sixteen and nineteen. The program includes at least
two years of comprehensive curriculum that can culminate in students receiving an
international diploma that fulfills the requirements of high school graduation for
multiple nations. This was originally designed to meet the needs of students at
international schools. This program also allows high school students the
opportunity to receive college credit dependent upon passing the exams.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Federal legislation re-authorized most recently
in 2002 and stipulates that all students in the United States will be proficient in the
areas of English/Language Arts and Mathematics by the year 2014 based on the
results of standardized assessments administered each year. Goals are established
for the Academic Performance Index (API) growth of all schools each year.
Schools are also required to make annual yearly progress (AYP) each year for
significant sub-groups within their population, or they are perceived to be out of
compliance. NCLB also requires that all teachers are fully qualified to teach in
their grade level or subject area. If schools are non-compliant with goals of NCLB
13
for a period of two years, the state or other authorized agency has the right to take
control back from the school site and dismiss current staff.
P-16 Partnership. (Pre-school through grade 16 or four years of college)
educational partnerships that exist between multiple levels of educational
organizations and institutions that provide for an integrated system of education
that ideally allows for seamless transitions for students from early childhood to and
through a four year college degree. P-16 is a newer term for what is also known as
seamless education, school-college partnerships, K-16 partnerships, networks,
consortiums or collaborations.
STAR. Standardized Testing and Reporting System for the state of California.
This assessment includes the California Standards Test (CST) and the California
Achievement Tests-6
th
(CAT-6). These test results for individual students are
incorporated into an index of academic performance (API) for each school and
district in annual reports. Progress towards Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) goals
are also included in this index by calculating the performance of each sub-group
(Ethnic groups, English Learners, Special Education and Title I students). This
system is designed to help schools measure progress toward the goals outlined in
the No Child Left Behind act of 2001 which stipulates that all students will be
proficient in the areas of English/Language Arts and Mathematics by the year 2014.
Tech Prep. This refers to an articulated course of study between secondary and
post-secondary institutions that result in credit for both high school and college for
students who pursue the specified block of professional/technical coursework. .
14
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
To facilitate the review of the literature, the researcher has identified the
five following areas as a basis for this study:
1. An examination of the history and purpose of P-16 partnerships with a
focus on the strengths of, and barriers to, effective collaboration as well as
the identification of essential leadership and organizational elements for
successful implementation,
2. An examination of credit based transition programs highlighting elements
of dual enrollment options for students, specifically the Early College High
School initiative which includes the Middle College High School, the
creation of the Middle College High School, results of the implementation
of Middle College High Schools, potential reasons for and the cultural
factors necessary for expanding Middle College High Schools, as well as
the potential outcomes of these schools for diverse learners,
3. An examination of the purpose and origin of the Accelerated Schools
Project as a method of school reform and as a way to increase student
achievement, the necessary culture required for implementation, and
potential results of implementation for diverse learners,
4. An examination of resource allocation and student achievement that details
how states, districts and school sites choose to allocate existing resources
15
and capitalize on grants available from (a) the private sector and (b) the
federal government, and from specific expenditures made by schools that
result in increasing student achievement.
Synthesizing the Literature
P-16 Educational Partnerships
Partnerships between different levels of an educational structure exist in
order to strengthen student learning outcomes. These partnerships are sometimes
known as P-16 (Pre-school through grade16) educational partnerships. They are
created when agreements exist between districts serving pre-school through twelfth
grade and institutions of higher education and provide for an integrated system of
education that allows for seamless transitions for students from early childhood
through a four year degree (Haycock, 1998; Rasch, 2002; Van de Water & Krueger,
2002). P-16 is a newer term for what is also known as seamless education, school-
college partnerships, K-16 partnerships, networks, consortiums or collaborations.
This concept emphasizes the idea of continuity of purpose and the integration of
separate entities for a common goal; the education of all students to high levels of
proficiency with the intent to prepare them for the information economy, the world
of work and democratic citizenship (Van de Water & Krueger, 2002). With this
concept, teachers at all levels of instruction come together to articulate curriculum,
identify the skills necessary to prepare students for school and work, and students
have the personal and academic support needed to become successful now and in
all aspects of their future plans.
16
The partnership between P-12 and higher education is not a new one, but is
one that has undergone fluctuations of scope and purpose due to varying levels of
interest from all stakeholders for over one hundred years. For example, during
much of the 19
th
century, higher education has prepared teachers to work in the K-
12 system, dictated curriculum, issued tests, approved secondary school courses
and screened the students who were selected for admission into their institutions
(Rasch, 2002). In contrast, during the twentieth century, the interest level in
collaborative educational partnerships, although intermittent, became increasingly
focused on improving student achievement and preparing students for work. As we
move into the twenty first century with the emphasis on heightened accountability
brought about by the most recent adoption of the federal No Child Left Behind
legislation in 2002, it has become more urgent that educators can insure that all
children are succeeding. Due to the penalties associated with failure and non-
compliance for individual students, educational organizations and our economy, the
benefits of partnership between secondary and post-secondary schools and
businesses are compelling (Rasch, 2002). However, to avoid some pitfalls that have
existed for early educational partnerships, it is important to review historical
accounts of both failures and successes.
Historical Background on P-16 Educational Partnerships
Over the last one hundred years, educational partnerships have sometimes
been difficult to forge due to intermittent interest and unfocused purposes, but
when clear, concise and coherent goals are agreed upon by each organizational unit,
17
they have been beneficial for student and teacher learning outcomes. Educational
partnerships that include the P-12 system and institutions of higher education were
originally created in the United States back in the 1880’s when the President of
Harvard University brought together teachers from elementary schools in
Cambridge, Massachusetts and faculty from Harvard University for the purpose of
creating a more effective teacher education program. The New England
Association of Colleges and Preparatory Schools, the oldest regional accreditation
agency, came into being because of that partnership in 1885 and played a role in
providing ongoing teacher education for pre-service and in-service teachers and
combined efforts between schools and colleges(Haycock, 1998). In 1896, John
Dewey started the Laboratory School at the University of Chicago to bridge the gap
between the isolation of each system’s efforts, which he believed to “constitute a
vast waste in education” and train teachers to offer a progressive education focused
on the child’s needs arising out of a social context (Harms & Depencier, 1996).
Dewey’s concept of education was based on democratic notions and ideals and his
efforts later became known as Progressive Education.
In the 1930’s, Dewey’s ideas formed the basis for the Progressive
Education Association, which created a commission to examine the relationship
between schools and colleges related to curriculum and the preparation of students
for college. After some analysis, the commission produced a report that
highlighted the need for schools and colleges to expand their partnerships in pursuit
of improved curriculum and instructional practices for student learning. In the
18
1950’s, the potential of the communist threat spurred a sense of urgency in
American interest in the quality of American math and science programs and, in the
1960’s, the Carnegie Foundation recommended a need for improved teacher
preparation programs and emphasized the importance of making connections
between high school and post-secondary educational preparation of students
(Goodlad, 2004).
In the early 1980’s, the National Commission on Excellence in Education,
established by the United States Department of Education, issued A Nation at Risk,
which decried that an inferior education in our country would threaten our
economic potential (Stonecipher, 2001). This report alarmed the nation and
heightened the focus on the American school system. However, at the same time,
it created opportunities to bring all stakeholders together in discussions about how
best to improve our system. This renewed a sense of interest in collaborative
partnerships between K-12 and higher education for the overall improvement of
student achievement.
In the 1990’s, in addition to federal policies that enabled the development of
more P-16 partnerships, there was a growing concern about the lack of alignment
between high school standards and the level of student preparedness for college
(Rasch, 2002). The Education Trust was established at this time to generate
interest among colleges and universities in K-12 reform efforts (Rasch, 2002 in
Chenowith, 2000). The Education Trust, in partnership with the Pew Charitable
Trusts, developed the compact for student success initiative, which allowed and
19
encouraged both higher education and K-12 to think more systemically about
school reform(Rasch, 2002).
Also during this decade, the United States and other countries collaborated
by comparing the math and science performance of their students in The
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 1995 and the Third
International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat (TIMSS-R) in 1999. The
United States first participated in this assessment in 1995, which included students
from 23 countries with three grade levels represented including fourth, eighth and
twelfth grades. The United States again participated in 1999, with 38 countries
involved this time, yet only two grade levels were represented, fourth and eighth
grade. The participation in these assessments provided an opportunity for our
country, and others, to generate two separate data points to make comparisons for
the same group of students, or cohort, over time and make comparisons about
academic performance between countries.
In tables 2.1 and 2.2, average and comparison scores are shown for the top
five scoring countries and the United States of America based on results from the
1995 and the 1999 assessments in both mathematics and science. When making
comparisons over time, scores that represent increases between two and nine points
suggest that American students’ comprehensive achievement in both areas has not
changed much over time. This is especially a concern for the educational
community in light of the fact that they ranked low relative to other nations in their
total scores during both assessment years.
20
Table 2.1: 1995 and 1999 Comparison of International Math scores on
TIMMS for eighth grade students
Nation 1995 Average
Score
1999 Average Score 1995-1999
Difference
1. Singapore 609 604 -5
2. Japan 581 579 -2
3. Korea 581 587 +6
4. Hong Kong 569 582 +13
5. Belgium-
Flemish
550 558 +8
15. United States 492 502 +9
Table 2.2: 1995 and 1999 Comparison of International Science Scores
on TIMMS for eighth grade students
Nation 1995 Average
Score
1999 Average Score 1995-1999
Difference
1. Singapore 580 568 -12
2. Czech Republic 555 539 -16
3. Japan 554 550 -5
4. Korea 546 549 +3
5. Bulgaria 545 518 -27
13. United States 513 515 +2
(N.C.E.S., 2000)
In 1999, out of a total of 38 countries, American students ranked in 18
th
place in the science assessment and ranked in 19
th
place in mathematics
achievement (N.C.E.S., 2000). When making comparisons between similar
cohorts, American eighth grade students demonstrated lower performance in 1999
21
in mathematics than they had shown in 1995 in the fourth grade. Singapore and
Korea ranked first and second place in mathematics in 1999 and Chinese Taipei
and Singapore scored first and second ranking in science achievement during the
same year. These countries performed much better than American students on both
assessments each administration as you can see in tables 2.1 and 2.2.
In a deeper analysis of the questions on the assessments and a comparison
of teaching practices in the higher scoring countries, it became clear that there are
marked differences in the scope of the curriculum covered in a given year and in
the pedagogical practices used by teachers. It was discovered that teachers in
countries like Japan, Singapore and Korea, teach mathematical concepts at a much
deeper level and cover fewer concepts in a given year. Additionally, in both science
and mathematics, they tend to utilize discovery learning when introducing new
concepts, which allows the students to have practical and experiential learning
through guided discovery of the new information (N.C.E.S., 2000). Although the
results of this analysis were helpful in understanding why American students did
not fare well on these assessments, neither the analysis of curriculum and
instructional differences nor the TIMSS-R scores did much to encourage those in
the educational community who were concerned about the perceived problems in
the K-12 educational system.
Now, the federal government has mandated that the educational community
improve student achievement so that all students will be working at grade level.
Many state governments have implemented additional requirements for high school
22
students who must demonstrate minimum basic skills in English and Mathematics
before they can earn a high school diploma. In the early twenty first century,
accountability for student achievement has been markedly increased with a goal
now set for having all students achieving at proficiency levels by the year, 2014.
This increase in accountability has been brought about with the implementation of
the federal No Child Left behind Act (NCLB). This school reform act, which has
been in place since January 8, 2002, states that each school, and all of its sub-
groups, will make Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) in meeting each state’s
standards. A critical part of this policy emphasizes that every child must reach
proficiency level (at grade level) in reading and math by the year 2014. This law
requires that all students will be successful according to the terms stated above
regardless of a child’s ethnicity, his status as a second language learner or if he has
learning disabilities (Are California High Schools Ready for the
2
1st Century?,
2004). Schools must demonstrate that students are achieving through scores on
state standardized assessments that all schools administer at the end of each school
year. These test results for individual students are incorporated into an index of
academic performance (API) for each school and district in annual reports.
Progress towards Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) goals are also included in this
index by calculating the performance of each sub-group (Ethnic groups, English
Learners, Special Education and Title I students). This system is designed to help
schools measure progress toward the NCLB goals. Schools that are not meeting
annual growth targets are subject to punitive consequences from the state, including
23
the potential removal of all employees and management of the school returned to
state authorized providers.
As schools are working to meet this laudable goal for all students,
enrollments in schools and districts have increased bringing with it an increase in
students with special needs, second language learners and students who come from
low socio-economic backgrounds. At the same time, enrollment at institutions of
higher education have risen rapidly in the last five decades due to the passage of
several pieces of federal legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
federal financial aid initiatives that have granted many more diverse students the
opportunity to access higher education (Rasch, 2002). This growth in enrollment
and in the diversity of learners is placing more pressure on both systems (not clear
what systems you’re referring to here). Currently, higher education officials have
begun to discuss their concerns about post-secondary students’ lack of preparation
for the skills necessary to be successful in college. At the same time, other
organizations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Kellogg
Foundation and the Pew Charitable Trust, have become increasingly concerned
about the drop out rate in American high schools, particularly among minority
students. These organizations are working to provide funding for schools and
districts to create new high schools that are more effective in graduating more
students and producing adults who are ready for the world of work in a new
information based economy. In addition, while the role of the federal government
in state and local decisions has grown along with its ability to tie funding to
24
compliance, the school system is struggling to meet all of the demands placed upon
it, while trying to remain fiscally solvent and continue to operate autonomously.
As we see signs of a system under stress, it is time that we face the need for change
and discontinue working in isolation for the benefit of our students. It is in this
context that the need for P-16 partnerships has become increasingly apparent, and
the interest and commitment from many parties is present. The beginnings of new
and hopeful partnerships that include P-16 educators and business are already in
existence.
Goals of P-16 partnerships
Efforts from P-16 educational partnerships build on previous work in
standards, assessment, and accountability. However, P-16 education has two
fundamental goals, the need to raise the achievement levels of all learners and to
close the achievement gap between groups of learners. While many goals are
worth pursuing, these five are central to our ability to insure that all children will be
prepared for the 21
st
century: a) Every child will be ready for school by age six; b)
Every child will be proficient in reading by age eight; c) Every child will be
proficient in geometry and algebra by age thirteen; d) Every learner will complete a
rigorous core curriculum by age seventeen, and e) Every learner will complete the
first two years of college by age twenty one.
An effective P-16 system bases these goals on the use of research to guide
their decisions, clearly articulated set of high expectations, the improvement of
teaching quality and the use of data to measure their progress, thus creating an
25
effective cycle of inquiry and action for improved student achievement (Van de
Water & Krueger, 2002).
To achieve the five central goals, it is implied that some strategies will be
essential to accomplish, including:
1. requiring universal pre-school beginning at age three
2. smoothing transitions from one level of education to the next
3. moving from a Carnegie unit system to a competency based system
4. creating more flexible learning opportunities for adolescent learners,
and
5. moving the accepted end point of public education from grade
twelve to grade fourteen.
Clearly, these strategies are sufficiently complex that in order to achieve these
goals discussions among and between multiple stakeholders, policy makers and
government officials is critically important and necessary. The P-16 initiative
requires that the focus remain on what is best for student learners, not on
individuals or political expediency (Van de Water & Krueger, 2002).
Strengths of Collaborative P-16 Education Partnerships and Business sector
The unique value of three way partnerships between educators in P-12,
higher education and private sector organizations, or business, is based on two
commonalities. First, America’s schools will greatly benefit from the combined
talents, skills and resources from all three sources. Secondly, some of the complex
adaptations to change that will be required in our schools in the coming decades
26
can only come to fruition from powerful collaboration among all three sectors
(Haycock, 1998; Stonecipher, 2001; Van de Water & Krueger, 2002). Based on the
findings presented by the Business-Higher Education Forum K-16 Task Force in
their 2001 report, the K-16 Education Reform Initiative that, it is clear that when P-
16 tri-partite relationships work cohesively with strong commitments from all
sides, student achievement is increased and improved articulation and alignment of
standards results in increased transition rates from P-12 into higher education
(Stonecipher, 2001).
Effective P-16 partnerships can be mutually beneficial to all parties and can
provide for enhanced services that can meet the needs of all students. Effective
collaborations can benefit partners by clarifying issues through shared information,
conducting or collecting research and by analyzing data. Effective partnerships
also build consensus and generate renewed interest, commitment and resources for
each party. They can empower all parties through providing support and creating
opportunities to connect and by building a network of colleagues equally
committed to the common goal (Haycock, 1998).
Partnerships are also able to respond to the complex array of demands
placed on organizations in a way that one, operating alone, cannot. P-12
institutions are currently experiencing heightened levels of accountability and are
under scrutiny from the state and federal government for improved test scores.
Colleges and universities are not exposed to the same level of accountability with
regard to student achievement. An university education is perceived to be an
27
individual and optional by product of matriculation to higher levels of educational
pursuit. Thus an opportunity is created for higher education and the private sector
to work collaboratively with P-12 teaching staff in providing and recommending
professional development options as needed.
Higher education is staffed differently and can provide personnel who
collect and analyze data in order to measure progress on reform efforts in the P-12
system. College faculty can also learn from P-12 teachers through vertical
articulation meetings that will inform curricular planning at the college level
(Palmer, 2000). Vertical articulation efforts between high school staff and higher
educators can result in coursework that is aligned and reduces duplication or gaps
in learning for students (Kirst & Venezia, 2004).
Other benefits to creating effective tri-partite educational partnerships is
that the results for higher education are financial and are related to increased levels
of tuition and increased levels of preparation for undergraduate students, thereby
reducing the need for resources allocated for remedial courses. This collaboration
results in an improved academic pipeline that prepares students to transition into
higher education and increases the college going rates for students. Successful
collaboration also decreases the numbers of students who need remedial instruction
in English and Mathematics classes at the college and university level and reduces
the amount of money higher education officials need to spend on offering those
classes (Gullatt & Jan, 2002; Palmer, 2000). When students are involved in pre-
college programs that involve partnerships between P-12 and higher education,
28
they report that they are more prepared for the rigor of college level work (Kirst &
Venezia, 2004).
Barriers to Effective Collaboration
Today’s large challenges demand more comprehensive systemic
approaches, and leaving out either businesses or colleges and universities may limit
the effectiveness of partnerships to improve elementary and secondary schools”
(Stonecipher, 2001). Today, it is important that all stakeholders in student success
are involved in reform efforts that will insure increased levels of student
achievement. However, there are some obstacles that must be overcome if P-16
partnerships can be successful. Barriers to success might include: over reliance on
individual charismatic leaders, the issue of conflicting demands and time, issues
around money and shared resources, the lack of evidence of prior success and the
lack of a common language(Van de Water & Krueger, 2002). It is important that
organizations confront these issues early and clarify their goals periodically to
insure continued commitment to the common goal.
Essential Elements of Effective Partnerships
Several key themes have emerged from research on effective tri-partite
collaborations between educators from P-12 and higher education and from the
business or private sector. Coordination of efforts and effective collaboration are
essential to identifying a unifying vision, creating goals, assessing progress and
avoiding duplication of effort which creates frustration and wears away at the
commitment. Partnership efforts should focus clearly on issues related to boosting
29
student achievement and not get sidetracked with political issues or special
interests. Partnerships themselves should be held more accountable for the results
of their efforts and need to collect data in an ongoing and pre-determined manner.
To be effective, it has been shown that increased higher education involvement in a
broad array of P-16 issues is necessary to see results.
The Business Forum Initiative, in 2001, reported in their findings that there
are ten essential elements for effective partnerships between business and
education. They recommended the following steps to insure success:
1. Involve as many different parties as possible making sure those
representatives from each sector are present.
2. Involve the highest level of leadership
3. Establish ongoing, formal collaborative structures with a defined
mission and clear goals and agendas and meet regularly
4. Focus on student achievement
5. Develop a long term focus and commit to a multi-year effort
6. Develop a collaborative plan focused on systemic, coherent reform
efforts
7. Concentrate on the most important issues
8. Be results oriented and establish methods to evaluate those results.
9. Dedicate staff and money to the collaboration.
30
10. Remain above the politics and insist that the organization’s strategic
plan and recommendations avoid partisan or special-interest
advantage
They recommended that more new and inclusive partnerships be created between
all three sectors that will be effective that will result in significant reforms for more
widespread student success (Stonecipher, 2001).
Credit Based Transition Programs
Credit Based Transition Programs, also known as CBTP’s, are defined as
programs that give high school aged students the opportunity to earn college credit
for work done while still in high school. These programs are sometimes known as
dual enrollment, joint enrollment, or dual credit programs and come under the
heading of seamless educational programs, which are designed to foster student
enrollment in higher education. Although there are many initiatives and programs
that exist and are designed to do this, there is a growing interest in the Credit Based
Transition Program approach.
Some examples of these types of CBTP’s include Advanced Placement, or
A.P. classes, International Baccalaureate, or I.B., programs, Tech Prep and Early
College or Middle College High Schools. It has become increasingly important, if
not required, in our economy to have at least some college education when
pursuing what are considered reasonably well paying jobs that will allow people to
have a sustainable income and the ability to provide for their families. These types
of credit based transition programs offer benefits to students by a) increasing the
31
likelihood that they will attain the personal and academic skills needed to succeed
in college and work (Bailey & Karp, 2003) and b) offering cost saving options for
parents by eliminating some tuition costs, and c) saving time for students who will
not have to spend as long earning any subsequent degrees, thereby allowing them
to enter the workforce more quickly.
While these benefits are particularly valuable to students who are typically
under represented in higher educational settings, most students enrolled in credit
based transition programs are often from higher socio-economic status and have
more academic potential to succeed. This is unfortunate and is something that
needs to be examined more closely as concern is growing about drop out rates and
college going rates for minority student populations.
One exception to this trend can be found in the Early College High School
Initiative, which also includes the Middle College High School concept. These
schools are designed so that all students can begin taking college level courses and
earn credit while in high school. These programs usually offer small class sizes
and reduced teacher-student ratios, more individualized attention, personal and
academic support and college and career advisement. Academic support may be in
the form of tutoring or study skills classes and heightened accountability in the
form of personal attention in the form of counseling or advisement from faculty
(Groark, 2004).
These programs are intended to target under represented students and
prepare them with the skills necessary for college success. These schools are small,
32
autonomous schools that blend high school and college into one educational
program, and are usually situated on the site of a community college or university
so that shared resources and personnel are available for students. Since the high
school building is situated on the college campus, students can take classes at the
college or university taught by college faculty, while returning to the high school
site to take high school classes that meet graduation requirements.
In an Early College High School, students start the program in the ninth
grade. In the Middle College High School, students begin the program in the
eleventh grade. Students in the Early College High School program may end their
senior year with both a high school diploma and an Associate’s degree, while
Middle College students may end with some college credits earned toward a
college degree with easier acceptance into the community college or university at
the site. The concept’s foundation is that under represented students will see
themselves in the faces of others already enrolled in the community college as
fellow students and be encouraged to continue, while also being better prepared for
the reality of higher education (Multiple Pathways to College: An Evaluation of
the Early College High School Initiative from 2003-2005, 2006).
History of the Middle College High School
The Middle College High School concept began in 1974 as an innovative
educational alternative to traditional comprehensive schools. Middle College High
School, was created as a public secondary school, but was specifically and
purposefully committed to meeting the academic, vocational and affective needs of
33
underserved youth. It began on the campus La Guardia Community College in
New York City. The intent was to provide a seamless secondary to post-secondary
educational continuum, use innovative curriculum and pedagogy, and create a small
and nurturing learning environment. The combination of these elements and the
location of the site on a college campus was intended to create a smoother path
toward obtaining a high school diploma and a college degree for those students
who have traditionally been the least well served by K-12 public education.
The two main goals of the program were to decrease the high school
dropout rate and increase the college-going and completion rate for these under
represented students. The belief was that the location of the high school on a
college campus symbolically promoted the idea to these underserved students that a
college education was not only possible, but the logical next step. These high
schools students had classmates who were college students with similar
socioeconomic backgrounds who overcame similar obstacles to learning. It proved
to be cost-effective for both institutions as they shared human and fiscal resources,
facilities and materials, and ultimately created a reduction in college level
remediation courses that the Institution of higher education partner had to offer.
In 1993, with financial support from the Pew Charitable Trusts and the De
Witt Wallace Readers Digest Fund, an informal network of middle colleges
coalesced and became the Middle College National Consortium or MCNC. The
consortium’s mission is to provide professional development programming to help
support its member schools in implementing the school’s specific design principles
34
and achieve positive educational outcomes for their students. The consortium has
developed a plan called Middle College Principles, Beliefs and Best Practices
which articulates a formalized and specific school design that all members need to
follow (Cunningham & Beinhacker, 2006).
Results of implementing the Middle College High School
Partnerships between two such complex organizations are sometimes
difficult to initiate and maintain. An educational collaboration between a high
school and a college requires two very different institutions to examine the
assumptions that allowed each to exist as if the other did not. Each organization
has its own concerns, constraints and budgetary issues with which to contend.
Responsibilities are often unclear as to what each organization will handle. A
successful collaboration needs financial, administrative and programmatic support
if it is to become a successful program for under represented students. In 1974, the
La Guardia Middle College High School program was a success, but it took a
dedicated team of administrators and faculty to sustain the vision and persist long
enough to make it into a reality. In fact, they were so successful that the dropout
rate for minority students decreased, attendance and course pass rates increased,
graduation rates for these students exceeded 80% college-going rates soared to
more than 85% (Bailey & Karp, 2003; , "MCNC's History").
35
Expanding the Middle College High School concept
The success of these programs paved the way for more successful
collaborations and credit based transition programs. Today, with financial support
from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie
Corporation of New York and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the Middle College
National Consortium is committed to expanding the considerable level of financial
and technical support that it provides to members and those opening new Middle
College National Consortium schools. The Gates’ foundation’s goal is to open 166
schools and serve over 60,000 students by 2011. Currently, twenty five states have
Early College or Middle College High Schools and six states are involved in the
Early College High School initiatives on some level. Most high schools are
collaborating with two year community college partners and most are situated on
their campuses.
Outcomes for diverse learners
These highly specialized programs have an increased potential to benefit the
under represented student population. The small school design was created
through this initiative to focus on recruiting low income and minority youth, the
same students for whom a smooth transition into college is often problematic and
fraught with barriers. These students could include students that are highly
36
motivated, but who have not received the skills, training or support needed to be
successful.
These students might also be those who are English language learners, those
who have considerable family obligations and are needed at home, those who might
find the cost of post-secondary education prohibitive and those students who may
be behavioral problems, but are capable of more academic potential. All of these
types of students are possible candidates for the Early College High School or
Middle College High School programs.
The design of the program was created to foster the academic skills
necessary for college success. These programs provide more personalized
counseling and advisement in the area of planning for college and future careers.
They do this by including an advisory component wherein each staff member is
connected to a small group of students throughout their time at the school. A staff
member is required to have frequent meetings with students and gives the teacher
an opportunity to keep students on track with graduation credit checks and for
students to bring grade reports from the institution of higher education on a
quarterly basis to discuss progress or concerns.
Study skills or homework support classes are often included in the schedule
to facilitate tutoring between students and from the assigned teacher(s). Small class
sizes are desired within the initiative’s plan and teachers and administrators are
hired specifically because of their ability and interest in working closely with a
population of students that need more support.
37
Although this program was created to serve under represented students who
might not otherwise matriculate into higher education, not all of the Middle College
High Schools or Early College High Schools have been successful in recruiting the
targeted group of students. When evaluating the enrollments at many of these
schools, it is still evident to see large percentages of Caucasian, middle class
students in the program. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, along with the
Pew Charitable Trust and the Kellogg Trust, through their funding intermediary
Jobs for the Future, receive annual reports about the progress of these schools. In
the latest report from 2005, it was clear that some schools are not meeting the
funding requirements for implementation of this school model. Recommendation
from that report indicate that by 2008, all schools must meet the mandates for
targeted population enrollments for continued funding(Multiple Pathways to
College: An Evaluation of the Early College High School Initiative from 2003-
2005, 2006)
Creating Equity for Minority and Low Income Students in Honors and other
Accelerated Educational Programs
The use of the term, accelerated learning, in education is often associated
with students participating in gifted and talented educational programs. These
students are traditionally identified for this program, also known as GATE, through
the use of grades, teacher recommendations, standardized assessments or
intelligence testing. Although students are identified using multiple measures,
GATE placement of students is sometimes perceived by minority communities as
38
subjective. Statistics often demonstrate a dearth of minority students qualifying for
this program (Ford, Baytops, & Harmon, 1997). Gifted or honors classes at all
levels of educational settings are often populated primarily by white students
coming from middle to upper middle class backgrounds. These classes are
frequently taught by some of the most veteran staff members and are subsidized by
additional categorical funding from the federal government. This perception of a
lack of equal access into these types of classes, including Advanced Placement
classes, has been the subject of lawsuits.
In 1993, in recognition of inequitable access to these programs, the United
States Department of Education has adopted its most culturally inclusive definition
of giftedness to date (Ford, Baytops, & Harmon, 1997):
Children and youth with outstanding talent perform or show the
potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when
compared with others of their age, experience, or environment. These
children and youth exhibit high performance capacity in intellectual,
creative, artistic areas, or all of these; unusual leadership capacity; or ability
to excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not
ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are present in
children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata,
and in all areas of human endeavor. (p. 26)
Recommendations for Improving Equity and Access to Gifted Programs
In reviewing some of the research on why minority students are under represented
in gifted or accelerated learning opportunities, such as some credit based transition
programs like Advanced Placement courses, it became clear that while the federal
government and the U.S. Department of Education have changed definitions of
what constitutes giftedness, schools and districts need to take some
39
recommendations into consideration to increase equity in access to these types of
programs with the hope of improving minority student achievement. Some
recommendations for the educational community include the following (Ford,
Baytops, & Harmon, 1997):
1) Policies and practices must remain focused on recruiting and
retaining more diverse students into the programs for gifted and
honors students.
2) Measures for screening and identification of these students must
be valid and reliable and include a culturally sensitive component.
3) Provide high quality education to all students with regard to teacher
quality and resources, while providing these students with sound
support services via counseling and other interventions such as
tutoring, study skills classes and information that is timely and
accurate.
4) Provide extensive training or professional development
opportunities for teachers and other personnel in how to
work with minority or under achieving students.
5) Involve family members of minority students in the educational
process so that there is support at home for these endeavors. Include
parents in conferences with counselors, teachers and administrators
involving discussions about their child’s opportunities to pursue
gifted or honors coursework and provide educational training
40
opportunities that deliver information, such as financial aid and
college or career information, along with study skills and
organizational information that will support the student’s
efforts at home and in the future.
6) Refocus and increase the research literature available on increasing
minority presence in gifted or honors programs.
The Accelerated Schools Project
Accelerated learning can have many meanings within the educational
community. Acceleration usually addresses the style and pace of instruction
presented by the teacher. Accelerated courses are provided for students at a much
faster pace compared to traditional or remedial course pacing. Accelerated
instruction can mean that basic and remedial instruction is not presented, and core
course content can be presented without review allowing the students to cover only
the necessary grade level content. Acceleration can also mean material that is
presented for students that teachers perceive to be able to grasp content quickly or
for those students who are identified as gifted or talented. Acceleration, as a term,
is perceived by educators as having a very positive connotation and is often viewed
as the opposite of remediation.
Dr. Harry Levin, from Stanford University, took the positive concept and
intention represented by the notion of acceleration and applied the benefits to
students who have been traditionally marginalized, such as minority or low income
students, who are often identified as needing remediation. The Accelerated
41
Schools Project (ASP) concept began in 1986 and was created by Dr. Harry Levin.
Levin’s concept of creating an Accelerated Schools Project came out of his and
others’ research on deficiencies in remedial interventions that schools have
traditionally used to help students who are traditionally marginalized or at risk of
failure. He discovered that most remedial programs actually reduce expectations
for at risk students on the part of educators and students alike (Hopfenberg, Levin,
Meister, & Rogers, 1990).
Programs of this nature are usually subsidized by categorical funding
provided by the state or federal government for students qualifying as Title I or
similar programs. Title I students are typically identified as students whose family
incomes are low enough to qualify for free and reduced priced lunch and breakfast
programs at school. Title I funding provides for remedial type classes in core
content areas such as Math or Language Arts instruction. Many times, these
classes are pull out programs, or programs that take students away from regular
core instruction to reinforce basic educational skills. Students are often “tracked”,
or placed in these additional support classes for years and this tracking can result in
stigmatizing the students and, sometimes, the teachers associated with the “dumbed
down” program. Both teachers and students often have lowered expectations about
the students’ abilities to improve their learning, which many times can manifest in
lowered academic achievement for these students. This only reinforces the
educators’ idea that the student continues to need additional help. It is a cycle that
is often difficult to break for students who have very little in the way of self-
42
efficacy and motivation. These students are often those who come to the
educational setting perhaps having had very little experience with academic success
and having very few expectations, yet they need the most effective intervention and
support to succeed. The programs’ intent, although positive, results in what can
only be seen as yet another issue of inequitable access and lowered expectations for
students already marginalized by the educational community.
Levin’s Accelerated Schools Project (ASP) was based on school reform
ideas that held democratic values as the basis for systemic changes and was
intended to improve learning for all students. This transformative idea promoted
the idea of giving accelerated learning opportunities normally afforded to gifted
and talented children to children who were considered at-risk, or those students
who had been identified as having the potential of failing to meet grade level
learning goals. The Accelerated School Project was conceived, founded, and
developed by Professor Henry M. Levin at Stanford University in 1986, to address
these communities and the questions and challenges presented in the 1983 report, A
Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform (United States Department
of Education, 1983). The Accelerated Schools project, now known as Accelerated
Schools PLUS (AS PLUS) is a national program designed to transform school
communities, particularly those with high poverty, low academic performance who
have been focused on the concept of remedial strategies to help these students.
AS PLUS is a comprehensive school reform effort designed to transform
these school sites into enriched learning communities providing accelerated
43
instruction and gifted and talented teaching strategies that have been traditionally
reserved for only the top five percent of students. Since its inception in 1986-87,
the AS PLUS now includes 1,500 elementary, middle, and high schools. The
program is currently located at the University of Connecticut. The AS PLUS
program works in partnership with the National Research Center for Gifted
Education and Talent Development and provides opportunities for schools to
participate in guided reform efforts under their supervision. Schools must commit
to five year programs and agree to adhere to the full program which includes an
emphasis on providing powerful learning opportunities for all students to achieve to
their full potential. Schools must have at minimum ninety percent “buy-in” from
all staff before the National Center will agree to take them on as an affiliated school
site. Commitment from all stakeholders is critical before and during this initial five
year period of training and continuous improvement.
The focus is on providing powerful learning opportunities for all student
learners which incorporates foci on the school’s philosophy about student
achievement, its model of governance and leadership, the curriculum and
instructional practices, including assessment, its approach to professional
development as an ongoing endeavor to include a coaching model, and collecting
and evaluating data as a means of continuous improvement. This project is a
comprehensive approach to school reform with an emphasis on creating cohesive
learning communities that include all stakeholders, including students. These
teams must come to function as democratic decision making bodies invested in the
44
improvement of teaching as a means of increasing learning and opportunity for all
students.
At the time that Levin developed the ASP, and it is still true today, many
schools functioned under the belief that students who are educationally “at-risk” of
failure must be given rote memorization tasks and provided with repetitive and
simplistic learning activities, as opposed to learning new material and being
challenged by rigorous and relevant material. In contrast, the Accelerated Schools
Project designed schools which confront that approach to remedial intervention.
Accelerated Schools, under Levin’s design, provide accelerated learning
opportunities for the same students, taking direction from John Dewey’s original
beliefs around democratic ideals and providing equal opportunities for all students.
This project focused on creating learning activities characterized by high
expectations and high status for its participants. The goal was to close the
achievement gap between at-risk youth and their white, middle class counterparts.
The project functions under three guiding principles including unity of
purpose, empowerment of the school site and building on existing strengths. The
process of implementing an accelerated school project at any particular site focuses
on the cycle of inquiry as a mechanism for moving toward accelerated practices
along the three dimensions of curriculum, instructional practices and organizational
structure. The paradigm of traditional schooling is shifted and all stakeholders,
45
including students, take on new and more meaningful roles in all three dimensional
areas.
These foundational democratic notions extend to all stakeholders, including
the staff, teachers, students and parents involved with Accelerated Schools.
Authority is necessarily de-centralized from the central office to the site, and,
further, from the Principal to the staff. The focus is on empowering the school site
to make decisions about resource allocations, curriculum and instructional choices
that are best for their particular population’s needs. These decisions are extensions
of a unified vision that is created by the school site staff and facilitated by the site
Principal.
The steps involved in implementing the ASP model at a school site include
the need to first assess the current reality through the use of data, examine
instructional practices, evaluate the gap between the vision and reality, brainstorm
solutions to this gap, pilot some of those solutions and, again, evaluate the impact
on student achievement. The cycle of inquiry is the basis for an action plan that
continues from year to year toward improvement of student achievement for all
students in the school (Levin, 2001).
The model of governance at an AS PLUS school includes a steering
committee, composed of representatives from the cadres, or sub-committees of
teachers. These sub-committees can be grade level or subject specific groupings.
The steering committee, as a representative body, is charged with collecting and
evaluating the data to determine the three to four focus priorities each year and
46
proposing those to the entire school site team. Tasks are then divided and given to
the cadres or sub-committees who collaboratively work to improve practices for
enhanced student outcomes. These committees provide ongoing data reports to the
steering committee on a regular basis who then review their progress. A
culminating meeting is held at the end of the school year to assess school wide
progress toward the goals that were initially established. Revisions to those goals
are created based on the data and the committee provides a summative analysis of
the school’s needs for the following year.
An essential element of implementation of the ASP is professional
development which is aligned with those focused priority areas, including the
potential initial need for staff to have additional training in the area of collaboration
to increase the likelihood that this shift in roles will actually take place (Biddle,
2002). Coaching is a critical element for successful implementation of this reform.
Coaching takes the form of one external coach, who is generally on staff at the
district level, and is assigned to each school site undertaking the implementation of
this project. These external coaches usually commit to once a week visits to the
site to meet with an internal facilitator, or lead teacher, who works with the site
staff more closely. The internal facilitator is usually given relief time or extra
periods within a school day to work with teachers on instructional practices that
support student learning. These facilitators also collect and analyze data and
complete reports that are provided to the school, district and the National Center.
The Coaching Model established by the AS PLUS program is seen as essential in
47
providing direction and focus, while also sometimes providing staff with needed
motivation to achieve the unifying vision which they created. The coaches work in
conjunction with the Principal and staff to assure fidelity to the program and its
goals.
Culture Required for Successful Implementation
The culture at a school site is often overlooked when implementing
comprehensive school reforms such as the Accelerated Schools Project. Each
school site has a definite and distinct school culture that often works against the
ideas inherent in proposing the need for any school reform (Levin, 2001).
However, it is possible to use a school’s culture to effect reform. According to
Levin (2001), school culture generally refers to:
…shared understandings, behavior, and attitudes that characterize a
school’s participants and operations as reinforced by interactions with
others and perceptions of the world (p. 6).
Levin (2001) also states that culture then manifests itself in several ways at a site:
1) teacher expectations about what behavior is normal for students and
what they should learn, this can vary by race, ethnicity, gender and
social class;
2) student expectations about themselves, about appropriate school
experiences and their self-images;
3) expectations about the role of adults in terms of what are legitimate
actions
4) opinions about acceptable educational practices;
48
5) basic beliefs about the need for change.
If school reforms of any kind are to be successful, staff members must work
collaboratively with community and parents to first establish consensus about the
need for and type of reform appropriate to that site. Decisions based on data that
honestly and accurately examine their current practices are essential. Schools that
do not have at least eighty to ninety percent of the staff committed to the need for
reform and the idea of a specific reform solution will generally waiver in their
commitment to the full implementation of a program which requires consistent and
diligent attention to making changes in all areas of the school’s current culture
(Levin, 2001).
Leadership in this endeavor is critical and must blend salesmanship with
authentic engagement and involvement of staff in what can be a difficult exercise in
honest reflection on practice(Goodman & Zimmerman, 2000). Once a readiness for
change is evident and acknowledged, capacity must be evaluated (Fermanich and
Kimball, 2002). Capacity is the ability of the staff to effect the desired change.
Once again, the Principal, in conjunction with a leadership team, may be in the best
position to evaluate this. For the staff, openness to professional development and
ongoing learning will be important to improve the staff’s capacity in needed areas.
The leadership in school reform must become more democratic.
Administrative roles change from authoritarian to “keeper of the dream” and one
who can allocate resources to make the vision a reality (Hopfenberg, Levin,
Meister, & Rogers, 1990). Strong team leadership is essential in maintaining any
49
school reform. If any reform is to succeed, including the ASP, Levin (2001)
suggests that school leadership must shift from autocratic and authoritarian to a
democratic, team oriented decision making framework. Formal leaders must
relinquish some, if not most, power to the group. Building trust and sharing
information openly is an essential part of the process. Adults must hold high
expectations for students along with maintaining a continued commitment to
change(Levin, 2001).
Potential Results of Implementation for all learners
Schools that provide all students with quality educational opportunities and
support services will have a greater chance of increasing student achievement for
all student learners. The quality of minority students’ educational experiences and
equal access to rigorous learning opportunities must be examined prior to
identification and placement so that more students may be successful in gifted or
accelerated educational programs. More than any other group, African American
and Latino children are designated as at risk or as underachievers. Many of these
students also come from less academically rigorous schools and classrooms,
making it difficult for minority students
a) To be successful in more academically rigorous or gifted education
programs and
b) To be identified as gifted.
c) To have equal opportunities to be competitive with other students in the
college application process and in later employment opportunities
50
To help gifted minority students in these situations to reach their potential, we must
provide them with high quality rigorous educational experiences. As an educational
community, we have hold increased expectations for their learning outcomes and
support them by including the opportunity to learn study skills, learning strategies,
higher level thinking skills, test-taking skills, and time-management skills (Ford,
Baytops, & Harmon, 1997).
While most Accelerated Schools programs take place in elementary and
middle school settings, part of the program’s goals is to reduce high school drop
out rates, particularly for minority students. To do this, they have purposely placed
their emphasis on improving instruction and raising expectations for students at
primary grades before these students reach high school.
In evaluating the success of Accelerated Schools programs, several studies
have been conducted. In 2000, researchers at one North Carolina elementary
school conducted an evaluation during the second year of implementation for
students in third through eighth grades and compared their scores on state
standardized assessments from the first to the second year. They did find moderate
improvement in English/Language Arts and Mathematics scores for these students
and a significant number of students did meet grade level standards during the
second year in state assessments(Baenen, Lindblad, & Yaman, 2002).
Another study was conducted at AS PLUS’ invitation, and with funding
from the Ford Foundation, the MDRC conducted an independent evaluation of the
Accelerated Schools reform in eight elementary schools around the country. The
51
schools selected by the research team served a high proportion of at-risk students,
had implemented the early version of the reform’s main components by the early
1990s, did not institute other major reforms during the study period, and were able
to supply the requisite data. In the study’s “interrupted time series” design, the
schools’ third-grade test scores in reading and math during the three years before
the reform was launched were used to predict what the third-grade test scores
would have been without the reform during each of the five following years. To
estimate impacts on student achievement, the predicted test scores were then
compared with the actual scores. The study focused on successive cohorts of third-
graders because this grade marks a critical point in the development of basic
reading and math skills. Among the study’s key findings:
1. During the first three years of implementation, the schools focused only on
reforming school governance and culture, turning to curriculum and
instruction only in the third or fourth year.
2. For the third grade classes in the study, there were no positive impacts in
the first two years, a slight decline in the third year as schools began to
modify their curriculum and instruction and a gradual increase in the fourth
and fifth years.
3. The average third-grade reading and math scores in the fifth year exceeded
the predicted levels by a statistically significant amount.
4. These impacts were not uniform across all students or all schools.
52
5. The largest impacts were observed among students who would have scored
in the middle of their school’s test score distribution without the reform and
among the schools that had the lowest test scores before launching the
reform.
However, these results should be interpreted with caution for several
reasons. They are based on a sample of only eight schools, the positive impacts
took four to five years to emerge, and it is not known whether the impacts will
persist in later grades. Nevertheless, these findings show that the Accelerated
Schools approach improved academic achievement in a group of mostly at-risk
students (Bloom, Rock, Ham, Melton, & Obrien, 2001).
Resource Allocations and Student Achievement
In our country, school district budgets are created from five revenue sources
including the federal and state education budgets, local property tax, local
miscellaneous and lottery money. In many states, almost fifty percent of school
revenues are still created through local property taxes thus, in many instances,
creating a state of economic determinism primarily affecting the most
disadvantaged youth (Carey, 2004). Several states have tried to reduce those gaps
with legislation and policies developed over the last four decades.
Since the implementation of the Federal No Child Left Behind Act, states
are also engaged in creating a standards based education. The overall purpose of
this act to was to provide students with highly qualified teachers, a research based
curriculum and a safe learning environment. To measure their progress toward
53
achieving the federally imposed goals included in this Act, states must rely on a
complex accountability system with a performance index that includes results on
standardized assessments measuring student achievement in regard to those
standards at each grade level. Furthermore, each sub-group’s performance is also
measured to determine adequate proficiency levels. These sub-groups include
English Language Learners, Title I or low income and special education students.
To enhance accountability for schools, ninety five percent of all students in each
school must take these assessments to insure a school’s attainment of its annual
performance objectives.
As accountability is increased with the imposition of a standards based
education, schools and districts are left to determine how best to allocate their
resources and decide if there are sufficient resources to insure that all students will
meet those performance indicators by 2014. Resource allocation and determining
the best use of the educational dollar has and will continue to become a paramount
issue for many school districts. At the center of this discussion is whether states
provide adequate funding to enable school districts to meet these new goals for all
learners.
Difficult decisions arise for policy makers when the conversation turns to
the definition of an “adequate” education. Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
in 1973 that funding disparities among local school districts were of “no federal
concern”, people have turned their hopes onto the state constitutions to determine
what is equitable in terms of school finance. The state constitutions usually require
54
that their citizens be given a “sound basic”, a “thorough and efficient” or an
“adequate basic” education. State Legislatures and Supreme courts are left to
decide. Grassroots organizations using pro-bono attorneys and civil rights
organizations, such as the A.C.L.U., often get involved in lawsuits seeking to place
pressure on state governments and remedy inequitable or inadequate school
funding issues. These unresolved or uncontested issues of school finance often
result in placing their harshest burdens on those with the lowest social capital, the
poor or minority student populations (Oakes, 2003).
Major court cases have been tried in North Carolina and in New York to
answer these questions. In North Carolina, the Supreme Court has already ruled in
Leandro v. State of North Carolina that adequacy rather than equality is the proper
constitutional test of a system of school funding (Oakes, 2004). In New York, the
CFE or Campaign for Fiscal Equity was successful in building a case which
ultimately proved that the state was not providing an equitable, nor an adequate,
education for all students. Their argument was based on the fact that although the
state had one of the highest average per pupil expenditures in the nation, students
were not meeting proficiency levels on state achievement tests (Zarb, 2005).
Similar organizations, like CFE, may decide to come to other states, including
California, to place pressure on the legislature via the court system to create a more
adequate system.
California remains below average in per pupil spending across the nation.
California ranks next to last in per pupil expenditures in a comparison of the ten
55
most populous states according to NEA rankings in 2002. During the 2001-02
year, California ranked 35
th
in the nation on per pupil expenditures. At the same
time, California has had above average per capita income over the last decade.
This dichotomy, along with the restrictions on creating new property tax
revenues under Proposition 13, reduces the state’s ability to provide an adequate
education for the students in California. To further complicate matters, during the
nineties, California had a twenty five percent increase in the total population of
K-12 students and a significant increase in those students who are ethnically
diverse, low income, English learners and those who are identified as learning
disabled. Average class sizes are among our nations largest in terms of teacher-
student ratios, while teacher salary is also among the highest in the nation. To
accommodate this situation, California has cut certificated staffing positions and
ranks next to last in the nation in the number of teachers and principals per student,
and last in the number of counselors and librarians per pupil (www.edsource.org).
Strategies to improve a state’s cost-efficient use of resources
An analysis of the literature evaluating the nation’s educational
finance system proves that the many states are extremely vulnerable to lawsuits,
such as the ones in California and in New York. Student achievement, as
evidenced through high school completion rates and college enrollment rates, are
decreasing in most major urban areas across the nation(Orfield, 2004). Nationally,
research puts the drop out rate in the United States between 68 and 71 percent,
which means that about one third of all high school students do not graduate. For
56
minority students, the rate at which they finish high school with a diploma declines
to approximately 50 percent (Bridgeland, Dijulio, & Morison, 2006). Most of those
students were either of Latino or African American descent. As of 2005, the
population in our schools has changed. There is a growing majority of students
who are low income and minority.
Schools consistently reply to those who are concerned about these statistics
that they are ill equipped financially to make any dramatic changes. Many also
blame the students (Orfield, 2004). It would appear from the research that it may
ultimately take pressure from the courts again to make any significant changes in
the ways schools are funded. In the interim, schools are left to decide how best to
utilize their current monies. As resources are currently allocated, the funding to
provide an adequate education to the growing and increasingly needier student
populations, as seen in American schools today, may not be appropriately used.
Methods Used to Determine Adequate Resource Allocations
Restructuring a state’s school finance system under existing requirements is
difficult, but it is possible with some adjustments in the way existing resources are
allocated and apportioned to districts. In reviewing the literature on resource
allocation and student achievement, it is clear that states will need to consider
conducting an evaluation of adequate expenditure levels to insure that all students
are able to meet proficiency levels. At this time, there are four models used to
determine adequate expenditure levels -1) Cost Function Model, 2) Successful
57
Schools Model, 3) Professional Judgment Model, and the 4) Evidenced Based
Model (Odden and Picus, 2004).
The Evidenced Based Model has proven to be most cost-effective method in
utilizing both existing funding and in establishing an adequate foundation level
(Odden, Picus, Goetz, & Fermanich, 2006). At the state level, the legislature or
department of education, in conjunction with a consultant or research team,
conducts an analysis of the state’s best practices and programs, based on research
and evidence that is able to provide the most probability of insuring that all learners
will achieve proficiency in all subject areas. The state then calculates the final
costs by using a pupil weighted system, determining differing pupil needs, to
establish the cost of educating a “regular” student, an English Learner, a low
income student and a special education student within these identified programs
(Odden and Picus, 2004).
Enhancing adequacy for all students is to change the funding model so that
schools can be funded using a student-based budgeting model. Currently, states
generally fund districts based on the number of students enrolled, based on their
average daily attendance, and provide the difference between a state guaranteed
funding level and the amount raised through local funding. Districts will often
fund individual school sites with a staffing based model that inherently creates
discrepancies within districts based on the seniority of staff assigned to any one
school. Although state and federal categorical budgets exist to supplement site
budgets for needier student populations, these schools still may not have the total
58
site budgets that newer schools with more veteran staff in affluent areas do. At the
same time, all schools and students are held to the same proficiency standards.
Funding assigned at the individual student level needs to be based on how
much it costs to have that particular student meet the proficiency standard, if we are
to see increases in student achievement and graduation rates for various sub-
groups. It would appear from the research that student based budgeting may
provide a more level playing field for all students, regardless of the wealth of the
district in which they reside. This change might allow school site administrators
more control in deciding what staff and programs they need based on the evidenced
based research for each student population. School site Principals may hire staff
based on the needs of their particular student populations. This level of de-
centralization places more accountability with site Principals and school staff for
student achievement. The only drawback is that the Principal’s job becomes
broader, and he or she may need more professional development to better
understand how to operate a site based budget to enhance student achievement
outcomes (Ucelli, Foley, Emdon & Bond, 2002).
Secondly, educational organizations can more efficiently spend their monies
by contracting out for non-essential or highly specialized services, thereby
encouraging a fair market cost for the labor involved rather than pay union fees for
those services. Districts can phase out positions as people retire or resign and
create clauses in their union contracts which allow them to opt for contracted
replacement services. This can be done for both classified and certificated
59
positions. Many districts now already contract for landscaping and maintenance
services, and some contract out for educational services, such as tutoring and
consulting in curriculum and instructional strategies (Hannaway, 1999). This
option saves districts hundreds and thousands of dollars over the course of years
and may be a more effective way to meet the needs of certain student populations,
or for smaller districts that do not have the economy of scale to offset the costs
associated with such services.
Finally, another option for schools and districts is to create partnerships
with local business and community college districts. Partnerships between
traditional schools and colleges, along with business, can provide alternative
educational options and provide access to resources that are not available in P-12
districts. Community college partnerships allow schools and their students access
to their libraries, computer labs, science labs, textbooks, teaching staff and other
facilities on their campuses. Shared resources can benefit both the district and the
college financially in many ways, while having positive effects on student
achievement. Many studies have indicated that partnerships prove highly
beneficial financially for the parties involved ("Financing Alternative Education
Pathways: Profiles and Policy", 2005)
However, there do not seem to be any simple solutions to the complex
problems of our American school finance system. Currently, with lawsuits
applying pressure to the systems, schools and districts throughout the country are
being forced to look at issues of equity and adequacy much more closely. In light
60
of NCLB requirements and high stakes testing that can now determine a student’s
potential for future success, issues of unequal access to the basic requirements of a
sound education reveal that a lack of resources and adequate supplies equals a lack
of educational opportunity, a lack of career opportunity and creates a vicious cycle
of social reproduction that should not be tolerated in a democratic country such as
ours (Scherer, 2002).
In the end, accountability must fall on all stakeholders in this process. Not
only should schools and districts be held responsible for the success or failure of all
students, so should government officials and policy makers at the state and federal
level who seem to have only complicated this confusing and poorly funded system
with the implementation of accountability systems tied directly to standardized
testing as a measurement for all learners, regardless of distinctly different
needs("Financing Alternative Education Pathways: Profiles and Policy", 2005;
Goodlad, 2004).
Summary of the Literature Review
This chapter presented some of the literature relevant to this study. The
focus of this case study is on the organizational structure, leadership and resource
allocations in a Middle College High School and the perceived causality with
regard to student achievement. As the researcher, I selected the literature based on
its relationship to each of those variables. Research on the strengths and
weaknesses associated with P-16 partnerships, Credit Based Transition Programs,
Accelerated Schools and Adequacy Based Resource Allocations can provide
61
valuable frameworks for schools and districts in regard to finding ways to improve
student performance, particularly for minority and low income students.
What we know is that with the 2014 deadline imposed by the federal No
Child Left behind Act of 2002 in place, schools and districts need to explore ways
to bring all students to proficiency standards. Currently, there are many schools all
over the country whose student populations are increasingly minority, low income,
and/or English language learners, and they are either below proficiency standards
or dropping out of school before graduation. The high school drop-out rates for
these students in large urban areas and in small towns alike are a concern for policy
makers, parents, the business community and the educational community (Orfield,
2004).
Many of the programs highlighted in this literature review have shown
some success in their ability to increase student achievement with this minority and
low income populations. Clearly, what we have been doing in the majority of
schools and classrooms in our country may be effective with the white, middle to
upper middle class student demographic. However, with the pressures of NCLB
imposing possible sanctions for schools that are non-compliant with Annual Yearly
Progress (AYP) goals for significant sub-group populations, and with the potential
negative implications for the American economy in the future, it is also clear that
we must find other ways to increase the graduation rates and college entrance rates
for all students, regardless of ethnicity and socio-economic status(Wirt, 2003).
62
What we don’t know is what will be most effective across a variety of
settings. We need to explore the leadership of programs that have demonstrated
some success, understand how the programs are structured, how they are funded,
how they choose to allocate their resources and how they can be brought to scale in
other settings. Therefore, I propose a study of a Middle College High School
program to determine how this program is organized, how the leadership makes
decisions with regard to resource allocation, and how successful this particular
credit based transition program is in increasing student achievement for various
student populations.
63
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter describes the design, sample, instrumentation, data collection
and data analysis process of the study. The purpose of this study was to identify
and examine the strengths and weaknesses of the leadership and organizational
structure and student level resource allocations at an alternative learning design
high school, which provides a wide variety of learners the opportunity for
concurrent enrollment in both high school and college level courses, and the
perceived causality of that design with regard to student achievement. The focus
was to better understand the relationship between the variables of leadership,
organizational structure, financial and human resource allocation and student
achievement, with a special focus on graduation rates and college going rates for
the non-traditional, at-risk or minority student.
This study used conceptual frameworks developed to guide data collection
and analysis for the study’s four research questions:
1. How is this school organized to maximize student achievement?
2. How does the school choose to allocate financial and human
resources in order to maximize student achievement?
3. How is the structure funded? From where do those funds originate?
4. How would this program be brought to scale in other settings?
64
For the purpose of this study, qualitative, descriptive-analytic case study
research methods were an appropriate approach. These methods provided the
means to do an in-depth study and analysis of a district and school involved in a
collaborative K-14 partnership which provides for a Middle College High School
with a dual enrollment option available for students in the district. Evidence
supported interviews and document analysis were used to collect data to provide
the basis for analysis. The instruments used were selected and developed based on
the study’s conceptual frameworks in order to identify the key elements addressed
in the study’s four research questions.
Sample and population
This descriptive-analytic case study was conducted in one Middle College
High School in a large K-12 school district in a community that has relatively high
socio-economic status that is located in a large metropolitan suburb in the
Southwestern United States. The district and school were selected on the basis of
the following population characteristics:
1. A district and school that has a Middle College High School option
available for students.
2. A district and school that has a relationship with a community
college which supports its mission through the shared use of
resources and facilities.
65
3. A district and school that has the capacity in funding, infrastructure,
people and professional development to support this alternative
offering.
Process of selection
Districts that had Middle College High School options were considered for
selection in this study. The Middle College High School concept is still considered
an alternative design and many districts do not yet have this option available for
students. It was important for this study to look at longitudinal data related to
student achievement, graduation rate and college acceptance rates, therefore the
Middle College High School selected would have had to be in operation for a
period of at least three years to have this data available. This factor also provided
the opportunity to study funding fluctuations and stability of the partnership, site
and district leadership, staffing and organizational structure as it relates to student
achievement. The district and school in this case study met the above criteria and
was identified to be suitable for selection in this qualitative research study.
Overview of district and school
The district selected for the study, Newcrest Unified School District is a
unified district K-12 (Kindergarten through twelfth grade) located in a beach
community in a large metropolitan area in Southern California. The Newcrest
Unified School District encompasses a large geographic region that includes parts
of three cities, Newport Beach, Corona Del Mar and Costa Mesa. Newcrest Middle
College High School is one of thirty two schools in the district and is the only
66
school serving grades eleven and twelve and offering concurrent enrollment
opportunities at a local community college. The school has 1.0 full-time equivalent
administrator and a .60 full time equivalent pupil services staff consisting of a
certificated school counselor. Norcross Coast Middle College High School has 4.5
full-time equivalent teachers. The average class size for the school in 2005 was
21.0 students. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 provide a demographic overview for both the
district and the school.
Table 3.1: Study Sample’s Demographics
Grade
Span
Number
of
schools
Enroll-
ment
Free/
Reduced
Lunch
EL
Fluent-
English
Proficient
Special
Education
School 11
th
-12
th
1 84
4
(4.5%)
0
10
(10.3%)
0
District K-12
th
32 22,122 8,891 (40.9%)
5,408
(24.4%)
3,144
(14.2%)
2,424
(9.12%)
Table 3.2: Study Sample’s Enrollment by Ethnicity
African
American
American
Indian
Asian Pacific
Islander
Latino or
Latino
White
School
2
(2.4%)
0%
5
(6%)
0%
8
(9.5%)
69
(82%)
District 272
(1%)
66
(0.3%)
981
(4.4%)
165 (0.7%)
8,914
(40.3%)
11,534
(52%)
District leaders
Two district leaders were part of the sample, the Assistant Superintendent
of Business, the Director of Accountability and Assessment. Each has worked in
the district since the establishment of Orange Coast Middle College High School in
2001. The Assistant Superintendent of Business provided background on the
67
partnership agreement development. He was a part of the original agreement and
monitors the renewal of the agreement each year.
Site leaders
One site leader was selected to be a part of the sample, the site principal.
This is the site principal’s fifth year as principal at the Orange Coast Middle
College High School. He is also a member of the Board for the Middle College
Consortium, a national organization that provides funding and oversees the creation
and implementation of Middle College High Schools throughout the country. He is
a very experienced Principal who has worked in the public school system for over
thirty years. The second sample was the School Counselor who works with all
students at the school and assists the Principal in working on staff and scheduling
issues between the college and school site.
Teacher descriptions
Four teachers were selected for in-depth interviews based on the
recommendation of the site principal. The selection included three teachers that
are very experienced, veteran teachers who have experience working at both the
traditional, comprehensive high school and the Middle College High School
campuses, while one teacher was relatively new to teaching and new to the school.
The three more experienced teachers began teaching at this site when it opened in
68
2001. One teacher is a newer teacher who was hired to work at the Middle College
High School three years ago.
School Facility
There are four full time instructional classrooms and an office in the school
which consist of two portables which are located on the campus of Orange Coast
Community College at the rear of the campus. All students and staff have access to
all buildings and use of academic resources on the college campus while they are
working or enrolled at the site.
Instrumentation
The research team, consisting of twelve graduate students from the
University of Southern California and one faculty advisor, Dr. Lawrence O. Picus,
developed the conceptual framework for the study through a collaborative process.
University Professor Dr. Lawrence O. Picus led a six-week seminar in the summer
of 2006 in which the Conceptual frameworks and data collection instruments were
developed by parallel dissertation team members using relevant literature as the
underlying basis. The graduate students detailed the final instruments and worked
in collaboration with the research team to fine-tune the data collection instruments.
Conceptual frameworks were developed for each research question of the study.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework selected for this research is based on school
finance adequacy studies (Odden, 2003). This study will specifically use the
Evidence-Based model which identifies a set of school-level components that are
69
required to provide a comprehensive, high quality instructional program within a
school and the evidence of its effectiveness and then determines an adequate
expenditure level by placing a price on each component and aggregating the total
cost. This approach is based on evidence from three sources:
1. Research with randomized assignment to the treatment (the “gold
standard” of evidence)
2. Research with other types of controls or statistical procedures that
can help separate the impact of a treatment
3. Best practices from studies of impact at the local, district or school
level (Odden, et al, 2006).
The definition of adequacy, with regard to school finance, can be defined as
how much it will cost to educate all students in a school to proficiency levels
(Odden, Picus, Goetz, & Fermanich, 2006) Individual student needs must be taken
into account and some students require more assistance, therefore more funding is
required to educate them to this standard. Many studies have been conducted on the
cost effectiveness of student level resource allocations and most of those
researchers have concluded that based on the increased level of accountability for
all schools brought about by the federal No Child Left Behind Act legislation of
2001, schools must begin to identify more precisely what it will take to insure that
no student is left behind in this increasingly complex knowledge based economy.
This framework will allow the researcher to examine whether or not all students in
70
a given school will be ready for college, ready for work in the global economy and
ready for democratic citizenship (Odden et al., 2006).
The conceptual framework is comprised of six core strategies which were
developed to give schools, districts and state legislatures the ability to examine
their current practices and associated costs with the purpose of restructuring their
educational programs to optimize student achievement. To be effective, this
approach required accountability and monitoring systems that are clear, concise and
consistent. For purposes of this study, this framework assisted the researcher in
establishing a basis on which there could be an examination of the leadership,
organizational structure and student level resource allocations at a Middle College
High School relative to student achievement. Elements included in this conceptual
framework include the following six core strategies:
1. Recalibrate goals for student learning. In order that schools prepare
students for college, work in the knowledge based economy and
democratic citizenship, the goal is to maximize the number of
students meeting proficiency levels or higher on state tests, passing
the California High School Exit Exam and increase the number of
students graduating from high school and going to college. The
long term goal is to have at least 90% of all students including low
income, students of color, ELL and students with disabilities achieve
to proficiency standards. Our assumption is that work in the global,
knowledge-based economy requires the same skills and expertise to
71
enter the work force after high school or go to college. We also
assume that in the 21
st
century, career-tech education is info-tech,
nano-tech, bio-tech, health-tech and construction-tech if it is to
bolster the state and the nation’s economic growth.
2. Re-engineer schools to have them deploy more powerful
instructional strategies and use resources more productively.
Schools need to change the curriculum they use, how they are
organized and how they use resources. One core idea is that all
students should take college preparatory curriculum.
3. Redesign teacher development so that all teachers acquire the
instructional expertise to educate all students to proficiency and the
ability to think, understand, problem solve and communicate. This
means using the extensive professional development resources in the
most effective ways.
4. Reinforce achievement for struggling students by providing a series
of extended learning opportunities, such as some combination of
individual and small group tutoring, extended-day and summer
school programs, so all students have an equal opportunity to
achieve to high standards. The objective is to hold performance
standards high and vary instructional time so all students can
72
achieve to rigorous standards. In this process, schools also will
close the achievement gap.
5. Retool schools’ technology so they can tap the educating potential
of the internet.
6. Restructure teacher compensation so the state begins to move away
from paying teachers on the basis of just years of experience and
education units, to a system that pays teachers individually for what
they know and can do, also known as a knowledge and skills-based
pay system
(Odden, et al, 2006).
This conceptual framework also provided the basis for the interview guides
and artifact analysis template. These tools were designed to evaluate the
relationship of the data and information to the research purposes and determine the
extent of the relationship between the variables and student achievement.
73
Table 3.3 provides an overview showing the relationship of the research questions
to the data collection instruments and methods selected.
Table 3.3: Relationship between the Six Core Strategies and the Research
Questions
Six Core Strategies
(6 R’s)
RQ 1: How is
this school
organized to
maximize
achievement?
RQ 2: How does
this school allocate
resources to
maximize
achievement?
RQ 3: How is
this school
funded?
RQ 4: How can
this school be
brought to scale in
other settings?
Recalibrate Goals X X X X
Re-engineer
Schools
X X X X
Re-design Teacher
Development
X X X X
Reinforce
achievement
X X X
Retool Schools’
Technology
X X
Restructure
Teacher
Compensation
X X X
Framework for Research Question One
The first research question asked, “How is this school organized to
maximize student achievement?” Four of the six core strategies were emphasized to
answer this question. Re-engineering schools was one of the six R’s utilized to
focus this question because it addressed the way in which resources were supplied
to the school to reinforce instructional practices. Additionally, the question aimed
at revealing how effective the school’s resource allocation practice was in relation
to the evidence-based approach. Finally, by selecting redesigning teacher
development another lens was used to understand and evaluate the effectiveness of
74
personnel usage for student achievement by examining learning outcomes. This
question was primarily analyzed through structured interviews.
Framework for Research Question Two
The second research question asked, “How does this school choose to
allocate human and fiscal resources to maximize student achievement?” All six
core strategies guided this research question in structured interviews with multiple
stakeholders. To understand the rationale behind the decision-making process, it
was important to look at the school’s and district’s goals pertaining to learning.
Therefore, recalibrating goals and reinforcing achievement were essential questions
used in examining the study school’s strategies and choices. Re-engineering
schools and redesigning teacher development were also selected as lenses for this
question because it offered an understanding of the possible criteria used for
determining allocation practices. Decisions based on improving instructional
practice and enhancing teacher expertise were central to the strategies offered in the
evidence-based model. It was important to include the final two lenses related to
re-tooling school’s technology and re-structuring teacher compensation in the
analysis of this research question as choices made in these two areas have potential
to improve student achievement.
Framework for Research Question Three
The third research question asked, “How is this school funded?” Interviews
with critical stakeholders and document analysis were used in the collection of
data. Five of the six core strategies were used as a lens to analyze and better
75
understand the information collected. Recalibrating goals and re-engineering
schools allowed the researcher to understand the school and district’s mission and
guiding philosophy and provided a rubric by which the data could be measured. In
using the core strategies with regard to teacher development, technology and
teacher compensation, the researcher could understand not only how the school was
funded, but why certain budgetary sources were used to draw for these endeavors
and how it may coincide with the school’s overarching mission for student
achievement.
Framework for Research Question Four
The fourth research question asked, “Would it be possible to bring this
school structure to scale in other settings?” All of the six core strategies were
utilized as lenses for this research question. All six of the core strategies focused on
building the capacity of educational institutions in varied ways so that increased
student learning could be realized. This research question was analyzed by
reviewing relevant documents and conducting structured interviews with multiple
stakeholders.
Data collection and Analysis
This conceptual framework also provided the basis for the interview guides
and document review guide. These tools were designed to evaluate the relationship
of the data and information to the research purposes and determine the extent of the
relationship between the variables and student achievement. Table 3.4 provides an
76
overview showing the relationship of the research questions to the data collection
instruments and methods selected.
Table 3.4: Relationship between the Data Collection Instruments and the
Research Questions
Data Collection
Instruments
RQ 1: How is
this school
organized to
maximize
student
achievement?
RQ2: How
does this
school choose
to allocate l
resources to
maximize
achievement?
RQ3: How
is this
school
funded?
RQ4: How
can this
school be
brought to
scale in
other
settings?
Interview
Guide
X X X
Document
Review Guide
X X X X
These types of data collection instruments were well suited to this
qualitative case study methodology.
The interviews allowed for data collection regarding beliefs and perceptions
about the leadership and structure of the organization and about resource
allocations. The interview questions were developed and selected because of their
ability to allow for probing to bring out deeper clarification to the questions
(Creswell, 2003).
Interviews with Individuals
Key people were identified to provide data in an interview. Each interview
contained a structured series of questions to develop a deeper understanding of the
research foci, which included leadership, organizational structure and resource
allocations as it relates to student achievement at the Middle College High School.
Interviews were conducted with a total of ten people. They included:
77
Deputy Superintendent of Business Services
Director of Accountability and Assessment
Consultant and Liaison, Community College
Vice President of Finance, Community College
Site Principal
School Counselor
Three experienced teachers
One teacher who is less experienced, but has been working at the site for three
years
The conceptual framework provided the basis for the interview guides and
was developed by Dr. Lawrence O. Picus for his work on adequacy studies on
school finance for Picus and Associates (Odden et al, 2006). The research
questions, interview questions and probing follow-up questions were developed by
parallel dissertation team members over a period of six weeks during the summer
of 2006. Interviews were approximately thirty minutes in length. Follow up
questions with individuals in person and by e-mail were used to provide
clarification.
Artifacts
There was an analysis of contextual documents or artifacts that included the
memorandum of understanding between the community college and the district for
operation and management of this school, the school and district accountability
report cards, district and site budget reports and items related to student
78
achievement and the organizational structure. These were used to deepen the
researcher’s understanding of the organization’s choices related to student
achievement.
The validity and reliability of the case study data obtained from the
instruments was established by using multiple sources to obtain data. Construct
validity was established by asking different individuals for the same data (Creswell,
2003).
Data collection process and timeline
The data collection for this study was conducted between September 2006
and February 2007. Prior to any data collection the researcher met with the site
administrator to explain the purpose for this study and format of the data collection.
The researcher asked that the site principal determine the process by which he
allowed the researcher to collect the data.
Data collection was conducted over a period of six months. Consent forms
were signed by all of those interviewed. Interviews were conducted at days and
times convenient for the interviewees.
Artifacts were collected by the researcher over the six month period of time
during multiple visits to the site.
Data analysis
The purpose of the study was to understand the leadership and
organizational structure and student level resource allocations in a Middle College
High School as it relates to student achievement. The focus was to identify key
79
design elements and decision making processes that foster an environment that is
conducive to student achievement. The process used to analyze the data followed
the four research questions, which address the purpose of the study. The data
collection, following the study’s purpose, addressed the four research questions in
the following ways:
Qualitative data
Ten interviews were audio-taped and scripted and reviewed for salient
points in making comparisons. Artifacts were collected that were related to the
research study purpose. When audio-taped interviews were completed and the
document data were analyzed, the researcher identified and coded themes for
salient points related to the research questions. All evidence was examined to
identify strengths and weaknesses of this alternative learning design school relative
to student achievement.
Summary
This chapter discussed the research methods used in the study, which
included a description of the research design, sample, conceptual frameworks, data
collection instruments, an overview of the data collection and process used to
analyze the data findings. The relationship of the research questions with the data
collection instruments was shown. In the next chapter the findings and analysis of
the research are presented.
80
CHAPTER FOUR
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Interpretation of the Findings
This chapter will present an analysis of the data collected in the study. The
purpose of the study was to identify and examine the leadership, organizational
structure and student level resource allocations at a Middle College High School,
an alternative learning design school which provides a variety of learners the
opportunity for concurrent enrollment in both high school and college level
courses. The focus was to better understand the relationship between the variables
of leadership, organizational structure, choices related to fiscal and human resource
allocation and the perceived causality with regard to student achievement in this
alternative high school, with a special focus on graduation rates and college going
rates for the non-traditional, at-risk or minority students. Case study methodology
was used to collect data from a Middle College High School in the Southwestern
United States.
Data were collected in the following ways:
Evidence-based interviews with a total of three district and college leaders;
Evidence-based interviews with the site principal and School Counselor;
Evidence-based interviews with four teachers ;
Document Analysis using relevant documents from the site, district, state
and from the National Middle College Consortium
The data obtained from the selected school and district was analyzed using the
81
conceptual frameworks developed for the research questions in order to identify
key design elements and implementation issues. Four research questions were
developed for this study:
2. How is this school organized to maximize student achievement?
2. How does the school choose to allocate resources in order to maximize
student achievement?
3. How is the structure funded? From where do these funds originate?
4. Is it possible to bring this school structure to scale in other settings?
A framework for the research questions was utilized to further assist the researcher
to interpret the findings. The conceptual framework selected for this research is
based on school finance adequacy studies (Odden, 2003). This study specifically
used the Evidence-Based model which identifies a set of school-level components
that are required to provide a comprehensive, high quality instructional program
within a school and the evidence of its effectiveness and then determines an
adequate expenditure level by placing a price on each component and aggregating
the total cost. This approach is based on evidence from three sources:
1. Research with randomized assignment to the treatment (the “gold
standard” of evidence)
2. Research with other types of controls or statistical procedures that
can help separate the impact of a treatment
82
3. Best practices from studies of impact at the local, district or school
level (Odden, et al, 2006).
This framework will allow the researcher to examine whether or not all
students in a given school will be ready for college, ready for work in the global
economy and ready for democratic citizenship (Odden et al., 2006).
The conceptual framework is comprised of six core strategies which were
developed to give schools, districts and state legislatures the ability to examine
their current practices and associated costs with the purpose of restructuring their
educational programs to optimize student achievement. For purposes of this study,
this framework assisted me in establishing a basis on which there could be an
examination of the leadership, organizational structure and student level resource
allocations at a Middle College High School relative to student achievement.
Elements included in this conceptual framework include the following six core
strategies:
1. Recalibrate goals for student learning. In order that schools prepare
students for college, work in the knowledge based economy and
democratic citizenship, the goal is to maximize the number of
students meeting proficiency levels or higher on state tests, passing
the California High School Exit Exam and increase the number of
students graduating from high school and going to college. The
long term goal is to have at least 90% of all students including low
income, students of color, ELL and students with disabilities achieve
83
to proficiency standards. Our assumption is that work in the global,
knowledge-based economy requires the same skills and expertise to
enter the work force after high school or go to college. We also
assume that in the 21
st
century, career-tech education is info-tech,
nano-tech, bio-tech, health-tech and construction-tech if it is to
bolster the state and the nation’s economic growth.
2. Re-engineer schools to have them deploy more powerful
instructional strategies and use resources more productively.
Schools need to change the curriculum they use, how they are
organized and how they use resources. One core idea is that all
students should take college preparatory curriculum.
3. Redesign teacher development so that all teachers acquire the
instructional expertise to educate all students to proficiency and the
ability to think, understand, problem solve and communicate. This
means using the extensive professional development resources in the
most effective ways.
4. Reinforce achievement for struggling students by providing a series
of extended learning opportunities, such as some combination of
individual and small group tutoring, extended-day and summer
school programs, so all students have an equal opportunity to
achieve to high standards. The objective is to hold performance
standards high and vary instructional time so all students can
84
achieve to rigorous standards. In this process, schools also will
close the achievement gap.
5. Retool schools’ technology so they can tap the educating potential
of the internet.
6. Restructure teacher compensation so the state begins to move away
from paying teachers on the basis of just years of experience and
education units, to a system that pays teachers individually for what
they know and can do, also known as a knowledge and skills-based
pay system
(Odden, et al, 2006).
This conceptual framework provided the basis for the design of the interview
guides and artifact analysis template. These tools were used to evaluate the
relationship of the data to the research purposes and determine the extent of the
relationship between the variables and student achievement.
Research Question One:
How is this school organized to maximize student achievement?
Framework for Research Question One
The first research question asked, “How is this school organized to
maximize student achievement?” Four of the six core strategies were emphasized to
answer this question. Re-engineering schools was one of the six R’s utilized to
focus this question because it addressed the way in which resources were supplied
to the school to reinforce instructional practices. Additionally, the question aimed
85
at revealing how effective the school’s resource allocation practice was in relation
to the evidence-based approach. Additionally, redesigning teacher development
was selected as another lens to help the researcher better understand and evaluate
the effectiveness of personnel usage for student achievement through the
examination of learning outcomes. This question was analyzed through structured
interviews and through the use of relevant documents.
Data for Research Question One
The focus of research question one is on understanding the design of the
Middle College High School and its organizational structure with an examination
of the specific variables that included student enrollment and recruitment, teacher
to student ratios, staffing, leadership, facilities, instructional minutes, master
schedule, school calendar and the shared management relationship structure that
exists between district, site and college. This section will also look at the degree to
which this school’s model contains components from the National Middle College
Consortium model and how this school design differs from the traditional
comprehensive high school model.
This information was evaluated against the core strategies which were
identified in the conceptual framework for this research study. Data were collected
from relevant artifacts including multiple years of data on the school’s results from
the state standardized tests and student results on the Scholastic Achievement Test,
or S.A.T., a college admissions test for incoming freshmen which measures college
readiness in certain content areas including math and language arts, a copy of the
86
most recent Western Association of Schools and Colleges (W.A.S.C.) audit for re-
accreditation, copies of the school site, school district and community college
budget for 2006-2007, a copy of the master schedule for the current year,
information from the original Memorandum of Understanding between the school
district, community college and the Middle College Consortium.
In addition to those documents, structured interviews with site, district and
community college personnel and a thorough a analysis of that information in
combination with a review of the data from relevant artifacts provided this
researcher with enough triangulated data to answer this research question. The
researcher purposely collected extensive student achievement data from this high
school which was readily available from the state department of education website
and from the district website and also available from documents obtained from the
site and through structured interviews with critical stakeholders.
The document guide was utilized for a deeper analysis of multiple relevant
documents including School Accountability Report Cards, results from multiple
years of state standardized testing reports and additional information about student
achievement was obtained through structured interviews with multiple stakeholders
including the Principal, the School Counselor and four teachers along with district
and college personnel. The information obtained through interviews was analyzed
later using the Interview guides which were designed for this study.
For comparative purposes, student achievement data that was readily
available from several other district websites and from the state department of
87
education website for other comprehensive high schools within this same district,
along with other small and alternative high schools in the same district and in
another district with similar demographics. The researcher also purposely included
one other small Middle College High School serving a very different student
population with a much higher percentage of minority students. The researcher
believed this information was important to include in the findings portion of the
study so that the data from the school in this study would be presented in a context
which might illuminate the relative strengths and weaknesses of this particular
program’s design model.
Findings for Research Question One
The Middle College High School is an alternative high school option for
juniors and seniors within the Newcrest Unified School district, a suburban school
district serving over twenty two thousand students in grades pre-k through twelve.
The ethnic composition of the population of this district is diverse and includes
Caucasian, Latino, African-American, Asian and Pacific Islander students.
However, the primary ethnic background of the student body is Caucasian, which
represents 52 percent of the district’s population and 70 percent of the school’s
population. Within this district, there are twenty two elementary schools, two
intermediate schools, four comprehensive high schools, two continuation high
schools, one recently opened Early College High School and one Middle College
High School, the school in this study.
88
The idea for Newcrest Middle College High School was originally
conceived over ten years ago in 1996, and the school opened in 1997. The group
that created this school included representatives from the school district and from
the community college. This group drafted a memorandum of understanding, or
M.O.U., which outlined their original expectations regarding staffing, funding and
facility space use.
The Middle College National Consortium is a national group that provides
oversight for the creation and proliferation of these types of schools, along with
providing the ongoing training and professional development needed for staff and
administration to maintain them. According to this organization, Middle College
High Schools must meet certain criteria and have certain shared characteristics.
Schools must apply and pay annual dues of $650.00 to the Middle College National
Consortium and be approved by this body before calling themselves a Middle
College High School. These schools must have all of the following in place:
a. Formal collaboration between the high school and the college as
demonstrated by:
Location on a college campus
Inclusion in the organizational structure of the college
Integration into the college, with faculty and students sharing
educational resources
Coordination of schedules and calendars
89
b. Authorization to grant a high school diploma; small school but large
enough to sustain its own unique classes and programs
c. Heterogeneous grouping of students
d. Implementation of collaborative, project-centered, interdisciplinary
curricula
e. Expanded teacher role in school governance
f. Expectation that teachers are teacher/counselors within a structured
system of support for students
g. Ongoing embedded professional development
h. Student outcomes measured by multiple assessments
i. Empowerment of students through formal leadership roles in school
governance
j. guidance programs such as peer counseling, and in academic support
services such as peer tutoring
k. Career education or community service as part of graduation
requirement (MCNC, 2005)
In reviewing the characteristics of the Newcrest Middle College High
School in this study, the school meets all of these required stipulations. Although,
this is true, there seems to be a missing component, and that is accountability
mechanism for the goal of improving and maintaining student achievement. The
funding for the operation of these schools is not contingent upon student outcomes.
This is true both at the site and district level as well as at the state and national
90
level. Organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Kellogg
Foundation and others do provide grant funding for the creation of more of these
types of schools and are very interested in measurable outcomes. However, in the
district and site in my study, there are no mechanisms in place for tracking college
admissions, retention or college graduation rates for the high school students at this
school and funding does not appear to be contingent upon any formalized
expectations about student achievement or college admissions and graduation from
the district or board.
This Middle College High School is located on a large community college
campus and has established a formal working relationship with the college as
evidenced by the existence of a Memorandum of Understanding, or M.O.U., signed
by representatives from the site, school district and community college. This
M.O.U. includes agreement about funding, staffing, scheduling and calendar,
facilities, student fees and student and staff access to college resources and clearly
defines the expectations for all parties. In addition to the written agreement, it was
decided that the Principal of the Middle College High School will also hold the title
of Dean of the Middle College High School. The Principal attends Cabinet
meetings with the College President along with other Deans at the school. This
allows the Principal to have a formal voice in decision making regarding resources
and facilities at the community college and enhances communication between the
two separate entities. The Principal and district personnel admitted that the current
91
M.O.U. needs updating and is ten years old. They have plans to update and renew
the agreement in the coming year.
For the last ten years, this alternative high school has maintained an average
enrollment of just under 100 students and is housed in two portables and located on
a community college campus. Sophomore students who live in the district can
choose to apply to attend this school as juniors and seniors. The school offers them
the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in both high school and community
college courses. These classes offered at the school and at the host community
college will meet the state criteria for a high school diploma. However, students
may also use the credits earned at the community college toward an Associate’s
degree or a Bachelor’s degree upon graduation from high school and transfer to a
two or four year college.
For students, there are many benefits. Tuition is waived by the college for
up to eleven units a semester. Students taking twelve units are considered full time
students, so as long as a student at the high schools takes eleven or fewer units per
semester, tuition is completely waived. Textbook costs for both high school and
college texts are covered by the school district, thus saving the student and his or
her family money on college classes taken during this period of time. Unlike
Advanced Placement, or the A.P. program, which is another credit based transition
program noted in the literature review and commonly offered at most high schools
for students seeking the opportunity to accelerate college credit acquisition; the
Middle College HS program gives students the opportunity to get transferable
92
college units at no cost. Whereas, in the A.P. program, students take those courses
in the high school setting and must pay a steep fee to take the final culminating
exam. Students can receive college credit only if they receive a certain passing
score on the exam. If they don’t receive that score, the class only counts toward
high school graduation. Both time and money were lost to those students if the
right score is not achieved. Students in Middle College High School programs reap
the benefits of receiving transferable units at no cost to the student, but to the tax
payers.
At this Middle College High School, it is required that students take at least
one community college class per semester while enrolled, although they can take
two or more courses per semester if it is approved by the Counselor and the student
has a 3.50 grade point average. Students must maintain a 2.0 grade point average
in all classes to remain at the school. A contract between the student and school
stipulating requirements for academic and behavioral expectations is signed upon
admission to the Middle College High School. If students do not adhere to the
contract, they can and have been asked to return to their school of origin within the
district. It is viewed as a privilege to be at the school and the level of freedom
students have here requires a certain level of maturity to be successful.
The school annually recruits students from the other four comprehensive
high schools within the district and students are required to apply and interview.
According to an interview conducted with the consultant who works as a liaison
between the community college and the school, “the school’s target population is
93
the underperforming Gifted and Talented student, otherwise known as G.A.T.E.
students. However, upon further review, only eighteen percent of the total
population of the school is identified as G.A.T.E. In addition to those students, the
school does accept other students with potential who are not successful on the
traditional high school campus. This usually includes students who are bright, but
not socially successful or those who find the comprehensive campuses
overwhelming due to large enrollments in the thousands. These students tend to
have academic potential, but are currently under-achieving.”
If accepted into this alternative high school program, these students must
complete an inter-district transfer to enroll in the school, which is located on a
community college campus located in one of the two cities within the attendance
boundary areas of the district. Transportation to and from the school for the student
is not provided by the district and must be provided by the student or his or her
family. Enrollment, Parking and health center fees for the college are also expected
to be paid by the student’s family, although the fees are minimal.
When speaking with the Principal of the school, he indicated that he was
very proud recently when a new student at the school told him “It feels so good to
come to this school. It’s really different here.” One father also told him recently
that “... his daughter now gets him up in the morning to take her to school, rather
than him having to roust her out each morning.” In explaining why this school is
unique, the Principal told me that “The Middle College High School model is
designed to provide a more appropriate placement for students who have the
94
potential for taking college prep and college classes, but who are underserved in a
traditional high school setting. It is founded on the understanding that the school
district provides administration, teaching and clerical staff and instructional
materials and the host college will provide and maintain the facilities, including
student computers in each classroom and provide technology support and
additional custodial and maintenance staff support. One of the critical factors in
the model is keeping class size small. At the Newcrest Middle College High
School, classes are are limited to twenty five or fewer, in order for students to
receive more personalized attention. This is a choice they make in terms of the cost
of the program and staffing levels in accordance with the National Middle College
Consortium guidelines, which hold the philosophy that smaller classes will result in
higher achievement for individual students. The teachers utilize a variety of
instructional methodologies, and maintain high expectations for student
achievement. The encouragement of personal accountability is developed in
students to produce both academic and social success.”
One of the school’s focus areas for improvement was developed as an
outcome of the self-assessment done prior to the W.A.S.C. accreditation review in
2003, is creating a climate wherein students can feel a sense of inclusiveness and
belonging or can develop a strong connection to the school, feel supported and
thrive socially and academically. They do this by having schoolwide potluck
dinners, hosting a variety of fieldtrips on Fridays, having seminars and guest
speakers, hosting end of semester celebrations at bowling alleys and movie theaters
95
and by implementing a new advisement model called a “House”, which are small
groups of students who mentor each other and which is facilitated by one of the six
certificated staff members who can also advise them on any number of topics
related to personal and academic success.
The Principal went on to say that “Middle and Early College High Schools
are gaining favor nationally with new programs forming in double digit numbers
annually.” The Newcrest Middle College High School is an active member of the
National Middle College Consortium, which oversees the development of Early
and Middle College schools nationwide. The Consortium provides extensive,
ongoing and semi-annual week long professional development conferences for
administrators and faculty, and sponsors an annual social consciousness based
leadership conference for students. School administrators and teachers work
collaboratively with community college administration and faculty to implement
the middle college high school model. This enhances students’ opportunities for
the students to participate fully in the community college program, with full access
to all of their facilities.
To accommodate the students’ access to the facilities at the college, this
model provides for a highly flexible high school schedule. The school day begins
at 7:35 a.m. and ends at 1:50 p.m. and includes time for three fifty-five minute
classes, three sixty minute classes and a twenty minute break. There is no lunch
period included in the day and most students take only four or five classes on the
high school campus and take one or two classes at the community college campus.
96
The shorter high school day, with no lunch period built in, allows time for students
to take afternoon and evening classes or study at the library on the community
college campus. On Fridays, the schedule is modified to provide opportunities for
seminars, guest speakers, celebrations, peer and teacher tutoring and participation
in an advisement program. The way the schedule is configured allows the school to
provide enough instructional minutes in the core curricula and also allows time for
these additional programs.
The students at this school have the option to take a variety of college
courses, concurrently earning both high school credit and transferable college units.
All students are expected to enroll in at least one community college class a
semester, with forty percent enrolled in two or more. Students may take a variety of
college courses as they choose, although the process is overseen by the Counselor.
Students may take up to twelve units at the community college, if they have an
overall grade point average of 3.5 and have taken two college courses the previous
semester earning A’s in both classes. Courses taken at the community college are
taken for college credit and may count toward high school graduation requirements
also. The students graduate from this school and receive a Newcrest Middle
College High School diploma, but they may take their college credits as transfer
credits to any two or four year institution. The school is accredited by the state
and meets the criteria for a public high school. The school currently holds a 6 year
Western Association of Schools and Colleges Accreditation status with a mid-term
review, which is the highest you can receive.
97
The school calendar is considered a traditional calendar and is aligned with
the community college calendar. The first day of the school year is earlier in the
year than other high schools in the same district to coincide with the start of the
academic year for the college. They take a longer break at the winter holiday than
do the comprehensive high schools within the district and end the year earlier as
well. The school has the same number of instructional days and minutes as do the
other high schools and teachers must adhere to a district contract to work the same
number of days as other teachers do in the district.
Although teachers at this school have a shorter instructional day and teach
fewer periods than other high school teachers do in the district, they are required to
hold office hours in the afternoon and make themselves available to students after
hours via email as Professors do at the college. According to information learned in
interviews with teachers at the site, although they teach a fewer number of periods
per day, they teach multiple types of classes per day to accommodate the
requirements of the master schedule. Each teacher is considered the Chair person
of that content area specialization and attends district meetings for Chair persons.
They also take on additional adjunct duties such as Yearbook or Newspaper
advisor, School Site Council Chair, Senior Class advisor etc. Most teachers at that
site spend long hours at the site in preparation beyond what they had in previous
positions at comprehensive high schools when they had double or triple the number
of student contacts. They all seemed equally committed and passionate about
working at that school with the types of students they service.
98
In interviews conducted with school staff, multiple teachers voiced the fact
that they liked the Middle College model because they enjoyed working closely
with small groups of students and becoming more familiar with these students’
personal goals and aspirations as opposed to some of their previous experiences on
a comprehensive high school campus. They also feel that there are more
opportunities for student and teaching staff for leadership and participation in
decisions than at traditional high schools. To increase opportunities for teacher and
student collaboration and consultation, Newcrest Middle College High School
recently adopted a program that they call “House”. It is similar to an advisory
group, or what some might call a homeroom. However, these houses have
extremely small heterogeneous groupings and are advised by one of the staff
members, including the Principal.
According to information from an interview with one of the teachers at the
Middle College High School, “The house is a concept where about two or three
Fridays per month we meet for an hour with a small group of students as a mentor.
All four teachers and the Principal have a house and it’s about an 18 to one ratio in
each house. Students run the houses. Adults are just there to facilitate or mentor,
just be there as a voice and to have somebody certificated in the room. And they
talk about school issues. They talk about school culture. We do fun things
sometimes. It’s just it’s a place where all that can go down, help with classes, peer
tutoring, going around the room, “Oh, which professor do you have?” “Oh, I have
this professor.” “Oh, I had him last semester.” Stuff like that comes along. And,
99
“I’m having a problem with his class.” “I’m having a problem with her class,”
whatever and they say, “Oh, but here’s how you talk it out, like here’s how they
work, here’s how they act,” because there’s seniors in there who know us because
they have us two years in a row. That’s another advantage for us is we have them
for two years. Other middle colleges have them for four so they have even more of
an advantage. But after two years we get to know each other well enough to where
we can learn from each other and the culture really develops, the seniors to the
juniors because the seniors have to got to indoctrinate the juniors so to speak, how
the culture is. And by that time, the seniors are so proud of this place and they
want to make sure it goes good that they’ll do that.”
To understand how this school utilizes funding to maximize student
achievement and to better understand how the school was initially created, an
interview was conducted with the liaison between the Community College and the
school district and site. This person is currently acting as a consultant for a private
company and oversees the annual application for and use of the funds from a grant
given by the Chancellor’s office at the community college. She also oversees
multiple grants for the community college and is the Coordinator for a joint county
Consortium on Staff Development with a grant that she wrote for Technology
Preparation. Prior to this, she was the Dean of the Community College involved
with the Middle College High School in this study. In total, she worked for the
Community College for 31 years and was indirectly involved with the initiation of
the agreement to place the Middle College High School on the campus. For the last
100
five years, she was more directly involved and takes an active role in writing the
grant application and overseeing the grants portion of the High School’s budget.
She is also familiar with the High School’s total operational budget and has a
working knowledge of the original Memorandum of Understanding between the
college and the school district.
In asking the consultant to elaborate on the information found in the
original Memorandum of Understanding, she admitted that it was loosely written
and that no one seems to be able to find the original document with signatures.
However, from the working memory of those involved, the MOU did outline the
major points as they relate to facilities, staffing, maintenance, finances and access
to college resources for students. Per that agreement, the college was to provide the
facilities and maintenance, along with the services of a college liaison to assist with
grant oversight and access to college services for students. At first, the college
allowed the High School students and staff to use available rooms on the actual
campus. However, this became a logistical problem for both as the campus is
roughly 160 acres and classes and offices were often located on opposite sides of
the campus each year. After a few years, the college purchased two portables for
$500,000.00 so that the High School could have permanent housing. According to
the consultant, this was a big step toward institutionalizing the program as a more
101
permanent part of the community college. Ongoing maintenance of these facilities
is provided for by the college.
In the original agreement, the school district agreed to provide funding for
personnel, including teachers, administration and clerical staff, and textbooks.
Funding for desks and basic supplies would also be purchased by the school
district. The provision of computers and maintenance and repair for the same was
to be paid for by the college.
In its original conception, the school was created with the anticipation of
about 100 student enrollment. The enrollment and staffing numbers have not
changed dramatically in the last ten years. Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 show Newcrest
Middle College High School’s demographic characteristics and special program
participation rates for the year 2005-2006. For comparison and to provide context
for later discussion on student achievement levels, table 4.3 and table 4.4 show the
same information for another Middle College High School located in a nearby city.
For purposes of this discussion, the second Middle College High School will be
called Urbana Middle College High School. This school is also affiliated with the
National Middle College Consortium, is located on a community college campus
and uses the same organizational model. Eleventh and twelfth grade students in that
district may also apply for transfer to the school and will have the opportunity for
concurrent enrollment in high school classes and community college classes. The
campus is also situated in portables on another community college campus.
102
However, while this school is located in the same county and has some
similarities with Newcrest Middle College High School, it has two times the
enrollment and is situated in an urban setting and serves a higher percentage of
minority students, thus the target population for recruitment is different. This
school specifically targets students who are at risk of not completing high school,
but who have potential for doing so or those students who would be the first in their
family to attend college. Their enrollment reflects the demographics of the larger
population residing in their district.
Table 4.1: 2005-2006 Newcrest MCHS Demographic Characteristics
*The average of all responses where "1" represents "Not a high school graduate" and "5"
represents "Graduate school."
Ethnic/Racial Subgroups Percent of total student enrollment
African American (not of Latino origin) 0
American Indian 0
Asian 11%
Filipino 0
Latino or Latino 16%
Pacific Islander 2%
White (not of Latino origin) 70%
Total number of Students enrolled in 2005-2006 99
Total number of students tested on STAR 2005-
2006
44
Average Parent Education Level for Newcrest
MCHS
3.77 *
103
Table 4.2: 2005-2006 Newcrest MCHS Participation Rates for Special
Programs
Source: The data in tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 are from the October 2005 California Basic Educational Data
System (CBEDS) data collection and the 2006 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program student
answer document.
Table 4.3: 2005-2006 Urbana MCHS Demographic Characteristics
Ethnic/Racial Subgroups Percent of total
enrollment
African American (not of Latino origin) 3%
American Indian 0
Asian 3%
Filipino 0
Latino or Latino 87%
Pacific Islander 1%
White (not of Latino origin) 6%
Total number of Students enrolled in 2005-2006 283
Total number of students tested on STAR 2005-2006 193
Average Parent Education Level for Urbana MCHS 2.09*
Source: The data in tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 are from the October 2005 California Basic Educational Data
System (CBEDS) data collection and the 2006 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program student
answer document. *The average of all responses where "1" represents "Not a high school graduate" and "5"
represents "Graduate school."
Special Student Programs Percent of total
student
population*
Gifted and Talented Education Program 20%
Free and Reduced Lunch Program 20%
English Learners 0
Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) 7%
Migrant Education Program 0
Students with Disabilities 2%
104
Table 4.4: 2005-2006 Urbana MCHS Participation Rates for Special
Programs
Special Student Programs Percent of
Student
Population*
Gifted and Talented Education Program 22%
Free and Reduced Lunch Program 51%
English Learners 4%
Reclassified Fluent English Proficient (RFEP) 47%
Migrant Education Program 0
Students with Disabilities 1%
Source: These data are from the October 2005 California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS)
data collection and the 2006 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program student answer document.
As can be seen in Table 4.1, Newcrest Middle College High School had a
total enrollment of 99 students for 2005-2006. The school has 1.0 full-time
equivalent administrator and a .50 full time equivalent pupil services staff serving
as a certificated school counselor. Newcrest Middle College High School has 4.50
full-time equivalent teachers each specializing in Mathematics, Science, English
and History. The school’s staffing ratio of 4.50 full time equivalent employees
means that the school has four full time teachers, while the school counselor
teaches some classes on service learning and study skills which are the equivalent
of .50 of his contract. The average class size for the school in 2005 was 21.0
students and the average adult to student ratio is one certificated employee to 16.5
students or one teacher to 24.75 students. Table 4.5 indicates the average class
size by subject area for three consecutive years at Newcrest Middle College High
School and illustrates average teaching load and distribution for teaching staff.
105
Table 4.5: NMCHS Average Teaching Load and Teaching Load Distribution
for 3 years
2003 2004 2005
Number of
Classes by
subject and
class size
Number of
Classes by subject
and class size
Number of
Classes by
subject and
class size
Subject
Avg
Class
Size 1-22 23-32
Avg
Class
Size 1-22 23-32
Avg
Class
Size 1-22 23-32
English 19.8 3 1 15.3 3 1 21.0 2 2
Math 20.0 2 18.5 2 16.0 3
Science 15.0 4 16.7 2 1 24.0 1 2
Social
Science
21.4 4 1 11.0 3 20.0 4 1
Source: The information contained in this table was obtained from the 2006 School Accountability
Report Card.
Teachers at Newcrest Middle College High School are all fully credentialed
and considered highly qualified under the No Child Left Behind legislation. Of the
four full time teaching staff, one teacher has a doctoral degree and currently teaches
Science. The Counselor has a Master’s degree plus an additional thirty plus hours
of college credit. One teacher has a Master’s degree and is teaching English. Two
teachers who have fewer years of experience teaching hold only a Bachelor’s
degree, but are currently working on additional credentials and a Master’s degree.
These teachers are teaching History or Social Science and Mathematics. Table 4.6
summarizes these data and compares the educational level of this school’s teaching
staff to the average educational levels for all teaching staff in the school district.
106
Table 4.6: NMCHS 2004-2005 Teacher Education Level
Education Level
Percent of Teaching
Staff at this School
Percent of Teaching
Staff in District
Doctorate 20.0 1.1
Master’s Degree plus 30 hours 20.0 23.6
Master’s Degree 20.0 31.6
Bachelor’s Degree plus 30 hours 0.0 23.1
Bachelor’s Degree 40.0 20.5
Less than a Bachelor’s degree 0.0 0.1
Source: The information contained in this table was obtained from the 2006 school Accountability
Report Card.
While the school calendar for Newcrest Middle College High School is
different from that of the other high schools in the district, the school is compliant
with the number of instructional minutes required by the state as can be seen in
Table 4.7. The calendar for NMCHS starts two weeks earlier in August and ends
two weeks earlier in June than do the other comprehensive high schools in the same
district. This is done so that the high school calendar matches the community
college calendar and so that students may enroll in those classes simultaneously.
Table 4.7: NMCHS Instructional Minutes
Source: The information contained in this table was obtained from the 2006 School
Accountability Report Card.
In an interview with the Counselor, he shared information regarding staffing
and explained how site governance functions in this school as compared to a more
traditional high school. Although decision making is simplified with a smaller
staff, he indicated that a small faculty makes scheduling and potential increases in
enrollment much more difficult with only four teachers. The principal makes some
administrative decisions due to his role, but the faculty is really included in all of
Grade Level Instructional Minutes
Offered
State Required
minutes
11 64,800 64,800
12 64,800 64,800
107
the decisions that determine the future planning and direction for the school. In
addition to a high level of faculty input, he indicated that “the students’ needs
determine the curriculum offered at the school, while at a larger comprehensive
school, the abilities or credentials of the faculty might determine the curriculum.”
He went on to give examples of this fact by saying “...our curriculum isn’t huge
because the college curriculum is our curriculum. So our elective offerings are
tremendous. And so we don’t have to worry about offering art and ceramics
because they’re offered at the college. And we don’t have to worry about offering
foreign language because it’s at the college. So what we offer here are basically
four academic areas, Science, Math, English and Social Studies. And those are the
four teachers that we have. And the curriculum is determined then by the A
through G requirements. And if the students exceed what we offer in terms of
Math or Science, they can use the offerings at the college as additional curriculum;
we incorporate that as their next stop. For instance, we only offer up through
Algebra II, which completes the A through G requirement, right? So if a kid wants
to trade because they want to be in the Sciences or Math arenas when they
graduate, then they just move on to Trigonometry here at the college or Calculus at
the college. I give them high school credit and they get college credits also. They
get to double dip here.”
In asking him about how hard or easy it is to create the master schedule at
the Middle College High School, he said that it was easier than the more traditional
school. He said “It’s easier because the A through G (or state university admission)
108
requirements determine what we offer. And so the teachers that we’ve hired are
only A through G teachers. If I have a Ceramics teacher and there’s not enough
kids signed up for Ceramics I don’t have to tell that Ceramics teacher he’s going to
teach Math. And that’s the reality of the comprehensive high school because they
are obviously a slave to the master schedule there. Is it more difficult there? Oh, it
is so much more difficult at the comprehensive high school.”
In terms of the idea of shared governance and leadership, he and the
Principal indicated that the teachers have to be willing to take on a little bit more of
a role than they might in a more traditional school. Since there are so few teachers
they have many adjunct duties such as each one is a department chair for their
corresponding subject. This means that they interact with the district in that
capacity and have some additional meetings to attend. That also means they have a
voice in the decision regarding textbook adoption at the district level and have a
voice in site based decisions regarding student placement, master schedule and
professional development decision relative to their subject. On the negative side,
the Counselor went on to say that “...because our population is only 100, that
means the number of students that each teacher sees per day is about 60 percent of
what they’d see at a normal comprehensive high school. However, on the other
side of that coin, of course, is the number of preps. Like our Science teacher last
year was doing marine biology, chemistry and physics, plus a computer class. So
she basically had four preps. That’s absurd at a regular high school. But then
when you take a look at her caseload for the day, she probably saw only 80 kids the
109
whole day. And at a comprehensive school, a teacher is seeing in an English class
about 190 kids every day. So the number of kids our teachers see is diminished,
but the number of preps that they’re required is greater.”
In terms of the amount of time a teacher at the Middle College High School
spends on campus, the Counselor said that “about the same number of minutes is
spent here as there would be at a regular comprehensive high school. It’s required
by the contract, by the way. The teachers here are contracted just the same as the
teachers that are contracted at the regular comprehensive high school. They’re paid
by the high school and are employees of the Newcrest Unified School District.
They are under contract and have to abide by the contract rules with Newcrest”.
Currently, facility space is adequate for the enrollment. Two portables were
initially purchased by the community college to house the school on its campus.
One portable is used to house the Principal’s office, the Counselor’s office, two
teacher offices, one secretary desk and front desk usually staffed by a student aide,
one part time community college counselor’s office and the bathroom. The other
portable is divided into four classrooms, which are used by the high school staff
during the day and by college staff at night. Students also attend classes on the
community college campus. These classes are held in a variety of classrooms as
scheduled and selected by community college personnel.
At the Middle College High School, all students are required to carry five
classes per semester. A typical day for students begins at 7:30 in the morning and
most of the kids are done by 1:00 p.m. Some students complete their required
110
courses by 12:00. If they come to the Middle College High School having already
completed Algebra II, Chemistry or Physics at their previous school, they would
only be required to take three classes in the morning at the high school and be free
to take three classes at the college, if they choose to do so. The school has some
students who are taking more than six units at the college. However, the official
requirement for students is that juniors are required to take a total of six classes and
seniors are required to take five classes. Students must maintain a 2.0 Grade Point
Average for all coursework taken at the high school and college. The students are
required to have at least three matriculated units at the community college and are
encouraged to take more than that.
If students do not maintain at least this level of academic success, the
Principal and Counselor hold conferences with the students. According to the
Counselor, “The Principal and I hold what we call our red letter conferences. We
call any student in with D’s at the quarter on their progress report and we do
everything that we can to help these students including offering these students
tutoring from our teachers, tutoring at the college, strategies that they may use to
improve their grades and advisement regarding attendance. And we do that a
significant amount of time relative to what they would get in terms of counseling at
a regular comprehensive high school.” If students are still not successful after this
level of intervention is implemented, they are asked to leave the school and return
111
to their school of residence. In the last five years, the Counselor indicated that one
or two students were asked to leave.
When asked about the school’s goals for student success upon graduation
from the Middle College High School, the Counselor said that their goal is to insure
that all of their students are prepared for a four year university admission.
However, he felt that even if the students opted to continue on at the same
community college, they’ve been successful. The Counselor went on to say, “If
they have the goal that they want to do the two year program here at the community
college and then transfer to a four year school, how much more successful can you
be? I mean their goals are to go on to college and be successful. I mean that’s
what we’re after, right?”
Research Question Two:
How does the school allocate resources to maximize student achievement?
Framework for Research Question Two
The second research question asked, “How does this school choose to
allocate human and fiscal resources to maximize student achievement?” All six
core strategies guided this research question in structured interviews with multiple
stakeholders. To understand the rationale behind the decision-making process, it
was important to look at the school’s and district’s goals pertaining to learning.
Therefore, recalibrating goals and reinforcing achievement were essential questions
used in examining the study school’s strategies and choices. Re-engineering
schools and redesigning teacher development were also selected as lenses for this
112
question because it offered an understanding of the possible criteria used for
determining allocation practices. The outcomes of decisions based on improving
instructional practice and enhancing teacher expertise were central to the strategies
offered in the evidence-based model. It was important to include the final two
lenses related to re-tooling school’s technology and re-structuring teacher
compensation in the analysis of this research question as choices made in these two
areas have potential to improve student achievement.
Data for Research Question Two
The focus for research question two helped the researcher to better
understand how the school chooses to allocate resources in order to maximize
student achievement. Data were collected from relevant artifacts such as the
school’s test results on the state standardized tests recovered from the state
department of education, a copy of the most recent WASC report, a school site
budget for 2006-2007, a copy of the master schedule for the current year, a copy of
the original Memorandum of Understanding between the district and community
college and the Middle College Consortium. Interviews with site, district and
community college personnel and a thorough analysis of information and statistics
from relevant artifacts provided enough triangulated data to answer this research
question. Extensive student achievement data from this high school was collected
which was readily available from the state department of education website and
from the district website, through documents obtained from the site and through
structured interviews with critical stakeholders. The document guide was utilized
113
for a deeper analysis of multiple relevant documents including School
Accountability Report Cards, results from multiple years of state standardized
testing reports and additional information was obtained through structured
interviews with multiple stakeholders including the Principal, School Counselor
and four teachers along with district and college personnel. The information
obtained through interviews was analyzed later using the Interview guides which
were designed for this study.
For comparative purposes, student achievement data was also collected for
other comprehensive high schools and other small or alternative high schools
within this same district and other small and alternative high schools in another
district with both similar demographics. The researcher also purposely included one
other small Middle College High School serving a very different student population
with a much higher percentage of minority students. This information was
important to include in the findings portion of the study so that the data from the
school in this study would be presented in a context which might illuminate the
relative strengths and weaknesses of this particular program’s design model.
Findings for Research Question Two
Through structured interviews, all stakeholders were asked what types of
measurable outcomes are sought to evaluate the success of the program. Most of
this information can be found on the School Accountability Report Card and on the
state education website. In addition to assessing the measurable outcomes relative
student achievement, this question also asks how this school chooses to allocate
114
resources to maximize student achievement. The researcher first attempted to
establish whether or not this school is, in fact, successful in having high levels of
student achievement. Then, the school budget was evaluated in terms of
allocations for staffing, facilities, technology and other resources.
Some variables reviewed to evaluate the overall success of the program
included graduation rate, drop out rate, High School Exit Exam Scores, college
admission rates and results on state standardized tests. In speaking with the
Counselor about High School Exit Exam scores, he believed that the students
perform very well on that measure. According to the Counselor, “... we were in the
90
th
percentile last year. We’ll be that again for this year. Now, we were a little
lower this past year than we were the last year before that. Do we track it? Yeah.
But see, because we get juniors and they’re coming from other schools as juniors
and they’re tested as juniors and then many of them, after they’ve been with us for
several months, is that a valid measurement? Sure. Is it valid for their other
schools? Yes. Is it valid for the middle college high school? I believe that it is
only a somewhat valid measure. Have we had these students for 12 years? No.
That is such a difficult thing to answer. Did we do well academically? Yes. Do
they have Swiss cheese education sometimes? Yes. Is the state testing an accurate
measurement? It just depends on what dimension you want to explore, right?”
In looking at another variable, the Counselor and Principal said that they do
not track the average aggregate grade point average for the student body by
semester or by ethnicity or grade level. The Counselor and Principal do perform
115
individual progress checks at each grading period to monitor students having
trouble, but overall information is not tracked currently.
Although aggregate grade point averages are not seen by the school to be
critical in measuring success in their program, graduation rate is valued as a
primary factor for success. According to the Counselor, “I’d say we approximate
100 percent graduation rate. Now, last year we had a child who failed his college
class and needed it for high school graduation. He had to make that up during
summer, which he did, but he couldn’t go through the graduation process because
he was short five units of credit. So, did he graduate? Yes. Is that 100 percent
graduation rate? As far as I’m concerned it is. Did he complete his summer school
requirement? Absolutely, he did. Was he embarrassed? Yeah. Did he come to me
and say, “I’m failing my college class. What am I going to do?” Now here’s an
interesting thing. If he hadn’t come to me, the college grades don’t come in until
months later than I need to know for the kids to go through the graduation
ceremony. So his honesty didn’t allow him to go through the walking across the
stage ceremony. How ethical is that?” Table 4.8 compares the graduation rates for
this school to the district and the state graduation rate averages. The Middle
College High School appears to be successful in graduating 100 percent of its
students in comparison to the district and the state averages, which are lower.
While graduation rates are important, another factor in a school’s success
can be determined by looking at drop out rates. Drop outs can be calculated a
number of ways, one of which is to take the number of seniors eligible to graduate
116
at the beginning of a school year and subtract students who opt to leave school
completely and not enroll elsewhere. Drop out Rates can also be calculated by
counting the number of students entering a school in their freshman year and
subtracting the number of students from the same cohort who leave that school for
any reason. Schools may also determine that a drop out is someone who chooses
not to continue their education. In looking at the statistics on the Middle College
High School in this study, the school does not appear to have a high rate of drop
outs. According to information gained in interviews, students rarely leave the
program. However, some of the students have chosen to go to other schools or a
few may have had issues with drug involvement and had to leave for drug
rehabilitation programs. One student recently had a compelling job opportunity in
the film industry and opted to leave the school and take the state High School
Proficiency Exam to receive her high school diploma. These are not counted as
drop outs in reports to the state. Officially, the dropout rate is zero as can be seen
on Table 4.8, which compares the dropout rate and graduation rate for this school,
the district and the state for a three consecutive years. Data listed in this table is
based in part on the 2003, 2004 and 2005 state required reports. The formula for
the one year dropout rate is grades 9-12 dropouts divided by 9-12 enrollment
numbers multiplied by 100. The graduation rate is calculated by dividing the
117
number of high school graduates by the sum of dropouts for grades 9-12, in
consecutive years, plus the number of graduates.
Table 4.8: 2002-2004 Dropout Rate and Graduation Rate for NMCHS,
District and State
NMCHS District State
2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004
Enroll-
ment
9-12
97 79 61 6,505 6,732 6,783 1,772,417 1,830,903 1,876,927
Number
of
Dropouts
0 0 0 79 37 27 47,871 58,189 61,253
Dropout
Rate
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.5 0.4 2.7 3.2 3.3
Grad
Rate
100.
0
100.
0
100.
0
93.6 94.1 95.9 87.0 86.7 85.1
Source: Data in this table collected from the 2005-2006 School Accountability Report Card and includes
information regarding the site, district and state in which this school is situated.
Another variable to use in evaluating the success of an alternative secondary
school is college readiness. This can be assessed a number of ways, but a standard
measure to use is aggregate student scores on college readiness assessments such as
the SAT or ACT, which are post secondary measures of readiness for college
entrance and are perceived to be accurate predictions for student performance in
college. The scores are used for determining admission into four year colleges and
universities. As these tests are optional, students may choose to take either test or
no test. Table 4.9 is a comparison of SAT Reasoning Test results for students at
the Middle College High School, Newcrest Unified School District and for the
state. Data included in this table reveal the average verbal and math scores for
grade 12 students in this school, in the same district and in the state who voluntarily
took the SAT Reasoning Test for college entrance. Data also includes total
118
enrollment numbers for grade 12 students in all three contexts and the percentages
of those students who took the test.
Table 4.9 SAT Reasoning Test Results for school, district and state
Source: Data in this table collected from the 2005-2006 School Accountability Report Card and includes
information regarding the site, district and state in which this school is situated. *** Scores are not
reported if the number of students taking the test is fewer than ten. This policy is in place to protect the
privacy of those students.
When analyzing this set of data in Table 4.9, students at the Middle College
High School score well on the verbal portion of the exam compared to the average
scores for students in the district and with the average student score in the state, but
as can be seen in the average math scores, students at the Middle College High
School do not score as well on the Math portion of the SAT Reasoning Test as
other students do in the same district or in the state.
According to the Principal, when asked to explain why he thought this
might be the case, he said that students who come to the school as juniors were not
working to potential in many areas on their comprehensive high school campuses
and are not highly interested or motivated to achieve in mathematics. They have a
short period of time to influence their attitudes in a more positive direction, which
have been developed over the last ten years. Another factor that impacts results on
these assessments is that few students opt to take the SAT test, as this is an optional
School District State
2003 2004 2005 2003 2004 2005 2003 2004 2005
Grade 12
Enrollment 43 41 38 1438 1398 1524 385,356 395,194 409,576
Percent of
Grade 12
students
taking the test
25.6 31.7 23.7 48.1 50.3 54.5 36.7 35.3 35.9
Average
Verbal Score 556 515 *** 530 529 523 494 496 499
Average Math
Score 494 485 *** 553 549 547 518 519 521
119
exam. However, although these factors might explain why these scores are low,
the fact remains that the goal of a Middle College High School is to increase high
school graduation rates, decrease drop out rates and improve college going rates for
at risk students. Mathematics is seen as a “gate keeper” for four year college
entrance and is a critical factor in students being prepared for rigorous college
curriculum (Orfield, 2004).
Table 4.10: Newcrest MCHS CST Data for 2003-2005
Source: Data in this table collected from the 2005-2006 School Accountability Report Card and includes
information regarding the site, district and state in which this school is situated. Data reported are the percent
of students achieving at the Proficient or Advanced level, which mean that students are either meeting or
exceeding the standards for that content area.
The information contained in table 4.10 represents the results for the state
standardized testing that is done annually for all students from second grade
through eleventh grade. Students are tested in four areas including English-
Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and History-Social Science. The state
standards test is given annually in the spring and measures student learning in those
four subjects by assessing student proficiency in the content standards established
by the state for each content area. Student achievement is rated from Far below
Basic, Below Basic, Basic, Proficient or Advanced. Per the mandates of the federal
No Child left Behind Act, student achievement for all students must be rated as
School District State
Subject 2003 2004 2005 2003 2004 2005 2003 2004 2005
English-
Language Arts
44 56 66 44 43 51 35 36 40
Mathematics 0 12 10 41 39 44 35 34 38
Science 10 26 32 42 38 38 27 25 27
History-Social
Science
53 64 82 40 39 46 28 29 32
120
Proficient by 2014. When analyzing Table 4.10, which includes student
achievement results for Newcrest Middle College High School, the district and the
state for a three year period of time between 2003 and 2005, Newcrest’s student
proficiency levels in both Mathematics and Science are lower than average scores
for the district and the state. In particular, the scores for Mathematics are
significantly lower than average scores for the district and the state.
In determining why this is true, it could be construed that math scores are
low because the teacher who is teaching mathematics is a young teacher with the
fewest number of years of experience compared to some of the other teachers on
the faculty. However, when one administrative staff member was asked why he
thought the math scores were so low, he said that the students come to the high
school after ten years of experience at other schools and are considered under-
performing students. He said it is difficult, at best, to improve their performance on
standardized assessments after only one year at the school. He implied that there is
a lack of motivation about math on the students’ part and difficult for the school to
overcome in such a short period of time.
When looking at results for mathematics achievement levels in the SAT
Reasoning Test and on the State Content Standard Assessment, students did not
fare well in comparison with other students in the district or the state. This fact was
surprising in light of the view commonly held by educators in both P-12 and in
higher education, that mathematics achievement is seen as the “gatekeeper” for
students seeking four year university admission. Currently, according to
121
information from district personnel, no specific funds, such as intervention monies
available from the state, are being utilized to bring students to grade level in
mathematics.
When asked about the low scores on the SAT Reasoning Test and on the
state standardized tests as seen in Table 4.10, the Principal responded by saying,
“Most of our students have not seen themselves as strong academically, and most
especially in Math. The eleventh grade students who are tested in our program are
typically not strong in math. About 40 percent have already completed Algebra II
prior to coming here. All have completed Algebra I, which is all they need to
graduate. In our case, however, we require all students to complete the A-G
requirements or four year university admission requirements, which mean they
must complete Geometry and Algebra II, as well as at least one additional lab
science such as Chemistry or Physics. Consequently, most are also reluctant
learners when it comes to Math and we have to work diligently to keep them
motivated to learn.”
However, when asking both district personnel and site staff members about
funding, it was discovered that the school does not currently utilize intervention
monies from the state to provide the students with intervention programs in
mathematics. The school generally uses teacher made packets in remediation
efforts with students after school or in tutoring sessions. At present, it would
appear to me that not much of an emphasis is placed on actively bringing students
122
to grade level in math or focused on improving test scores by providing students
with supplemental intervention funding for programs targeted at the deficiency
area. Students must seek out help on their own as they see fit. Although they are
advised to get tutoring and may be assigned a peer or staff tutor, the program is not
mandated and efforts are not cohesively designed to bring about change.
When comparing overall student achievement on all state standardized tests,
the state uses the A.P.I., or Academic Performance Index, as a complex formula to
determine aggregated student achievement for a school site or district. This is a
tool that allows stakeholders or members of the public to compare the performance
of one school to another. Table 4.11 includes the A.P.I. scores for Newcrest
Middle College High School, the district and the state over the last five years,
which allowed the researcher to have a better understanding of how the school
fared overall compared to average student performance in the other contexts.
Table 4.11: Comparison of NMCHS/District/State API from 2002-2006
Source: Information contained in this table were obtained from the 2006 School Accountability Report Card
and from the state department of education website accessed at www.cde.ca.gov in February 2007.
When comparing overall student performance in this school to that of the
district and the state, achievement at the Middle College High School has increased
four of the last five years with the exception of the most recent year in which
student performance dropped two points. When comparing annual scores for the
school, the district and the state, the Middle College High School has marginally
2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006
MCHS 724 735 763 789 787
District 720 733 734 760 778
State N/A 683 692 671 679
123
higher overall performance scores than the district and clearly has higher scores
than the average overall performance index scores for the state.
Using the data in Tables 4.12 and 4.13, A.P.I. scores from 2001 through
2006 for both Newcrest Middle College High School and Urbana Middle College
High School are analyzed. This provided comparison data from schools that are
designed with a similar purpose, which is to expose non-traditional or “at-risk”
students to college classes and allow them to be concurrently enrolled in high
school and community college. It was desirable to have a context for comparison
between more similarly designed schools to provide a better understanding of how
well Newcrest Middle College High School was preparing students for college and
university success.
Table 4.12: Newcrest MCHS API Scores 2001-2006
School
Year
Number of
students included
in
API Growth
Prior year
Base
Growth
Target
API
Score
Actual
Growth
Met
Growth
target
School
wide?
2005-2006 46 789* 1 787* -2 No
2004-2005 44 750* 3 789* +39 Yes
2003-2004 25 691* 5 763* +72 Yes
2002-2003 34 680* 6 735* +55 Yes
2001-2002 40 638* 8 724* +86 Yes
2000-2001 40 660* 7 639* -21 No
Source: Data in the table was collected from the State Department of Education website accessed at
www.cde.ca.gov in February 2007.
*means this API is calculated for a small school district, defined as having between 1 and 99 Standardized
Testing and Reporting (STAR) test scores included in the API (valid scores). APIs based on small numbers of
students are less reliable and therefore should be carefully interpreted.
124
Table 4.13: Urbana MCHS API Scores 2002-2006
School
Year
Number of
students
included
API
Growth
Prior year
Base
Growth
Target
API
Score
Actual
Growth
Met
Growth
target
School
wide?
2005-2006 187 799 1 829 +30 Yes
2004-2005 181 691 5 799 +108 Yes
2003-2004 196 728 4 708 -20 No
2002-2003 158 664 7 707 +43 Yes
2001-2002 115 590 11 604 +14 Yes
Source: Data in the table was collected from the State Department of Education website accessed at
www.cde.ca.gov in February 2007.
When analyzing the data in tables 4.12 and 4.13, the researcher reviewed
the information in tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 which included demographic and
special program participation rates. Clearly, Newcrest Middle College High
School is not serving the same population as Urbana Middle College High School
and the enrollment rates are discrepant. However, this makes student achievement
outcomes between the two schools even more surprising. Urbana Middle College
High School serves a more diverse population and has greater percentages of
English Learners, Reclassified Fluent English proficient students (RFEP) and
students who receive free and reduced lunch, also identified as Title I students. The
population of students attending Urbana Middle College High School has many
more challenges to overcome in terms of their ability to master the dominant
language and in terms of their economic difficulties and the host of problems that
persist in communities with high poverty rates.
Despite these challenges, the A.P.I. scores at Urbana Middle College High
School are comparable to those of Newcrest Middle College High School. In fact,
Urbana’s A.P.I. score for the most recent reporting year was 42 points higher than
125
that of Newcrest MCHS. In 2006, Urbana’s A.P.I. score was 829 as compared to
Newcrest’s score for the same year, which was 787 points. Urbana’s score
increased thirty points from their prior year’s score of 799. However, Newcrest’s
score dipped two points to 787 from their score in 2005, which was 789.
During the last five years, although both schools met or exceeded their state
growth targets for the Annual Performance Index, Urbana MCHS has made
significant growth. In 2001, Urbana had an A.P.I. score of 590 points, and by
2006, the school had an A.P.I. of 829 points making the most significant growth
between 2004 and 2005 with an increase of 108 points. In 2001, Newcrest had an
A.P.I. score of 638 points, and by 2006, the school had a score of 787 points,
making the most significant growth between 2001 and 2002 with an increase of 86
points. Urbana’s overall performance in the most recent year is clearly higher than
that of Newcrest Middle College High School despite having what can be viewed
as a more challenging population.
For an even clearer basis for comparison relative to student achievement
results, the researcher analyzed data from three other alternative secondary school
options. Table 4.14 includes demographic data, class size information and Annual
Yearly Progress or A.Y.P. information for four alternative secondary schools. The
table displays data from Sea Breeze Alternative High School, which is a small
alternative high school located in a district near Newcrest Unified School District
and has similar demographics. Two schools are in Newcrest Unified School
District and include Newcrest Middle College High School and a small alternative
126
high school. One of the schools included in the table is Urbana Middle College
High School.
Table 4.14: 2005 AYP Comparisons for Four Alternative Secondary Schools
Students Student Performance
School
Name
Enroll-
ment
Avg
Class
Size
%
English
Learners
%
Free
Meals
Largest
Ethnic
Group
%
Minori
ty
AYP
Language
Arts
%
Proficient
AYP
Math
%
Proficient
Sea Breeze
Alternative
High
School
109 13.5 1.8 0.0 White 22.1 76.2 52.4
Urbana
MCHS 283 22.8 6.7 49.8 Latino 92.2 86.2 93.1
Newcrest
Alternative
High
School
97 34.7 11.3 11.3 White 22.7 N/A N/A
Newcrest
MCHS 97 21.0 .03 4.1 White 23.7 67.4 16.3
When comparing A.Y.P., or the Annual Yearly Progress, scores in
Language Arts and Mathematics for the four schools, student achievement at
Newcrest Middle College High School is lower in both subject areas than either
Sea Breeze Alternative High School or Urbana Middle College High School.
Although demographics and enrollment size is similar between Sea Breeze High
School and Newcrest Middle College High School, student achievement at Sea
Breeze High School is higher in Language Arts and much higher in Mathematics.
When comparing student achievement between Urbana MCHS and Newcrest
MCHS, while Urbana’s demographic information is different and their class size
and enrollment levels are higher, student achievement levels in both Language Arts
127
and Mathematics is significantly higher. The most significant difference can be
seen when comparing the percentage of students who are proficient in mathematics.
While ninety three percent of Urbana MCHS students are proficient and
fifty two percent of students at Sea Breeze Alternative High School are proficient,
only sixteen percent of the students at Newcrest MCHS are scored as proficient at
mathematics on the 2005 state standardized tests. The low math scores at this
school are a red flag for an area of immediate concern and the problem needs to be
rectified. It is not in keeping with the National Middle College Consortium’s
model and it is not in accordance with the No Child Left Behind legislation
indicating that all children will be at grade level in all content areas. This school is
designed with small class sizes and is focused on providing more individualized
support for students. It would seem that improving math performance should be a
focus for the “House” advisement program as poor performance in math is
considered a “gatekeeper” for four year college entrance and success.
When making a comparison table for the Annual Performance Index scores
for all high schools in Newcrest Unified School District, the researcher chose to
include both the comprehensive high school scores as well as those scores for the
small or alternative high schools. In the following table, data is given which
depicts the A.P.I. scores for all seven high schools located in Newcrest Unified
School District for the most recent testing year. The table depicts score
information for 2006 and includes the A.P.I. base from the prior year, the A.P.I.
target established by the state for 2006 and the actual A.P.I. score earned by each
128
school for 2006. The table also indicates the growth made from the prior year to
measure overall gains for the year. In that year, there were four comprehensive high
schools in the district, two alternative high schools and one Middle College High
School. The alternative high schools are deemed small schools based on low
enrollment numbers, which are comparable to that of the Middle College High
School. The alternative high schools target a different population for enrollment
and have students who were not successful on the traditional or comprehensive
high school campuses, whereas the Middle College High School recruits under-
performing Gifted and Talented students from the other four comprehensive high
schools in the district.
Table 4.15: 2005-2006 Comparison of Newcrest Unified School District High
School API Scores
High Schools
2005
API Base
2006
Growth
Target
2006
API
Score
2005-2006
API Growth
Comprehensive
High Schools
HS 1 842 A 870 28
HS 2 712 4 713 1
HS 3 688 6 709 21
HS 4 766 2 789 23
Small Schools
Alternative HS 1 583* 11 542 -41
Newcrest MCHS 789* 1 787 -2
ASAM Schools
Alternative HS 2 527* D 481 -46
" * " means this API is calculated for a small school or LEA, defined as having between 11 and 99 valid
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program test scores included in the API. The API is
asterisked if the school or LEA was small in either 2005 or 2006. APIs based on small numbers of
students are less reliable and therefore should be carefully interpreted.
"A" means the school scored at or above the statewide performance target of 800 in 2005.
"D" means this is either an LEA or an Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM) school. Target
information is not applicable to LEAs or to ASAM schools.
Of the seven schools in the district, the three alternative secondary schools
had a decrease in A.P.I. growth, which measures overall achievement levels.
129
However, while Alternative High School 2 had the lowest scores, it is considered
an Alternative Schools Accountability Model or ASAM School and target scores or
information is not seen as applicable to them making their results invalid as a
comparison score. When comparing A.P.I. scores with Alternative High School
number 1 and Newcrest MCHS, Newcrest’s scores are 245 points higher, which is
a significant difference. When making the comparison between the comprehensive
high school scores and those of Newcrest, the scores for the Middle College High
School are comparable. However, Newcrest MCHS has higher scores than High
School numbers two and three and is only two points lower than High School
number four. Only High School number one scores higher than NMCHS, with a
score of 870 on the A.P.I., which is eighty three points higher than Newcrest
Middle College High School.
In summary, when reviewing student achievement data relative to student
proficiency in content standards and comparing the Academic Performance Index
data for Newcrest Middle College High School to that of alternative schools within
the Newcrest Unified School District, Newcrest has higher student achievement.
However, when comparing Newcrest MCHS scores with those of an alternative
high school in a nearby district with similar demographics and enrollment numbers,
Newcrest MCHS scored much lower on the Annual Yearly Progress scores from
the state standardized assessments in English-Language Arts and Mathematics.
When comparing data from Newcrest MCHS and the data from Urbana MCHS,
Newcrest MCHS has a lower level of student achievement as measured by Annual
130
Yearly Progress scores in English and Math and in overall Academic Performance
Index scores for the last five years. When comparing the Academic Performance
Index data from Newcrest MCHS to other comprehensive high schools within
Newcrest School district, Newcrest MCHS has either higher scores or comparable
scores with three of the four comprehensive high schools.
Newcrest Middle College High School has a population of students who
have native English speaking ability, a significant percentage of students who are
qualified as Gifted and Talented, few students receiving free or reduced fee lunches
and no students who are second language learners, who are learning disabled or
who would qualify for special education. Based on information from several
interviews with staff at the high school, their students have academic potential but
were not successful on the comprehensive high school campuses. It would seem
that they are still not performing to the level one would expect, based on
demographics, small class sizes and low student to staff ratios and with the amount
of money allocated to support the school’s mission at a cost that is fifty percent
more per student than the other larger, comprehensive high schools in the district,
whose students are faring better on multiple measures with regard to mathematics.
All six core strategies guided the analysis of data gained in structured
interviews with multiple stakeholders and information learned from the
examination of critical documents. To understand the rationale behind the decision-
making process, it was important to look at the school’s and district’s goals
pertaining to learning. Therefore, recalibrating goals and reinforcing achievement
131
were essential core strategies to use in examining the school’s strategies and
choices. Re-engineering schools and redesigning teacher development were also
selected as lenses for this question because it offered an opportunity for
understanding the criteria used for determining allocations of resources. The
outcomes of decisions based on improving instructional practice and enhancing
teacher expertise were central to the strategies offered in the evidence-based model.
It was important to include the final two lenses related to re-tooling school’s
technology and re-structuring teacher compensation in the analysis of this research
question as choices made in these two areas have potential to improve student
achievement.
In using the core strategies of the conceptual framework identified as the
lenses through which this data were analyzed, it is clear that the school is re-
engineered in that its location is on a college campus, its design meets the criteria
for a Middle College High school out outlined by the Middle College National
Consortium, level of staffing creates small class sizes and the uniquely defined
relationship with the college is engineered to maximize student achievement in an
alternative learning format. The school has recalibrated its goals and reinforced
achievement by increasing opportunities for student and staff leadership and
decision making, by the creation of a small learning community with reduced staff
to student ratios, and by giving students the opportunity for concurrent enrollment
in high school and college with the chance to receive college credit for classes
taken during the high school experience. Through its relationship with the
132
community college, the school has re-tooled technology because it has shared use
of the college facilities and technological resources and the college maintains and
upgrades all technology on the high school site. Teacher development for this
school is also re-designed in that it is a requirement of the Middle College National
Consortium. All teachers have to participate in professional development at least
annually which is provided by the Consortium. In addition to this unique addition,
these teachers also participate in paid professional development days sponsored by
the district and by the site as other teachers in the district do.
However, in looking at the lenses of re-structuring teacher compensation,
the school has not implemented anything innovative in this regard. Table 4.16
depicts the average teacher and administrative salaries in the Newcrest Unified
School District. Since three of the four teachers at the site are relatively new and
two do not yet have Master’s degrees, one can assess about how much the school
spends on staffing and administration from this table. The teachers are employees
of the larger Newcrest Unified School District and are compensated in the
traditional way based on years of experience and on educational units. The only
added opportunity for pay available to teachers at this uniquely designed school is
in the way of stipends as teachers are paid stipends for additional duties including
Chair of their Department, which all four teachers are, and for supervising the
newspaper, yearbook and Associated Student Body Government. Although this is
common at other traditional schools, the opportunity for receiving differential pay
133
is greater at this school since there are fewer teachers and all are expected to take
on many additional duties.
Table 4.16: 2003-2004 District and State Averages for Staff Salaries
Source: NMCHS School Accountability Report Card 2006
Table 4.17 District and Site General Fund Expenditures and cost per student
Source: Information contained in tables 4.17 and 4.18 was obtained from the district website and interviews.
Category District Amount
State Average for
Districts in Same
Category
Beginning Teacher Salary $40,000 $37,061
Mid Range Teacher Salary $59,995 $58,924
Highest Teacher Salary $82, 878 $72,876
Average High School
Principal Salary
$105,661 $107,418
Superintendent Salary $189,754 $179,061
Percent of Budget for
Teacher Salaries
38.8 41.4
Percent of Budget For
Administrator Salaries
6.1 5.1
Newcrest Unified School District
2005-06
Newcrest MCHS
2005-06
District Total of
General Fund
Expenditures
Average District
Expenditures per
Comprehensive
High School
student
Total Site
Expenditures
Average Dollars
expended per
NMCHS
student
$190,129,477 $5,000.00 $650,996.00 $6,925.00
134
Table 4.18: Newcrest MCHS Fund Appropriations for 2005-2006
Newcrest MCHS Fund Appropriations
2005-2006
General
Fund
Title
I
SIP EIA Other
(Grants)
Total
1000
Certificated
Teaching
Personnel
350,415.00 0 0 0 57,842.00 408,257.00
2000
Classified
Personnel
36,608.00 0 0 0 0 36,608.00
3000
Administrative
Personnel
120,644.00 0 0 0 20,134.00 140,778.00
4000
Books,
Instructional
Materials and
Supplies
3,100.00 0 0 0 26,895.00 29,995.00
5000
Services and other
operating expenses
3,004.00 0 0 0 27,364.00 30,368.00
6000
Capital Outlay
0 0 0 0 0 0
7000
Other Financing
Issues
0 0 0 0 4,990.00 4,990.00
8000
Federal Revenue
0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 513,771.00 0 0 0 137,225.00 650,996.00
Source: Information contained in tables 4.17 and 4.18 was obtained from the district website and from an
interview with the Deputy Superintendent and CBO for budget information as of 2007
Research Question Three:
How is the structure funded? From where do these funds originate?
Framework for Research Question Three
The third research question asked, “How is this structure funded and from
where do these funds originate?” Research question three pertained to the actual
funding sources utilized for this type of alternative learning design school. To
answer this question, the researcher conducted several interviews with critical
135
stakeholders and utilized document analysis in the collection of data. Five of the
six core strategies were used as lenses to help the researcher analyze and
understand the information collected. Core strategy one, Recalibrating goals, and
Core strategy two, re-engineering schools, allowed the researcher to understand
both the school and district’s mission and provided a rubric or template by which
the data could be measured. In using core strategies three, five and six with regard
to teacher development, technology and teacher compensation, the researcher could
understand not only how the school was funded, but why and how certain
budgetary sources were used for these endeavors and how these decisions may
coincide with the school’s overarching mission as it relates to student achievement.
Data for Research Question Three
Structured interviews with multiple stakeholders at the site, district and
college were conducted. All data collected were classified using the interview
guides created by the thematic dissertation teams. Documents were analyzed using
with the Document Review Guide, to triangulate data in order to answer research
question three. Interviews with site and district administration and with a private
consultant hired by the school provided most of the information regarding how the
school is funded. Documents used to answer this question included the site and
district budgets, grant funding reports, Western Association of Schools and
Colleges, or W.A.S.C., accreditation reports, the original Memorandum of
136
Understanding and miscellaneous earnings report summaries which delineated
specific stipends for additional teacher duties.
Findings for Research Question Three
There are primarily three sources of funding for this Middle College High
School. The school receives its primary funding through general fund revenue
from the host school district based on the number of students attending the school,
also known as Average Daily Attendance or A.D.A. The school also utilizes
unrestricted funding from the state which is calculated based on the total number
and types of students who attend the high school. The school also applies for a
grant through the Chancellor’s office at the community college. In addition to
those funding sources, the school is also eligible and did receive additional grant
funding last year from for a small schools grant from the state. Table 4.20 includes
information from the 2006-07 budget for the MCHS and reveals how much money
is received per funding source.
Table 4.19: Dollars received by NCMHS per funding source for 2006-07
Funding Sources
for NCMCHS
Dollars received per source
for 2006-07
General Fund $444,267.00
Unrestricted Funds
(CBEDS)for ADA @$70.00 per
student
$6,000.00
State Chancellor’s Middle College
Grant
(Only one grant received in 06-07
(obtained with the Community
College)
$71,918.00
NCMCHS Total $522,185.00
137
To better understand how the grant revenues are secured and managed, I
conducted an interview with the liaison between the Community College and the
school site. This person is currently acting as a consultant for a private company
and oversees the annual application for and use of the funds from a grant given by
the Chancellor’s office at the community college. This is a small grant given to
special programs at the college and primarily funds some staff positions and
professional development for staff at the Middle College High School and provides
financial resources for marketing and recruitment of new students.
The grant for the current school year in 2006-2007 was funded for
$127,000.00. The grant process is an annual renewal application. Each year, since
its inception, the school has been given the grant funding from the Chancellor’s
Office at the community college. In trying to ascertain what, if any, criteria in terms
of student outcomes is required for the school to continue to receive the grant
money each year, the consultant indicated that no measurable outcomes are
required at this time. The process requires that a renewal application be filled out
and, as long as the school is in operation, the grant will continue to be approved.
The amount varies from year to year depending on state funding levels. Last year,
the school was eligible to apply for a second grant for small schools from the state
which would then supplement the primary grant. According to the consultant, the
school was successful in obtaining both grants last year allowing the school to use
some additional funding to pay for some personnel costs associated with hours paid
for the part time Counselor from the community college, for professional
138
development through the National Consortium and for marketing the program to
other schools in the district.
As was discussed in the answer to research question two, the school’s costs
are shared and born partially by the host community college budget. Although,
students are required to pay minimal fees associated with being a student on the
college campus including enrollment, parking and health center fees, students are
not required to pay tuition. Tuition is waived for the first eleven units of
instruction per semester for students enrolled in the MCHS program. In addition,
the community college does not receive funding from the K-12 district for tuition.
As is true with community colleges, they receive reimbursement from the state at a
particular rate for each Full Time Equivalent Student, or F.T.E.S. They receive
pro-rated reimbursement at the .25 or .50 rate for these high school students based
on the number of units the students choose to take. As part of the original
agreement in the M.O.U. with the high school, the community college only asks
that the school pay for textbooks and not for tuition. However, based on estimated
numbers, it is clear that the community college does not lose money in this
endeavor. In addition to this, many of the students attending the high school
transfer to the host college upon high school graduation. According to information
I learned in an interview with the site administration, approximately seventy
percent of all MCHS students go on to attend this community college.
139
Table 4.20: 2006-2007 MCHS Costs and Revenue for Community College
Category Amount
Total Operational Budget
for Community College
$75,875,988.00
Total number of full time
equivalent students at CC
16,987
Total number of Units offered at CC
(Assuming one FTES = 12 units x 16,987
FTES)
203,844
Cost per instructional Unit at CC
(Divide total budget by total number of
units)
$372.22
Total number of
MCHS students
100
Total number of units
for MCHS students
600 units a year
(at one class per
semester)
HS FTES
(600 units divided by 12)
50
Total cost for MCHS program
incurred by Community College
(600 units x 372.22 or cost per unit)
$223, 322.00
Total revenue received from state at
(50 HS FTES x 5461 FTES revenue from
state)
$273,050.00
Revenue Exceeds the Cost to
the Community College to host this
program
$49,728.00
Source: Information contained in this table was accessed from the website for the community
college. * Statistical Information based on 2001 District Fact Sheet and 2006-2007 Fiscal Year
Budget for the host Community College and should be considered estimated numbers.
In order to provide small class size and to maintain a sense of
connectedness to the school, the school chooses to staff the school at a 21.6 to one
pupil to staff ratio. At this time, they have 4.5 F.T.E.’s and approximately ninety
seven students. At this level, class size is small and is usually at 21 students in all
140
classes. This is a decision that is costly to the district and accounts for the
increased cost of the program. Table 4.21 highlights the average student
enrollment levels, pupil-staff ratios and average class size for the MCHS and all
four comprehensive high schools in the district. Also included in this table for
purposes of comparison are the Annual Yearly Progress scores in Language Arts
and Mathematics for these schools.
Table 4.21: Comparison of Staffing/Pupil Ratios for all NUSD High Schools
NUSD
High
Schools
Grade
Span
2005-
2006
Student
Enroll-
ment
Pupil
Staff
Ratio
Avg
Class
Size
Largest
Ethnic
Group
Percent
Minority
% AYP
Proficient
Lang Arts
% AYP
Proficient
Math
MCHS 11-12 97 21.6 21 White 23.7 67.4 16.3
HS 1 9-12 1331 22.9 29.5 Latino 67.8 56.2 42.2
HS 2 7-12 1979 27.1 30.4 Latino 66.7 43.1 40.8
HS 3 7-12 2163 26.8 31.0 White 14.1 81.5 65.3
HS 4 9-12 2462 26.3 31.3 White 30.7 67.4 60.3
Source: Information contained in table regarding 2005-2006 Enrollment statistics obtained from http://www.ed-
data.k12.ca.us as of April 2007
It is clear when looking at the larger class sizes and pupil staffing ratios at
the comprehensive high schools, that it would not appear to be a significant factor
in student performance on the AYP In mathematics. Every other high school
scored higher on this sub-test than did the MCHS. Granted, fewer student scores
were calculated to ascertain the MCHS A.Y.P. score, but a red flag of concern is
raised in response to the much lower score.
It begs the question purely from a financial point of view whether or not it
is, in fact, beneficial to pay more for a smaller school that is under performing.
When evaluating the data from this question against the framework, it would seem
141
that this school may need to re-engineer the design and utilization of fiscal and
human resources, especially in the area of mathematics. It might be wise to
consider the use of community college resources and instruction to improve student
performance.
Another way to enhance student performance would be to incorporate
benchmark exams and final exams that are aligned with the content standards. The
math teacher at the MCHS would need to work collaboratively with math teachers
from the district to design curriculum maps and insure that students at the MCHS
are receiving instruction equivalent to what is obtained at the other high schools
and which is aligned with standardized performance assessments.
Another option to consider is professional development aimed at improving
instructional strategies in the area of math. The Middle College Consortium offers
opportunities at their semi-annual conferences to collaborate with other subject
specific teachers and participate in professional development aimed at improving
student performance. This is an option that should be encouraged by the Principal
and he will need to hold the teacher accountable for demonstrating the use of new
instructional strategies, designing or using standards aligned assessment and
benchmark exams to calibrate measures of learning.
Research Question Four:
Is it possible to bring this school structure to scale in other settings?
Framework for Research Question Four
The fourth research question asked, “Would it be possible to bring this
142
school structure to scale in other settings?” All of the six core strategies were
utilized as lenses for this research question. All six of the core strategies focused on
building the capacity of educational institutions in varied ways so that increased
student learning could be realized. This research question was analyzed by
reviewing relevant documents and conducting structured interviews with multiple
stakeholders.
Data for Research Question Four
Data from structured interviews with multiple stakeholders at the site,
district and college were analyzed for information used in answering this research
question. All data collected were classified using the interview guides created by
the thematic dissertation teams. A documents review was also conducted and
critical documents were analyzed using with the Document Review Guide, to
triangulate data in order to answer this research question. Interviews with site and
district administration and with a private consultant hired by the school provided
most of the information regarding how the school is funded. Documents used to
answer this question included the site and district budgets, grant funding reports,
W.A.S.C. accreditation reports, the original Memorandum of Understanding and
miscellaneous earnings report summaries which delineated specific stipends for
additional teacher duties.
Findings for Research Question Four
Interviews with site and district administration and with the college liaison
revealed that at this time, there are no current plans for this particular program to be
143
expanded. There are many factors involved in their decision to limit expansion.
These factors should be considered by administrators overseeing similar programs
in seeking to bring programs like this to scale. It can be done, but planning for
expansion should include consideration of not only budget constraints, but also
other variables including teacher credentials, staffing ratios for high school and
college personnel, high school and college facility space and the impact of
increasing the size of the school on culture or climate and student achievement.
The school in this study has maintained an enrollment rate of about one
hundred students with a staffing ratio of twenty five to one resulting in four full
time equivalent teaching staff. Each teacher at this site has a specific single subject
credential in a particular subject area including Mathematics, English, Science and
History-Social Science. If this school were to expand by half its size, the school
would need to employ two additional teachers who were each able to teach two
subjects, specifically one who could teach half of the subjects and another one who
could teach the remaining two subjects. Increasing the student enrollment to one
hundred and fifty students would require that the school’s master schedule offer .50
times the classes in each subject area. To find staff members, who happen to hold
two single subject credentials in the areas that the school would need would be
tremendously difficult. The school would need to plan for exponential expansion.
The school would need to double, triple or quadruple in size and hire four, eight or
twelve more teachers, for example, to accommodate the likelihood of finding
144
appropriately credentialed staff and provide the needed number of sections of each
subject area in the master schedule for students.
However, another option the school could consider is utilization of more
community college teaching staff to accommodate the growth in student
enrollment. Students could be encouraged to take classes for high school
graduation requirements on the community college campus. This would require
more collaborative planning between the Middle College High School staff and
Community College Instructions. As a team, they would need to include a review
of the community college curriculum in the areas of English, Math, Science and
Social Science to determine what classes would meet the high school graduation
requirements. Once that is done, students would need to enroll in those classes and
the college could then help absorb the expansion of the program.
To accommodate exponential expansion, the school would need to consider
plans for growth in facility space. In this case, the school has two portables. One
portable holds four classrooms and one portable holds administrative three offices
for the Principal, Counselor and secretary. The school would need to expand the
number of classrooms equivalent to the number of teachers it hired. In this case, if
the school planned to double in size, the Principal would need to hire four more
staff and provide four additional classrooms or another portable that could be
divided into four sections, such as they have now.
The concern would be in working out the details of the expansion with the
community college because the portables are currently located in a parking lot at
145
the rear of the campus. The Principal would have to negotiate where the additional
portable or portables would be located and whether or not the community college
would pay for this as they had originally done at the inception of the program. The
portable’s location might also become a concern for both the college and the high
school as it would take up parking spaces on the campus at the same time that more
students would be enrolled and more staff members have been hired.
In addition to the issues of logistics and the finances of planning for
additional facility space with the community college, the Principal would also need
to collaborate with his or her district to plan for the creation of new positions and
the hiring of additional teaching, counseling or clerical staff. With the increase in
the number of students, depending on the size of expansion, there will be a need for
more teachers and perhaps, more clerical or counseling staff to meet the needs of
the students. This would be an issue that might impact the district’s general funds,
unless the Principal and district decided to allow the option for the transfer of
existing district staff to the Middle College High School. As funding for schools is
driven by Average Daily Attendance, or A.D.A., resources are divided up between
schools based on the number of students attending that school. If students are taken
primarily from other schools in the district on an intra-district transfer basis, then
funds would be re-distributed to the schools accordingly. Staffing needs at schools
are generally calculated in the same way, and therefore staffing positions would be
taken from other high schools in the district and provided for the Middle College
High School.
146
Although the redistribution of existing staffing, or F.T.E.’s, from one high
school to another to accommodate the shift in student enrollments is easier for the
district as opposed to creating, posting and hiring for new positions, the issue of the
need for specific credentials for those teachers comes up again. To allow for this,
applications for intra-district transfer of staff should be permitted as well and staff
should be selected based on the need for particular subject area credentials. The
Principal and existing staff would need to interview all interested applicants to
determine the person most qualified for the position needed based on credentialing
and the more subjective criteria of fit with the program philosophy. This would
become important to include in any plans for expansion because to ignore the
mission and philosophy of the school in hiring appropriately credentialed staff may
have a negative impact on school culture and climate, thus potentially having an
adverse effect on the goals of the program related to graduation rates and college
going and completion rates for the at risk students they serve.
Any notions of expansion must include planning and consideration of all of
the variables mentioned including budget constraints, facility space, teacher
credentials, staffing ratios and school culture and climate. To ignore any of these
variables would place the mission of the program in jeopardy and have a potentially
detrimental impact on student achievement. In light of the potential success of
these programs for our country’s most needy populations, this would be too high a
price for growth. Administrators should proceed with caution, plan ahead
carefully, collaborate with college and district administration and plan any goals for
147
growth exponentially in order to maximize student achievement in this secondary
school design model.
However, in light of the extensive costs associated with this program
compared to that of the other high schools in the district, district administrators
should hold the school more accountable by asking the school to set goals for
improvement in the area of mathematics performance. Currently, the school’s
program is expensive to operate and is not as successful in regard to the results on
standardized measures of student achievement as some of the other larger
comprehensive high schools in the same district, particularly in the area of math.
In light of this factor, the district should make any additional funding contingent
upon a plan for improvement in the area of student performance in math and upon a
plan to increase matriculation to four year universities. Otherwise, it may not be
wise to increase the size of the program. If the school does not improve the
performance in these areas, a discussion about closing the program might be an
option the district should consider.
Summary and Discussion of Findings
A detailed analysis of the data yielded findings for each research question,
which were subsequently analyzed and considered, resulting in the discovery of
three major themes constituted in the findings of the study:
1) The program does not seem to be cost-effective. It costs about $6,925.00
per year to educate the MCHS student as opposed to an estimated cost of $5,000.00
per student at the other comprehensive high schools in the same district. Given the
148
less challenging and smaller population that Middle College High School has, it
would seem that they should be performing to standard. The target population of
this school differs somewhat from the intended target of a Middle College High
School model, which should be first generation college students, students of color
or disadvantaged students. This school targets underperforming G.A.T.E. or Gifted
and Talented students of Caucasian descent. However, it should be noted, that by
percentage, the population of the school is more or less representative of larger
district population
The performance data would suggest that the smaller class size does not
seem to be more effective. Specifically, the math scores on state tests and on
college readiness tests such as the SAT demonstrate that students are not perform
as expected It should be noted that at Middle College, the math teacher is the
youngest and the least experienced teacher. Currently, the school is also not
receiving intervention monies and does not create intervention classes to support
students struggling with math. Given these extant realities, to maximize resource
allocations, perhaps the high school could utilize college instruction more,
specifically in the area of mathematics instruction.
One of the obvious advantages of the alternative learning design of the
school is that it provides learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in
college level courses. This enhances the students’ opportunities to participate fully
in the community college program, and Middle College High School students may
take a variety of college courses, earning both high school credit and transferable
149
college units. All students at the school are concurrently enrolled in at least one
community college class, with a substantial percentage of the population (42%)
enrolled in two or more. Utilizing this advantage, specifically in the area of
mathematics would alleviate problems in both performance and allocation.
2) It would also appear that the allocation of human resources is not ideal.
The FTE distribution reveals the inadequacies where the Counselor is .80 FTE and
the Teacher .20, to allow him to teach service learning classes in order to meet
graduation requirement of 40 hours of community service. The Principal admitted
that students come to this school under-performing and sometimes unmotivated,
specifically with regards to math. Since math is a gatekeeper for four year college
entrance, a programmed focus should be put on creating targeted motivational
programs, so students have aspirations about attending four year schools, combined
with study skills and math skills review with college age tutors working one on one
to increase accountability and enhance math performance. The Counselor should
be 1.0 FTE, and another part time Counselor should be hired to act as service
learning instructor. Perhaps, these strategic moves would release the mathematics
instructor for full time teaching, as well as utilizing math instruction from the
college.
3) Another issue that emerges from the data analysis has to do with the
program intent of a school like Middle college, and attending accountability
measures. Ideally, this program is intended to create a pipeline to a four year
university; however, most of the Middle College High School students transfer to
150
the CC (community college), and the data reveals that approximately 85% of the
student body will continue to attend the community college. No records have been
kept on eventual transfer to four year institutions or the drop out rate from the
community college itself.
Thus, it is fair to conclude that the school is not working to potential.
Currently, there is no accountability model in place to insure students are working
to standard and to help determine the areas of weakness. Thus, the enhancement of
accountability is critical with this school. Clear records need to be kept about
successful college entrance for both two and four year institutions and eventual
graduation rate from those schools tracked as well. The researcher feels that such
accountability measures could possibly be made conditional and aligned with state
grants, and continuation of funding from the district
Analysis and findings of the data for each research question have been
presented in Chapter Four. Three major themes were developed and discussed.
The study is summarized in Chapter Five, with conclusions, recommendations, and
suggestions for future studies.
151
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY
Conclusions and Implications of the Findings
Over the last few years efforts to increase student achievement outcomes
have dominated educational policies at the federal, state and local levels. A review
of literature in the areas of P-16 collaboration and educational partnerships, the
history and effectiveness of Credit Based Transition Programs, the history and
purpose of Accelerated Schools relative to minority and at-risk student populations
and the issues of adequacy in school finance relative to insuring student
achievement demonstrated that innovative ideas in secondary school reform and
powerful collaborative partnerships between various private and public entities can
have effective results in maximizing student achievement for at risk, non-traditional
and minority student populations. In light of the most recent statistics regarding
national drop out rates for these populations, secondary school reform will continue
to be a need and a focus for educators and policy makers alike if we are to increase
retention rates and college going and completion rates for what is becoming a
significant percentage of the population.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify and examine the strengths and
weaknesses of the leadership and organizational structure, processes and student
level resource allocations at an alternative learning design high school, which
provides a wide variety of learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in
152
both high school and college level courses, and its perceived causality with regard
to student achievement. The focus was to better understand the relationship
between the variables of leadership, organizational structure, financial and human
resource allocation and student achievement, with a special focus on graduation
rates and college going rates for the non-traditional, at-risk or minority student.
This study used conceptual frameworks developed to guide data collection
and analysis for four research questions: (a) How is this school organized to
maximize student achievement? (b) How does the school choose to allocate
financial and human resources in order to maximize student achievement? (c) How
is the structure funded? and (d) How would this program be brought to scale in
other settings?
Methodology and Sample
This descriptive-analytic case study was conducted in one Middle College
High School in a large K-12 school district in a community that has relatively high
socio-economic status and is located in a large metropolitan suburb of Los Angeles
in Southern California. The district and school were selected on the basis of the
following population characteristics:
1. A district and school that has a Middle College High School option
available for students.
2. A district and school that has a relationship with a community
college which supports its mission through the shared use of
resources and facilities.
153
3. A district and school that has the capacity in funding, infrastructure,
people and professional development to support this alternative
offering.
The district selected for the study, Newcrest Unified School District is a
unified P-12 (Pre-school through twelfth grade) district located in a beach
community in a large metropolitan area in Southern California. The Newcrest
Unified School District encompasses a large geographic region that includes parts
of three cities. Newcrest Middle College High School is one of thirty two schools
in the district and is the only school serving grades eleven and twelve and offering
concurrent enrollment opportunities at a local community college.
Instrumentation
This conceptual framework also provides the basis for the interview guides and
document review guide. These tools were designed to evaluate the relationship of
the data and information to the research purposes and determine the extent of the
relationship between the variables and student achievement. Figure 3.2 provides an
overview showing the relationship of the research questions to the data collection
instruments and methods selected.
These types of data collection instruments are well suited to this qualitative
case study methodology.
The interviews will allow for data collection regarding beliefs and
perceptions about the leadership and structure of the organization and about
154
resource allocations. The interview questions were developed and selected because
of their ability to allow for probing to bring out deeper clarification to the questions
(Creswell, 2003).
Key people were identified to provide data in an interview. Each interview
contained a structured series of questions to develop a deeper understanding of the
research foci, which includes leadership, organizational structure and resource
allocations as it relates to student achievement at the Middle College High School.
Interviews were conducted with a total of ten people. They included the following
individuals:
Deputy Superintendent of Business Services
Director of Assessment and Accountability
Business Office Liaison, Community College
Vice President of Financial Administration, Community College
Site Principal
School Counselor
Three experienced teachers
One teacher who is less experienced, but has been working at the site for three
years
In addition to the interviews, there was an analysis of contextual documents
or relevant, evidenced based artifacts which included the memorandum of
understanding between the community college and the district for operation and
management of this school, the school and district accountability report card,
155
district and site budget reports and other items related to student achievement and
the organizational structure. These were used to deepen the researcher’s
understanding of the organization’s choices as they related to student achievement.
The validity and reliability of the case study data obtained from the
instruments will be established by using multiple sources to obtain data. Construct
validity will be established by asking multiple individuals for the same data
(Creswell, 2003).
The research team included twelve doctoral students involved in a thematic
dissertation group from the University of Southern California and one faculty
advisor, Dr. Lawrence O. Picus. The team selected the conceptual frameworks for
the study through a collaborative process. University Professor, Dr. Lawrence O.
Picus, led a six-week seminar in the summer of 2006 in which the conceptual
frameworks and data collection instruments were developed by parallel dissertation
team members using relevant literature as the underlying basis. The graduate
students detailed the final instruments and worked in collaboration with the
research team to fine-tune the data collection instruments. Conceptual frameworks
were developed for each research question of the study.
Conceptual Framework for all research questions
The conceptual framework selected for this research is based on school
finance adequacy studies (Odden and Picus, 2004). This study will specifically use
the Evidence-Based model which identifies a set of school-level components that
are required to provide a comprehensive, high quality instructional program within
156
a school and the evidence of its effectiveness and then determines an adequate
expenditure level by placing a price on each component and aggregating the total
cost. This approach is based on evidence from three sources:
1. Research with randomized assignment to the treatment (the “gold
standard” of evidence)
2. Research with other types of controls or statistical procedures that
can help separate the impact of a treatment
3. Best practices from studies of impact at the local, district or school
level (Odden, et al, 2006).
The definition of adequacy, with regard to school finance, can be defined as how
much it will cost to educate all students in a school to proficiency levels (Odden
and Picus, 2004). Individual student needs must be taken into account and some
students require more assistance, therefore more funding is required to educate
them to this standard. Many studies have been conducted on the cost effectiveness
of student level resource allocations and most of those researchers have concluded
that based on the increased level of accountability for all schools brought about by
the federal No Child Left Behind Act legislation of 2001, schools must begin to
identify more precisely what it will take to insure that students are working to grade
level, graduating from high school and will be prepared for what is an increasingly
complex, knowledge based economy (Goodlad, 2004; , High Schools of the new
Millenium: Imagine the Possibilities, 2004). This framework will allow the
157
researcher to examine whether or not all students in a given school will be ready
for college, ready for work in the global economy and ready for democratic
citizenship.
The conceptual framework is comprised of six core strategies which were
developed to give schools, districts and state legislatures the ability to examine
their current practices and associated costs with the purpose of restructuring their
educational programs to optimize student achievement. For purposes of this study,
this framework assisted the researcher in establishing a basis on which there could
be an examination of the leadership, organizational structure and student level
resource allocations at a Middle College High School relative to student
achievement. Elements included in this conceptual framework include the
following six core strategies (Odden et al., 2006):
1. Recalibrate goals for student learning. In order that schools prepare
students for college, work in the knowledge based economy and
democratic citizenship, the goal is to maximize the number of
students meeting proficiency levels or higher on state tests, passing
the California High School Exit Exam and increase the number of
students graduating from high school and going to college. The
long term goal is to have at least 90% of all students including low
income, students of color, ELL and students with disabilities achieve
to proficiency standards. Our assumption is that work in the global,
knowledge-based economy requires the same skills and expertise to
158
enter the work force after high school or go to college. It is assumed
from the research that in the 21
st
century, career-tech education
would need to include info-tech, nano-tech, bio-tech, health-tech and
construction-tech, if it is to bolster the state and the nation’s
economic growth.
2. Re-engineer schools to have them deploy more powerful
instructional strategies and use resources more productively.
Schools need to change the curriculum they use, how they are
organized and how they use resources. One core idea is that all
students should take college preparatory curriculum.
3. Redesign teacher development so that all teachers acquire the
instructional expertise to educate all students to proficiency and the
ability to think, understand, problem solve and communicate. This
means using the extensive professional development resources in the
most effective ways.
4. Reinforce achievement for struggling students by providing a series
of extended learning opportunities, such as some combination of
individual and small group tutoring, extended-day and summer
school programs, so all students have an equal opportunity to
achieve to high standards. The objective is to hold performance
standards high and vary instructional time so all students can
159
achieve to rigorous standards. In this process, schools also will
close the achievement gap.
5. Retool schools’ technology so they can tap the educating potential
of the internet.
6. Restructure teacher compensation so the state begins to move away
from paying teachers on the basis of just years of experience and
education units, to a system that pays teachers individually for what
they know and can do, also known as a knowledge and skills-based
pay system.
This conceptual framework provides the basis for the interview guides and artifact
analysis template. These tools were designed to evaluate the relationship of the
data and information to the research purposes and determine the extent of the
relationship between the variables and student achievement.
Data Collection and Analysis
The data collections for this study were conducted between September 2006
and February 2007. Data collection was thus conducted over a period of seven
months. Interviews were conducted at days and times convenient for the
interviewees. Artifacts were collected by the researcher over the seven month
period of time during multiple visits to the site.
The purpose of the study was to understand the leadership and
organizational structure and student level resource allocations in a Middle College
High School as it relates to student achievement. The focus is to identify key
160
design elements and decision making processes that foster an environment that is
conducive to student achievement. The process that was used to analyze the data
involved the study of the alignment of collected data to the four research questions
as it addressed the purpose of the study.
Framework for the First Research Question
The first research question asks, “How is this school organized to maximize
student achievement?” Four of the six core strategies were emphasized to answer
this question. Re-engineering schools is one of the six R’s utilized to focus this
question because it addresses the way in which resources are supplied to the school
to reinforce instructional practices. Additionally, the question aimed at revealing
how effective the school’s resource allocation practices are in relation to the
evidence-based approach. Finally, by selecting the redesigning teacher
development strategy as another lens helped the researcher to understand and
evaluate the effectiveness of personnel usage for student achievement by examining
learning outcomes. This question was analyzed through structured interviews and
document analysis.
Findings for the First Research Question
In examining the organizational structure of this alternative high school, I
compared it to the model designed by the Middle College National Consortium. It
meets most of the criteria required by the MCNC. One of the most important
criteria for the success of a school like this is for it to be located on a college
campus. This school is situated on two portables on a community college campus.
161
Although enrollment differs from school to school and is not stipulated in the
model of a MCHS, it is recommended that schools have small class sizes, lower
pupil-staff ratios and create a climate which is conducive to students feeling
connected to the school and faculty. Currently at this school, 94 students are
enrolled and the pupil-staffing ratio is 21.6 to one. One thing that differs from the
philosophy behind the Middle College concept at this school is with the target
population. It is not as ethnically diverse, but can be explained in that it is
somewhat representative of the larger district’s population. In addition to that, the
population is not at risk in the sense that they are not students who might be first
generation college students, but they are at risk in their own way of not graduating
high school or making into college due to social or motivational concerns.
According to interviews with site personnel, they try to recruit under-performing
GATE students at risk of dropping out of the larger comprehensive high schools in
the district.
For students entering this optional alternative credit based transition
program, there are many benefits. Tuition is waived by the college and students
can take up to eleven units per semester. They also do not pay for textbooks at the
CC as the school district absorbs the cost for those. Students are held responsible
for enrollment, health center and parking fees as any other students would be.
Students typically spend a half day at the MCHS and may take CC classes at night
or in the afternoons. The MCHS offers a study hall/Peer Tutoring program each
Friday for students having difficulties in their college classes.
162
Staff members are employees of the K-12 school district and are expected to abide
by the contract established for teaching staff regarding working hours, calendar,
meetings etc. The Principal is also given the title of Dean of the MCHS and has a
voice in decisions at the CC as it affects his school.
The school calendar differs from the district and is altered to be concurrent
with the CC, rather than other high schools in the district. New students may only
transfer in to this school at the beginning of the school year, but students not
maintaining grades or behavior are transferred out at any point.
The School Counselor plays a critical role in making sure the students are
on track to graduate, insuring they are taking appropriate classes at the CC, insuring
they are making progress in CC classes and assisting them with college
applications and career advice. The Counselor, along with all of the teachers and
Principal, also hosts an advisory class called a “House” and teaches a class in
Service Learning.
Teachers must be willing to take on many extra duties at this school. The
four teachers at the MCHS are also all Department Chairs in each of the core
curriculum areas and must be willing to take on many adjunct duties including
Yearbook, Newspaper, ASB, School Site Council Chair, etc. They maintain office
hours in the afternoons and communicate regularly with students and parents via
email and phone conferencing.
Enrollment has remained around 100 for the last ten years and staffing has
remained about the same. (4 teachers, 1 Counselor, 1 Admin, 1 clerical staff)
163
There are no current plans to expand the school. However, if they were to do so,
the school would have to intend to double or triple in size as opposed to
incremental growth and that is hampered by facility, staffing and budget issues.
Findings relative to Student Achievement
Graduation Rate for this school is 100%. Drop out Rate is 0%. College Admissions
are not accurately tracked. Estimated 80-85% of students go on to same community
college and 10-15% go on to a four year University. When comparing AYP and
API scores for this school to other alternative or small high schools in and outside
of the district, the scores are typically lower than those schools in language arts and
math proficiency and in overall API.
Surprises in the data The API and AYP scores for this school are lower
than a similarly designed school serving a more highly diverse and economically
challenged population in a nearby city. Math Scores for this school are surprisingly
low on the SAT Reasoning Test (College Readiness Assessment for seniors) and on
the STAR tests (Evaluation of grade level mastery in content standards for
juniors).This is a concern because this subject is viewed as gatekeeper for four year
university admissions and data revealed that about seventy percent of the students
go on to transfer to the host community college as opposed to applying to four year
universities. According to the Principal, when asked to explain why he thought this
might be the case, he said that students who come to the school as juniors were not
working to potential in many areas on their comprehensive high school campuses
and are not highly interested or motivated to achieve in mathematics. They have a
164
short period of time to influence their attitudes in a more positive direction, which
have been developed over the last ten years. Another factor that impacts results on
these assessments is that few students opt to take the SAT test, as this is an optional
exam. However, although these factors might explain why these scores are low,
the fact remains that the goal of a Middle College High School is to increase high
school graduation rates, decrease drop out rates and improve college going rates for
at risk students. Mathematics is seen as a “gate keeper” for four year college
entrance and is a critical factor in students being prepared for rigorous college
curriculum (Orfield, 2004).
While this school can explain the reasons for the situation, it needs to take
steps to improve it by examining the rigor of the instruction in the high school math
courses, providing intervention for students who need it and by providing
motivation for the students to increase their interest in four year colleges as
opposed to the current interest for most of their students in remaining at the host
community college campus.
Framework for the Second Research Question
The second research question asks, “How does this school choose to allocate
human and fiscal resources to maximize student achievement?” All six core
strategies guided the data analysis for this research question in structured
interviews with multiple stakeholders. To understand the rationale behind the
decision-making process, it was important to look at the school’s goals as they
pertained to expected learning outcomes. Therefore, recalibrating goals and
165
reinforcing achievement were essential questions that were used in examining the
study school’s strategies and choices. Re-engineering schools and redesigning
teacher development were also selected as lenses for this question because it
offered the researcher an understanding of the processes and possible criteria used
for determining the allocation of various resources. The researcher analyzed data
relative to the school’s decisions for improving instructional practices and
enhancing teacher expertise as they are central to the conceptual framework and the
strategies offered in the evidence-based model. It was important to include the
final two lenses related to re-tooling school’s technology and re-structuring teacher
compensation in the analysis of this research question as choices made in these two
areas have potential to improve student achievement.
Findings for the Second Research Question
Cost per student is less for this school than average dollar expenditure per student
for district. This is true in spite of what I expected to find when staffing is at 4.5
FTE, .50 Counselor and 1 Administrator and 1 clerical staff for 85-100 students.
Resources are spent as follows:
A) District funds go to personnel costs, textbooks for high school
classes, maintenance, technology for high school facility
B) Grant funds go toward personnel, student recruitment and
marketing, Professional Development for teachers and programs
166
C) Community College funds go to technology, facility maintenance,
personnel for Community College
Framework for the Third Research Question
The third research question asks, “How is this school funded and from where do
these funds originate?” Four of the six strategies provided through the conceptual
framework were utilized in focusing this response to this research question. Re-
calibrating goals is the focus of an alternative school and it was important to use
this lens to analyze the relationship between those goals and how this school is
funded. Re-engineering schools was chosen because it concentrates on
understanding how the resources are being utilized and how the original sources for
funding are initiated. Redesigning teacher development was selected because it was
necessary to determine if the levels of funding are sufficient to produce the needed
teacher expertise for this type of school. Finally, restructuring teacher
compensation offered the researcher another perspective through which to view this
question because it examines the possibility of additional cost factors needed for
the school’s professional development. Structured interviews and the review of
pertinent documents was utilized to analyze data related to this research question.
Findings for the Third Research Question
There are primarily three sources of funding for this Middle College High
School. The school receives its primary funding through general fund revenue
from the host school district based on the number of students attending the school.
The school also utilizes unrestricted funding from the state which is calculated
167
based on the total number and types of students who attend the high school. The
school also applies for a grant through the Chancellor’s office at the community
college. In addition to those funding sources, the school is also eligible and did
receive additional grant funding last year from for a small schools grant from the
state.
As part of the original agreement from the M.O.U., the community college
shares the cost of operating this school by providing and maintaining the facilities,
providing and maintaining the teacher and student technology materials and
support and by waiving the cost of tuition for college classes. They also provide
collaboration and personnel to support the school’s grant writing efforts and will
provide grant management and oversight once it is obtained. While the college’s
cost incurred for instructional units taken by MCHS students is estimated at $223,
322.00 this year, their reimbursement from the state is estimated at $273,050.00
leaving the community college with revenue of $49,728.00. The community
college does not necessarily lose money by providing this opportunity for students
living in and around this school. And, by all accounts, seventy percent of the
students in the MCHS go on to attend this community college upon high school
graduation.
Framework for the Fourth Research Question
The fourth research question asks, “How is it possible to bring this school
structure to scale in other settings?” All of the six core strategies were utilized as
lenses for determining the answer to this research question. All six of the core
168
strategies focus on building the capacity of educational institutions in varied ways
so that increased student learning can be realized. To answer this research question,
the researcher analyzed relevant documents and conducted structured interviews
with multiple stakeholders.
Findings for the Fourth Research Question
Interviews with site and district administration and with the college liaison
revealed that at this time, there are no current plans for this particular program to be
expanded. There are many factors involved in a decision to bring a program like
this to scale. These factors should be considered by administrators overseeing
similar programs in seeking to bring programs like this to scale. It can be done, but
planning for expansion should include consideration of not only budget constraints,
but also other variables including teacher credentials, staffing ratios for high school
and college personnel, high school and college facility space and the impact of
increasing the size of the school on the culture and climate so that it does not
adversely impact student achievement.
The school in this study has maintained an enrollment rate of about one
hundred students with a staffing ratio of 21.6 to one resulting in 4.5 full time
equivalent teaching staff. Each teacher at this site has a specific single subject
credential in a particular subject area including Mathematics, English, Science and
History-Social Science. If this school were to expand by half its size, the school
would need to employ two additional teachers who were each able to teach two
subjects, specifically one who could teach half of the subjects and another one who
169
could teach the remaining two subjects. Increasing the student enrollment to one
hundred and fifty students would require that the school’s master schedule offer .50
times the classes in each subject area. To find staff members, who happen to hold
two single subject credentials in the areas that the school would need would be
tremendously difficult. The school would need to plan for exponential expansion.
The school would need to double, triple or quadruple in size and hire four, eight or
twelve more teachers, for example, to accommodate the likelihood of finding
appropriately credentialed staff and provide the needed number of sections of each
subject area in the master schedule for students.
However, another option the school could consider is utilization of more
community college teaching staff to accommodate the growth in student
enrollment. Students could be encouraged to take classes for high school
graduation requirements on the community college campus. This would require
more collaborative planning between the Middle College High School staff and
Community College Instructions. As a team, they would need to include a review
of the community college curriculum in the areas of English, Math, Science and
Social Science to determine what classes would meet the high school graduation
requirements. Once that is done, students would need to enroll in those classes and
the college could then help absorb the expansion of the program.
To accommodate exponential expansion, the school would need to consider
plans for growth in facility space. In this case, the school has two portables. One
portable holds four classrooms and one portable holds administrative three offices
170
for the Principal, Counselor and secretary. The school would need to expand the
number of classrooms equivalent to the number of teachers it hired. In this case, if
the school planned to double in size, the Principal would need to hire four more
staff and provide four additional classrooms or another portable that could be
divided into four sections, such as they have now.
The concern would be in working out the details of the expansion with the
community college because the portables are currently located in a parking lot at
the rear of the campus. The Principal would have to negotiate where the additional
portable or portables would be located and whether or not the community college
would pay for this as they had originally done at the inception of the program. The
portable’s location might also become a concern for both the college and the high
school as it would take up parking spaces on the campus at the same time that more
students would be enrolled and more staff members have been hired.
In addition to the issues of logistics and the finances of planning for
additional facility space with the community college, the Principal would also need
to collaborate with his or her district to plan for the creation of new positions and
the hiring of additional teaching, counseling or clerical staff. With the increase in
the number of students, depending on the size of expansion, there will be a need for
more teachers and perhaps, more clerical or counseling staff to meet the needs of
the students. This would be an issue that might impact the district’s general funds,
unless the Principal and district decided to allow the option for the transfer of
existing district staff to the Middle College High School. As funding for schools is
171
driven by Average Daily Attendance, or A.D.A., resources are divided up between
schools based on the number of students attending that school. If students are taken
primarily from other schools in the district on an intra-district transfer basis, then
funds would be re-distributed to the schools accordingly. Staffing needs at schools
are generally calculated in the same way, and therefore staffing positions would be
taken from other high schools in the district and provided for the Middle College
High School.
Although the redistribution of existing staffing, or F.T.E.’s, from one high
school to another to accommodate the shift in student enrollments is easier for the
district as opposed to creating, posting and hiring for new positions, the issue of the
need for specific credentials for those teachers comes up again. To allow for this,
applications for intra-district transfer of staff should be permitted as well and staff
should be selected based on the need for particular subject area credentials. The
Principal and existing staff would need to interview all interested applicants to
determine the person most qualified for the position needed based on credentialing
and the more subjective criteria of fit with the program philosophy. This would
become important to include in any plans for expansion because to ignore the
mission and philosophy of the school in hiring appropriately credentialed staff may
have a negative impact on school culture and climate, thus potentially having an
adverse effect on the goals of the program related to graduation rates , college
acceptance and college completion rates for the at risk students they serve.
172
Any notions of expansion must include planning and consideration of all of
the variables mentioned including budget constraints, facility space, teacher
credentials, staffing ratios and school culture and climate. To ignore any of these
variables would place the mission of the program in jeopardy and have a potentially
detrimental impact on student achievement. In light of the potential success of
these programs for our country’s most needy populations, this would be too high a
price for growth. Administrators should proceed with caution, plan ahead
carefully, collaborate with college and district administration and plan any goals for
growth exponentially in order to maximize student achievement in this secondary
school design model.
However, in light of the extensive costs associated with this type of
program compared to that of the other high schools in a district, district
administrators should hold these schools accountable by asking the school to set
goals for student achievement. Currently, this school’s program is expensive to
operate and is not as successful in regard to the results on standardized measures of
student achievement as some of the other larger comprehensive high schools in the
same district, particularly in the area of math in spite of larger class size and
increased enrollment numbers at the other schools.
In light of this factor, the district should make any additional funding
contingent upon a plan for improvement in the area of student performance in math
and upon a plan to increase matriculation to four year universities. Otherwise, it
may not be wise to increase the size of the program. If the school does not improve
173
the performance in these areas, a discussion about closing the program might be an
option the district should consider.
Conclusion
A detailed analysis of the data yielded findings for each research question,
which were subsequently analyzed and considered, resulting in the discovery of
three major themes constituted in the findings of the study:
1) The program does not seem to be cost-effective. It costs about $6,925.00
per year to educate the MCHS student as opposed to an estimated cost of $5,000.00
per student at the other comprehensive high schools in the same district. Given the
less challenging and smaller population that Middle College High School has, it
would seem that they should be performing to standard. The target population of
this school differs somewhat from the intended target of a Middle College High
School model, which should be first generation college students, students of color
or disadvantaged students. This school targets underperforming G.A.T.E. or Gifted
and Talented students of Caucasian descent. However, it should be noted, that by
percentage, the population of the school is more or less representative of larger
district population
The performance data would suggest that the smaller class size does not
seem to be more effective. Specifically, the math scores on state tests and on
college readiness tests such as the SAT demonstrate that students are not perform
as expected It should be noted that at Middle College, the math teacher is the
youngest and the least experienced teacher. Currently, the school is also not
174
receiving intervention monies and does not create intervention classes to support
students struggling with math. Given these extant realities, to maximize resource
allocations, perhaps the high school could utilize college instruction more,
specifically in the area of mathematics instruction.
One of the obvious advantages of the alternative learning design of the school is
that it provides learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in college level
courses. This enhances the students’ opportunities to participate fully in the
community college program, and Middle College High School students may take a
variety of college courses, earning both high school credit and transferable college
units. All students at the school are concurrently enrolled in at least one community
college class, with a substantial percentage of the population (42%) enrolled in two
or more. Utilizing this advantage, specifically in the area of mathematics would
alleviate problems in both performance and allocation.
2) It would also appear that the allocation of human resources is not ideal.
The FTE distribution reveals the inadequacies where the Counselor is .80 FTE and
the Teacher .20, to allow him to teach service learning classes in order to meet
graduation requirement of 40 hours of community service. The Principal admitted
that students come to this school under-performing and sometimes unmotivated,
specifically with regards to math. Since math is a gatekeeper for four year college
entrance, a programmed focus should be put on creating targeted motivational
programs, so students have aspirations about attending four year schools, combined
with study skills and math skills review with college age tutors working one on one
175
to increase accountability and enhance math performance. The Counselor should
be 1.0 FTE, and another part time Counselor should be hired to act as service
learning instructor. Perhaps, these strategic moves would release the mathematics
instructor for full time teaching, as well as utilizing math instruction from the
college.
3) Another issue that emerges from the data analysis has to do with the
program intent of a school like Middle college, and attending accountability
measures. Ideally, this program is intended to create pipeline to a four year
university; however, most of Middle College students transfer to the OCC
(community college), and the data reveals that approximately 85% of the student
body will continue to attend the community college. No records have been kept on
eventual transfer to four year institutions or the drop out rate from the community
college itself.
Thus, it is fair to conclude that the school is not working to potential.
Currently, there is no accountability model in place to insure students are working
to standard and to help determine the areas of weakness. Thus, the enhancement of
accountability is critical with this school. Clear records need to be kept about
successful college entrance for both two and four year institutions and eventual
graduation rate from those schools tracked as well. The researcher feels that such
accountability measures could possibly be made conditional and aligned with state
grants, and continuation of funding from the district
176
Analysis and findings of the data for each research question have been
presented in Chapter Four. Three major themes were developed and discussed.
The study is summarized in Chapter Five, with conclusions, recommendations, and
suggestions for future studies.
Recommendations
1. The school should stop using grant money to pay for any personnel
positions and begin to use general fund resources.
2. Math scores should be a focus for Advisory Committee.
3. Use some grant resources and district funding to provide
intervention for math.
4. If math scores on STAR and SAT go up, four year university
admissions might also go up. Set goal to increase enrollments
for four year schools and decrease community college
transfers.
5. Student Advisory groups should focus on four year colleges
and associated careers.
6. Track college and university admissions.
7. Set goal to increase enrollment of ethnic minority students and
expand the program in four years.
8. Continued emphasis on Professional Development with staff
and include focus on Math.
177
Importance of the Study
Research in the area of middle college high school administration will
ultimately help those students who need alternative educational settings in order
to benefit from the learning process (Hansen, 1989). Information from this
study can aid educators in selecting administrators suited to leading non-
traditional, small schools as well as leaders of successful traditional high
schools (Hamm, 1999).
Suggestions for Further Research Studies
The 2014 deadline imposed by the federal No Child left Behind Act is
looming ever closer for all K-12 schools relative to the anticipation that all students
will be achieving at grade level regardless of the fact that schools may have
significant populations of students with primary language interference or students
identified with learning disabilities. As this imminent deadline draws near, the drop
out rates for minority and at risk populations is increasing in a manner that is
disproportionate to enrollment rates.
With all of these pressures on K-12 schools mounting, there is clearly a
compelling and urgent need for continued research around secondary school
reform, P-16 partnerships, minority retention and school finance relative to student
level resource allocations and adequacy. It would seem evident to this researcher
that more in depth studies on successful Middle College and Early College High
Schools is needed to provide school administrators with some understanding and
potential solutions to remediate the drop out rates for some of the affected and at
178
risk populations. However, it would be preferable to assess the impact of these
alternative design schools which have higher percentages of minority student
populations. Although it may be clear that drop out rates for this population is a
concern for educators and policy makers, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
and other private organizations are making the siren call that this will soon have a
negative and, possibly devastating impact on all citizens as it relates to the national
economy. If a significant percentage of the population does not have a Bachelor’s
degree, or at least a high school diploma, as the national workplace places an even
greater importance on what is even now seen as the skills needed for knowledge
based economy, our national economy will be seriously impacted in the global
market. More and more technology based and customer service based jobs will
need to be contracted out to other countries and the divide between the wealthy and
the poor will grow even wider as those who are the employers have higher incomes
and the salaries of those who work in the service sector, which requires fewer
technical skills, remains much lower. The seriousness of this dilemma with regard
to drop out rates and college going rates for a growing segment of the population
has serious implications for a democratically based country if fewer and fewer of
its citizens are either unemployed or under-employed.
It is incumbent upon educators, policy makers and citizens to become involved in
the solution to this growing problem.
Much has already been done, but more still needs to be accomplished in the
way of research around secondary school reform. The model that currently exists
179
has not changed all that much since the time Horace Mann designed the first
common high school in the nineteenth century (Goodlad, 2004). If we reflect upon
the reasons our country was founded and upon the primary purpose of education in
a democratic society as written about by Thomas Jefferson, it is to create an
informed citizenry who can make educated decisions, vote for elected
representatives and authorize legislation that will benefit and represent the needs of
all members of our society (Orfield, 2004). In light of this reflection, it is clearly
time to consider other more creative options for educating our growing and ever
diverse population to maintain the viability of our democracy in the twenty first
century. Beyond the economic reasons, it is critical to our form of government to
have an educated citizenry who can participate in the decisions which will shape
the future for all of us. To ignore the cry for educational reform, or to err in this
endeavor, may have grave consequences for us all in the near future and imperil our
way of life forever.
180
REFERENCES
Are California High Schools Ready for the 21st Century? (2004).). Oakland, CA:
The Education-Trust West.
Baenen, N. R., Lindblad, M., & Yaman, K. (2002). Can Extended Learning
Opportunities Improve Student Achievement? Paper presented at the
Conference Name|. Retrieved Access Date|. from URL|.
Bailey, T., & Karp, M. (2003). Promoting College Access and Success: A Review
of Credit-Based Transition Programs. Washington, D.C.: Office of
Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of Education.
Biddle, J. K. (2002). Accelerated Schools as Professional Learning Communities.
Paper presented at the Conference Name|. Retrieved Access Date|. from
URL|.
Bloom, H., Rock, J., Ham, S., Melton, L., & Obrien, J. (2001). Evaluating the
Accelerated Schools Approach: A Look at Early Implementation and
Impacts on Student Achievement in Eight Elementary Schools: MRDC.
Bridgeland, J. M., Dijulio, J. J., & Morison, K. B. (2006). The Silent Epidemic:
Perspectives of High School Dropouts. Washington, D.C.: Civic
Enterprises, LLC.
Cunningham, C., & Beinhacker, B. (2006). Design Principles, Beliefs & Effective
Practices [Electronic Version], 1-2. Retrieved 07-19-06 from
www.lagcc.cuny.edu.
"Financing Alternative Education Pathways: Profiles and Policy". (2005).).
Washington, D.C. : National Youth Employment Coalition.
Ford, D. Y., Baytops, J. L., & Harmon, D. A. (1997). Helping Gifted Minority
Students Reach Their Potential: Recommendations for Change. Peabody
Journal of Education, 72(3), 201-216.
Goodlad, J. (2004). A Place Called School: Twentieth Anniversary Edition. New
York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.
181
Goodman, R., & Zimmerman, W. (2000). Thinking Differently: Recommendations
for 21st Century School Board/Superintendent Leadership, Governance,
and Teamwork for High Student Achievement. Arlington, VA: Educational
Research Service.
Groark, M. (2004). New Investments Expand and Strengthen National Network of
Early College High Schools. Retrieved 07-10-06, from
www.gatesfoundation.org.
Gullatt, Y., & Jan, W. (2002). How Do Pre-Collegiate Academic Outreach
Programs Impact College Going Among Under represented Students?
Washington, D.C.: The Pathways to College Network.
Haycock, K. (1998). School-College Partnerships. In P. W. Timpane, White, L.S.
(Ed.), Higher Education and School Reform (pp. 57-82). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
High Schools of the new Millenium: Imagine the Possibilities. (2004).). Seattle,
WA.: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Hopfenberg, W. S., Levin, H. M., Meister, G., & Rogers, J. (1990). Accelerated
Schools. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Huebner, T. A., & Corbett, G. C. (2004). Rethinking High School: Five Profiles of
Innovative Models for Student Success. San Francisco, CA: Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation.
Kirst, M. W., & Venezia, A. (Eds.). (2004). From High School to College:
Improving Opportunities for Success in Postsecondary Education. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Levin, H. (2001). Learning From School Reform. Paper presented at the
Conference Name|. Retrieved Access Date|. from URL|.
MCNC's History [Electronic Version], 1-2. Retrieved 07-19-06 from
www.lagcc.cuny.edu/mcnc/history.htm.
182
Multiple Pathways to College: An Evaluation of the Early College High School
Initiative from 2003-2005. (2006).). Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation.
N.C.E.S. (2000). Highlights from the Third International Mathematics and Science
Study-Repeat (TIMSS-R). Washington, D.C.: US Department of Education.
Odden, A., Picus, L., Goetz, M., & Fermanich, M. (2006). An Evidenced Based
Approach to School Finance Adequacy in Washington (pp. 130): Lawrence
O. Picus and Associates.
Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing Our Future: How
Minority Youth are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis.
Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
Contributors: Urban Institute, Advocates for Children of New York, and
The Civil Society Institute.
Palmer, J. (Ed.). (2000). "How Community Colleges Can Create Productive
Collaborations with Local Schools." (Vol. 111).
Rasch, E. (2002). The Community College's Role in P-16 Education Reform.
Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Stonecipher, A. (2001). Sharing Responsibility: How Leaders in Business and
Higher Education Can Improve America's Schools. Washington, D.C.:
Business-Higher Education Forum.
Van de Water, G., & Krueger, C. (2002). P-16 Education. Eugene, OR.
Wirt, J., Choy, S., Provasnik, S., Rooney, P., Sen, A., & Tobin, R. (2003). The
Condition of Education 2003. Retrieved 07-08-06. from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe.
183
APPENDIX A: PRINCIPAL INTERVIEW GUIDE
Research
Questions
Principal Interview Questions
Research Question
One:
How is this school
structured to
maximize student
achievement?
What is the school’s mission?
Probing Questions:
When and how did this school’s Middle College High School concept begin?
What outcomes are expected for students in this program?
What data or information do you use to measure those outcomes?
How would you define success for this program?
How does this school differ from a traditional high school?
What are the demographics and characteristics of your students? What type(s) of
students are best served by this school design? Why?
What is the current enrollment? Has this gone up or down over the last several
years? Why do you think that is the case?
What are the school’s goals for growth in enrollment in the future? How do you
plan to make that happen?
Do you have school wide goals to promote student achievement for all students?
Probing Questions:
What are the school’s goals for its students?
Who determined these goals?
Does this impact your decisions on staffing? How?
Tell me about the leadership or governance of this school site.
Probing Question:
Compare this school site’s leadership structure to other traditional high schools.
How do they differ? How are they the same?
Does this site use shared governance or collaborative decision making?
If so, who is involved and how often do they meet?
What kinds of decisions are made by the Principal and what kind are made by this
team, if it exists?
What kinds of accountability measures are in place to support this structure?
How are all potential students who may benefit from this program made aware of your school
and how it differs from the traditional high school?
Probing Questions:
Do you receive students from only this district? Or do you accept inter-district
transfers?
What are the eligibility criteria for students to enter your program? Or do you
have specific entrance criteria?
Do you need to recruit students? If so, how?
If not, why not?
Do you try to attract or target students who are at-risk or those who are on an
accelerated/gifted track?
How does it meet the needs of those students in a way that is different from
traditional high schools?
How/Who are the teachers or other staff assigned to work at this school?
Are they all employees of the district? Or of the community college?
Tell me the names of all of your staff and their positions/responsibilities
How is the need for staffing determined? What is the calculation?
What are the minimum and maximum viable enrollment number and staffing ratio
to make this a cost-effective school?
How were you selected as leader of this school?
What do you look for when you hire staff at this school? How are they better suited for this
type of school?
Who determines how school site funds are spent?
Probing Questions:
Are multiple stakeholders involved in the decision-making process?
What are the processes in place to make funding decisions?
Do you have criteria for use of funds based on the fact that you are a MCHS?
What criteria are those?
Does there need to be consensus among all parties (district, college, teachers,
MCNC, admin) on the allocation of resources?
184
Research Question
Two (cont’d):
How does this
school choose to
allocate human and
fiscal resources to
maximize student
achievement?
Is accessing funds more complicated because you are a MCHS?
Staffing Issues
Probing Questions:
What is the overall student enrollment now? Based on that number, how many
FTE’s are allotted to the site and for what positions are they used?
In your opinion, is that sufficient?
What is the average class size at the site? At the college for the classes they
attend?
Do you have many students from any sub-group populations such as special
education, title I, EL or particular minority groups that are traditionally under
served in college preparation or credit based transition programs?
If so, are there any structures provided by the school such as support classes in the
schedule or personnel assigned to support their success?
Do you have other supports for students like an advisory class, homeroom, or
mentoring? Or, are all classes in the schedule offered linked to high school
graduation and college acceptance (A-G requirements)?
How is the master schedule decided? Do you or the site admin collaborate with
the community college staff in building your schedule?
Must teachers have multiple preps to accommodate all the needed classes? How
many preps are given on average per teacher?
Do teachers have input on their assignments and workload?
Are teachers expected to have extra duties along with their regular teaching
assignment such as advising students or tutoring, clubs etc?
If so, what are they?
Does this school use similar curriculum as other high schools in the district? If not, how do
they differ?
What kind of access do these students have to technology? Is that important?
As a Middle College High School on a community college campus, what, if any, facilities are
shared and available for your staff and students?
Do you share human resources in any way with the college? If so, how? Ex. clerical,
custodial
Research
Questions
Principal Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question
Three:
How is this school
funded?
How does the district fund this type of a school? Is it different from the way they fund other
schools in the same district?
Probing Questions:
Is the cost shared with the community college? If so, how?
Is there a legal agreement in place with the community college for shared use of
resources that stipulates how much each party is responsible for?
Is this agreement in place for one year or more? Is it renegotiated or re-evaluated
periodically?
If so, by whom? How is that evaluated?
Does the district receive additional funds from other sources such as private
foundations or corporate sponsors to operate this school?
If so, what is the total amount?
What percentage of the overall cost of the school is covered by these funds?
If there are funds from an intermediary source such as the MCNC or other
foundations, is there an application process?
What kind of accountability measures are in place for continued use of these funds?
Research Question
Four:
How can this school
be brought to scale
What strategies are used to build organizational capacity at your school site?
Probing Questions:
Does the staff collaborate horizontally and vertically?
If they collaborate vertically, with whom do they collaborate?
How often are you given the opportunity to collaborate within the working day?
185
in other settings? Are your staff meetings used for collaboration and/or professional development?
Are you provided with current research pertaining to effective educational strategies?
Is professional development strategically linked to student learning outcomes?
Probing Questions:
Who determines professional development needs for your staff?
How often are professional development activities offered to you?
Are the school’s goals aligned with professional development activities?
Is professional development aligned with the standards based curriculum?
Does professional development focus on research-based instructional strategies?
Do your students take benchmark assessments?
Are these assessment outcomes utilized to drive professional development?
Do you utilize technology to access data to assist you in identifying learning gaps
for your students?
Do all staff members, including you, actively participate in professional development
activities?
Probing Questions:
What funding source is used for professional development?
From what source do you and your staff receive your professional development
training?
Who decides the source, the time and who is able to go for professional development?
Do teachers receive compensation for attending or participating in professional
development activities? Or, is it expected as a part of their regular contract?
Does the staff, in your opinion, effectively implement the knowledge and skills that are
gained from professional development activities?
Probing Questions:
Do teachers have access to personnel that can reinforce what they learned?
Do teachers have an instructional coach and/or peer coach to co-plan and co-teach?
How do you know that teachers are effectively implementing their new knowledge?
186
APPENDIX B: DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW GUIDE
Research Questions District Interview Questions
Research Question One:
How is this school structured
to maximize student
achievement?
What is the school’s mission?
Probing Questions:
When and how did this program begin?
What outcomes are expected for students in this program?
How do you measure those outcomes? With what data or
information?
How does the program at this school differ from a traditional high
school?
How would you define success for this school’s program?
What are the demographics and characteristics of these students?
What type(s) of students are best served by this school design?
Why?
Has the enrollment at this school gone up or down over the last
several years? Why do you think that is the case?
What are the district’s goals for enrollment in the future? How do
you plan to make that happen?
Does the district set goals to promote student achievement for all students? Are
they any different for this school?
Probing Questions:
Are they any different for this school?
Who determined these goals?
How and when are/were they determined?
Tell me about the leadership or governance of this school site.
Probing Question:
Compare this school site’s leadership structure to other traditional
high schools.
How do they differ? How are they the same?
Does this site use shared governance or collaborative decision
making?
If so, who or what parties are involved and how often do they meet?
What kinds of decisions are made by the district? by the Principal?
and what kind are made by this team, if it exists?
What kinds of accountability measures are in place to support the
leadership structure?
What kinds of things are in place to support the school site’s and
district’s partnership with the community college? Ex. MOU,
School Plan, contract, etc.
When did this begin? How often is this decision/agreement
revisited?
How are all potential students who may benefit from this program made aware
of this school and how it differs from the traditional high school?
Probing Questions:
Do you receive students from only this district? Or do you accept
inter-district transfers?
What are the eligibility criteria for students to enter this program? Or
do you have specific entrance criteria?
Do you need to recruit students? If so, how?
If not, why not?
Do you try to attract or target students who are at-risk or those who
are on an accelerated/gifted track?
How does it meet the needs of those students in a way that is
different from traditional high schools?
How/Who are the teachers or other staff assigned to work at this school?
187
Are they all employees of the district? Or of the community college?
How is the need for staffing determined? What is the calculation?
What are the minimum and maximum viable enrollment number and
staffing ratio to make this a cost-effective school?
How were you selected as leader of this school?
What do you look for when you hire staff at this school? How are
they better suited for this type of school?
Research Questions District Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Two:
How does this school choose to
allocate human and fiscal
resources to maximize student
achievement?
Who determines how school site funds are spent?
Probing Questions:
Is this school funded the same way other schools are funded? If not,
how?
Is this school the exception to the rules with regard to funding
decisions? How?
Are multiple stakeholders involved in the decision-making process?
What are the processes in place to make funding decisions?
Do you have criteria for use of funds based on the fact that this is a
MCHS?
What criteria are those?
Does there need to be consensus among all parties (district, college,
teachers, MCNC, admin) on the allocation of resources?
Is accessing funds more complicated for the site because this is a
MCHS?
Staffing Issues
Probing Questions:
What is the overall student enrollment now? Based on that number,
how many FTE’s are allotted to the site and for what positions are
they used?
In your opinion, is that sufficient?
What is the average class size at the site? At the college for the
classes they attend?
Do you have many students from any sub-group populations such as
special education, title I, EL or particular minority groups that are
traditionally under served in college preparation or credit based
transition programs?
If so, are there any structures provided by the school such as support
classes in the schedule or personnel assigned to support their
success?
Do you have other supports for students like an advisory class,
homeroom, or mentoring? Or, are all classes in the schedule offered
linked to high school graduation and college acceptance (A-G
requirements)?
How is the master schedule decided? Do you or the site admin
collaborate with the community college staff in building your
schedule?
Must teachers have multiple preps to accommodate all the needed
classes? How many preps are given on average per teacher?
Do teachers have input on their assignments and workload?
Are teachers expected to have extra duties along with their regular
teaching assignment such as advising students or tutoring, clubs etc?
If so, what are they?
Does this school use similar curriculum as other high schools in the district? If
not, how do they differ?
What kind of access do these students have to technology? Is that important?
As a Middle College High School on a community college campus, what, if any,
facilities are shared and available for your staff and students?
Do you share human resources in any way with the college? If so, how?
188
Research Questions District Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Three:
How is this school funded?
How does the district fund this type of a school? Is it different from the way
they fund other schools in the same district?
Probing Questions:
Is the cost shared with the community college? If so, how?
Is there a legal agreement in place with the community college for
shared use of resources that stipulates how much each party is
responsible for?
Is this agreement in place for one year or more? Is it renegotiated or
re-evaluated periodically?
If so, by whom? How is that evaluated?
Does the district receive additional funds from other sources such as
private foundations or corporate sponsors to operate this school?
If so, what is the total amount?
What percentage of the overall cost of the school is covered by these
funds?
If there are funds from an intermediary source such as the MCNC or
other foundations, is there an application process?
What kind of accountability measures are in place for continued use
of these funds?
Research Question Four:
How could this school be
brought
to scale in other settings?
What strategies are used to build organizational capacity at your school site?
Probing Questions:
Does the staff provided with pd days or release time to collaborate
horizontally and vertically?
If they collaborate vertically, with whom do they collaborate?
Is professional development strategically linked to student learning outcomes?
Probing Questions:
Who determines professional development needs for the site staff?
How often are professional development activities offered to staff?
Are the school’s goals aligned with professional development
activities?
Is professional development aligned with the standards based
curriculum?
Does professional development focus on research-based instructional
strategies?
Accountability Measures
Do students take benchmark assessments?
Are these assessment outcomes utilized to drive professional
development?
Do you utilize technology to access data to assist you in identifying
learning gaps for your students?
Do you use CAHSEE data, graduation rates or college entrance rates
to drive professional development?
What funding sources are used for professional development?
Probing Questions:
Do all staff members actively participate in professional development
activities?
Who decides the source, the time and who is able to go for
professional development?
Do teachers receive compensation for attending or participating in
professional development activities? Or, is it expected as a part of
their regular contract?
189
APPENDIX C: COLLEGE ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW GUIDE
Research Questions College Interview Questions
Research Question One:
How is this school
structured to maximize
student achievement?
What is this school’s mission?
Probing Questions:
When and how did this program begin?
What is the college’s interest in building a partnership and creating this
school?
What outcomes are expected for students in this program?
How are those outcomes measured? With what data or information?
How would you define success for this school’s program?
What are the demographics and characteristics of these students? What
type(s) of students are best served by this school design?
Why?
Has the enrollment at this school gone up or down over the last several
years? Why do you think that is the case?
What are the college’s goals for this school’s enrollment in the future?
How do you plan to make that happen?
Tell me about the leadership or governance of this school site.
Probing Question:
Tell me the names/positions of each person involved in working on this
collaborative.
Does this site use shared governance or collaborative decision making?
If so, who or what parties are involved and how often do they meet?
What kinds of decisions are made by the district? the college? by the
Principal? and what kind are made by this team, if it exists?
What kinds of accountability measures are in place for their decisions?
What kinds of things are in place to support the school site’s and district’s
partnership with the community college? Ex. MOU, School Plan, contract,
etc.
When was this created?
How often is this decision/agreement revisited?
How are all potential students who may benefit from this program made aware of this
school and how it differs from the traditional high school?
Probing Questions:
Do you know what the eligibility criteria are for students to enter this
program? Or is there specific entrance criteria?
How does this school actively recruit students? How?
If not, do you know why not?
Does this school specifically attract or target students who are at-risk or
those who are on an accelerated/gifted track?
How does this program meet the needs of those students in a way that is
different from traditional high schools?
How/Who are the teachers or other staff assigned to work at this school?
Are they all employees of the district? Or of the community college?
Do you know how the need for staffing is determined?
What are the minimum and maximum viable enrollment number and
staffing ratio to make this a cost-effective school for all parties?
How were you selected as contact at the college for working with this
school?
Do you assist in hiring staff at this school?
What type of teacher is best suited for this type of school?
190
Research Questions College Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Two:
How does this school choose
to allocate human and fiscal
resources to maximize
student achievement?
Who oversees any funds that are shared with the MCHS? Or facilities use agreements?
Or any shared personnel?
Probing Questions:
Are or were multiple stakeholders involved in the current or original
decision-making process regarding shared funds, personnel or facilities?
How was that stipulated?
What are the current processes in place to make funding decisions or to
distribute those funds?
Do you have criteria for the use of funds by the MCHS?
What criteria are those?
Does there need to be consensus among all parties (district, college,
teachers, MCNC, admin) on the allocation of resources?
Is accessing funds more complicated for the site because this is a MCHS
and involved in a partnership with the college?
Staffing Issues
Probing Questions:
Do you set aside special classes for MCHS students to take?
What are they?
Are they mixed in with college students or grouped together?
At what times of day do you offer the classes for the MCHS students? Day
or night or both?
Do you restrict the times of day or classes in which MCHS students may
enroll?
Do your policies or state policies about tuition free classes discourage
MCHS students from taking other courses?
What is the average class size at the college in which high school students
are enrolled?
Do you provide any special classes for certain sub-groups of students from
the MCHS at your site? EL, Special Education, Title I?
How is the college teaching schedule decided?
Does the MCHS site Principal collaborate with you or have input in
building this schedule?
How does this impact the teaching assignments at the community college?
Do teachers at the college have input on their assignments to work with
high school students?
Are there ever any problems in getting college staff to agree to work with
high school students from this program?
Do they see a difference in the students’ preparation and readiness for the
college curriculum?
Do the students work with the same curricular resources as the other college students in
your school? If not, how do they differ?
What, if any, facilities are shared and available for the MCHS staff and students?
Do you share human resources in any way? If so, how? Ex. custodial, clerical,
teaching, etc
Research Question Three:
How is this school funded?
How does your partnership with the MCHS impact your budget?
Probing Questions:
Do have any expenditures or negative costs associated with the agreement
with the school district for the MCHS program? If so, what are they?
Since your budget is driven by tuition and state education budget, how are
you impacted by the fact that the MCHS students are attending cost free?
Is there a legal agreement in place with the community college for shared
use of resources that stipulates what each party is responsible for?
Is this agreement in place for one year or more? Is it renegotiated or re-
evaluated periodically?
If so, by whom? How is that evaluated?
Does the school or college receive additional funds from other sources such
191
as private foundations or corporate sponsors to operate this school?
If so, what is the total amount?
What percentage of the overall costs incurred by the college is covered by
these funds?
If there are funds from an intermediary source such as the MCNC, or other
foundations, is there an application process required for both parties to
access these funds?
What kind of accountability measures are in place for continued use of these funds?
Research Questions College Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Four:
How is professional
development used to promote
organizational capacity and
student achievement?
Do the MCHS staff participate in professional development activities with your staff?
Or, vice versa?
Do either school’s staff jointly attend professional development activities through other
sources such as through the Middle College National Consortium or other private
organizations?
How important, in your opinion, is staff development to the overall mission of this
school?
How is professional development funded? Do you receive funding from the MCNC for
your staff to participate in any workshops or conferences to help them work with high
school students in a college environment?
192
APPENDIX D: TEACHER INTERVIEW GUIDE
Research Questions Teacher Interview Questions
Research Question One:
How is this school structured
to maximize student
achievement?
How does this school define success for its students? What is your mission?
Probing Questions:
What outcomes are expected for students in this program?
How does that differ from a traditional high school?
What are the demographics or distinguishing characteristics of your
students? Who is this school intended to serve?
Why?
What is the current enrollment? Has this gone up or down over the last
several years? Why do you think that is the case?
What are the school’s goals for growth in enrollment in the future? How
do you plan to make that happen?
Do you have school wide goals to promote student achievement for all students?
Probing Questions:
What are the school’s goals for its students?
Who determined these goals?
Tell me about the leadership or governance of this school site.
Probing Question:
Compare this school site’s leadership structure to other traditional high
schools.
How do they differ? How are they the same?
Does this site use shared governance or collaborative decision making?
If so, who is involved and how often do they meet?
What kinds of decisions are made by the Principal and what kind are
made by this team, if it exists?
What kinds of accountability measures are in place to support this
structure?
How are all potential students who may benefit from this program made aware of
your school and how it differs from the traditional high school?
Probing Questions:
Do you receive students from only this district? Or do you accept inter-
district transfers?
What are the eligibility criteria for students to enter your program? Or
do you have specific entrance criteria?
Do you need to recruit students? If so, how?
If not, why not?
Do you try to attract or target students who are at-risk or those who are
on an accelerated/gifted track?
How does it meet the needs of those students in a way that is different
from traditional high schools?
How/Who are the teachers or other staff assigned to work at this school?
Are they all employees of the district? Or of the community college?
How is the need for staffing determined? What is the calculation?
What are the minimum and maximum viable enrollment number and
staffing ratio to make this a cost-effective school?
How were you selected to work at this school?
Do you ever assist with interviewing new staff?
Is there large turnover at this site?
What do you look for when you hire new staff at this school? How are they better
suited for this type of school?
193
Research Questions Teacher Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Two:
How does this school choose to
allocate
human and fiscal resources to
maximize
student achievement?
Who determines how school site funds are spent?
Probing Questions:
Are multiple stakeholders involved in the decision-making process?
What are the processes in place to make funding decisions?
Do you have criteria for use of funds based on the fact that you are a
MCHS?
What criteria are those?
Does there need to be consensus among all parties (district, college, teachers
MCNC, admin) on the allocation of resources?
Is accessing funds more complicated because you are a MCHS?
What is the overall student enrollment and grade span covered at your site?
Probing Questions:
How many FTE’s are allotted to your site and how are they used?
In your opinion, is that sufficient?
What is the average class size?
Do you have any large sub-group populations such as special education,
title I, EL or particular minority groups that are traditionally under
served in college preparation or credit based transition programs?
If so, are there any special classes provided in the schedule or personnel
assigned to support their success?
Do you have classes like advisory, homeroom, or academic support
classes? Or, are all classes offered linked to high school graduation and
college acceptance requirements?
How is the master schedule decided? Do you collaborate with the
community college staff in building your schedule?
Must teachers have multiple preps? How many preps are given on
average per teacher?
Do teachers have input on their assignments and workload?
Are teachers expected to have extra duties along with their regular
teaching assignment such as advising students or tutoring, clubs
etc?
If so, what are they?
Do you use similar curricular resources as other high schools in the district? If not,
how do they differ?
How does technology play a role in this program?
As a Middle College High School on a community college campus, what, if any,
facilities are shared and available for your staff and students?
Do you share human resources in any way? If so, how?
Research Question Three:
How is this school funded?
How does the district fund this type of a school? Is it different from the way they
fund other schools in the same district?
Probing Questions:
Is the cost shared with the community college? If so, how?
Is there a legal agreement in place with the community college for shared
use of resources that stipulates how much each party is responsible for?
Is this agreement in place for one year or more? Is it renegotiated or re-
evaluated periodically?
If so, by whom? How is that evaluated?
Does the district receive additional funds from other sources such as
private foundations or corporate sponsors to operate this school?
If so, what is the total amount?
What percentage of the overall cost of the school is covered by these
funds?
If there are funds from an intermediary source such as the MCNC or
other foundations, is there an application process?
What kind of accountability measures are in place for continued use of these funds?
194
Research Questions Teacher Interview Questions (cont’d)
Research Question Four:
How is professional
development used to
promote organizational
capacity and
student achievement?
What strategies are used to build organizational capacity at your school site?
Probing Questions:
Does the staff collaborate horizontally and vertically?
If they collaborate vertically, with whom do they collaborate?
How often are you given the opportunity to collaborate within the working
day?
Are your staff meetings used for collaboration and/or professional
development?
Do you have days paid or unpaid during the summer for PD?
Are you provided with current research pertaining to effective educational
strategies?
Do you have Coaches assigned from the district/site to assist you in
implementing PD?
Is professional development strategically linked to student learning outcomes?
Probing Questions:
Who determines professional development needs for your staff?
How often are professional development activities offered to you?
Are the school’s goals aligned with professional development activities?
Is professional development aligned with the standards based
curriculum?
Does professional development focus on research-based instructional
strategies?
Do your students take benchmark assessments?
Are these assessment outcomes utilized to drive professional
development?
Do you utilize technology to access data to assist you in identifying
learning gaps for your students?
Do all staff members, including you, actively participate in professional
development activities?
Probing Questions:
What funding source is used for professional development?
From what source do you and your staff receive your professional
development training?
Do you know how much is available in terms of funding for PD?
Who decides the source, the time and who is able to go for professional
development?
Do teachers receive compensation for attending or participating in
professional development activities? Or, is it expected as a part of their
regular contract?
Does the staff, in your opinion, effectively implement the knowledge and skills that
are gained from professional development activities?
Probing Questions:
Do teachers have access to personnel that can reinforce what they learned?
Do teachers have an instructional coach and/or peer coach to co-plan and co-
teach?
How do you know that teachers are effectively implementing their new
knowledge?
195
Title of Document
Date
Type of Document
Author/Decision-
Maker
Location of Source
How closely is the
document related to
the structure and
purpose of this
organization?
How does this
document relate to
the leadership or
governance of this
organization?
How closely is this
document related to
the funding of this
organization?
How closely is the
document related to
the choices about
human and fiscal
resource allocation?
How does this
document relate to
professional
development and
organizational
capacity/growth?
How closely does this
document relate to
improved student
achievement for a
variety of student
learners?
Reflections or
Questions
APPENDIX E: DOCUMENT REVIEW GUIDE

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Unrestricted

This descriptive-analytic case study was conducted in one Middle College High School in a large K-12 school district located in a higher Socio-economic status community in the western portion of Orange County, a large metropolitan suburb of Los Angeles in Southern California. The district and school were selected on the basis of: (a) A district and school that has a Middle College High School option available for students (b) A district and school that has a relationship with a community college which supports its mission through the shared use of resources and facilities and (c) A district and school that has the capacity in funding, infrastructure, people and professional development to support this alternative offering. ❧ The purpose of this study was to identify and examine the strengths and weaknesses of the leadership and organizational structure, processes and student level resource allocations at an alternative learning design high school, which provides a wide variety of learners the opportunity for concurrent enrollment in both high school and college level courses, and its perceived causality with regard to student achievement. The focus was to better understand the relationship between the variables of leadership, organizational structure, financial and human resource allocation and student achievement, with a special focus on graduation rates and college going rates for the non-traditional, at-risk or minority student.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Navigating troubled waters: case studies of three California high schools' resource allocation strategies in 2010-2011

PDF

The open enrollment of advanced placement classes as a means for increasing student achievement at the high school level

PDF

Resource allocation strategies and educational adequacy: Case studies of school level resource use in California middle schools

PDF

The implications of using online classes with at-risk students in an alternative education setting

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: case studies of six California schools within two school districts

PDF

Doubling student performance through the use of human capital at high-performing high-poverty schools

PDF

Strategy and college participation: a comparative case study of two early college high schools

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: Case studies of four California charter schools

PDF

Student perceptions at middle college high schools

PDF

The impact of resource allocation on professional development for the improvement of teaching and student learning within an elementary school in a centrally managed school district: a case study

PDF

Resource allocation in successful schools: case studies of California elementary schools

PDF

Evidence-based resource allocation model to improve student achievement: Case study analysis of three high schools

PDF

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

PDF

Resource allocation and educational adequacy: case studies of school-level resource use in southern California with budget reductions

PDF

Resource use and instructional improvement strategies at the school-site level: case studies from ten southern California elementary schools

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student learning: case studies of California 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

Allocation of resources and educational adequacy: case studies of school-level resource use in southern California Title I Program Improvement middle schools

PDF

Allocation of educational resources to improve student learning: case studies of California schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Parsons, Jami Ware (author)

Core Title The middle college high school: a case study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 07/19/2007

Defense Date 05/01/2007

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

Tag academic pipeline,alternative high school,at risk students,middle college high school,OAI-PMH Harvest,P-16 education,secondary school reform

Place Name California (states), Orange (counties), USA (countries)

Language English

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Hentschke, Guilbert C. (committee member), Nelson, John L. (committee member)

Creator Email jparsons@lagunabeachschools.org,jwparson@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m623

Unique identifier UC1432267

Identifier etd-Parsons-20070719 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-531169 (legacy record id),usctheses-m623 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Parsons-20070719.pdf

Dmrecord 531169

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Parsons, Jami Ware

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