Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Achievement gap and sustainability: a case study of an elementary school bridging the achievement gap
(USC Thesis Other)
Achievement gap and sustainability: a case study of an elementary school bridging the achievement gap
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
ACHIEVEMENT GAP AND SUSTAINABILITY: A CASE STUDY OF AN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BRIDGING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP
by
Sandra Jean Gray
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2010
Copyright 2010 Sandra Jean Gray
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, I acknowledge and give all the praise to my Lord and Savior,
Jesus Christ, who saved me and changed my destiny. Without the help, wisdom,
encouragement, and guidance, I would not be who I am today nor would I have ever
embarked on this journey. My life is a complete adventure due to His presence in it.
Second, I thank my husband and best friend, Scott, for his continual patience,
encouragement, and love. For all the times he cooked dinner, fed the kids, washed the
dishes, ran to the book store, fixed the technology problems, and myriad other tasks that I
could not fulfill, he is my greatest support. I will be forever grateful for such a wonderful
and giving man. To my two best friends in the world, Deanna and Robert, thanks for
every encouraging word and supportive moment. My mom and dad gave me the founda-
tion of faith and belief in the unseen; I cannot imagine how I would have turned out with
both of them. Our family is so close and it is due to my parents deciding to stay con-
nected and available in good times and bad times.
Dr. Gothold created an environment that allowed our group to feel safe and take a
risk; his style of leadership was one of encouragement and friendship. He organized his
thematic group like a conductor and orchestra. In a process that was unfamiliar and
threatening, Dr. Gothold paved the way for success. Without his leadership, this disser-
tation would not be complete. I could not have finished without the constant encourage-
ment and friendship of Kimberly and Michael. Their !"#$%'()*+'),-'./")01'0",/)#2/*'
made this process almost fun instead of work. The supportive network of people includes
iii
so many people who encouraged and cheered me from the sidelines; many thanks to
Shannon, Stacy, Peggy, Debbie, Pam, Matt, Jason, and Elise for every kind word and
helpful task that they completed while I continued in this process. Their friendship was
and is so important to me.
The life of my grandmother, Marcella June Broudy, has been an inspiration to me.
Her faith has always been what I counted on and strove to emulate. Her encouragement
was like the roots to my soul and carried me as a child, young woman, and adult. She has
been a rock in my life and I hope to become even half of the woman she is. I thank her
for believing in me and being a constant source of support, and for listening to me babble
on when I went to school on Wednesdays, as if whatever topic was the most important
thing in the world to her. I love Gram and Pops3they are my heroes.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study 1
Background of the Problem 4
Statement of the Problem 8
Purpose of the Study 10
Research Questions 11
Significance of the Study 11
Limitations 12
Delimitations 13
Assumptions 14
Definition of Terms 14
Organization of the Dissertation 17
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 19
History of the Achievement Gap and Public Policy 21
Definition of the Achievement Gap and Related Factors 30
Practices That Are Reducing the Achievement Gap 36
Summary 46
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 48
Research Questions 49
Research Design 49
Conceptual Model and Framework 51
Sample and Population 54
Instrumentation 60
Data Collection 61
Document Review 61
Survey 62
Observation Guide 63
Interview Protocol 64
Data Analysis 65
Summary 66
v
Chapter 4: Presentation and Analysis of Data 68
Description of the School 69
Participants 71
A Normal Day at Crestline Elementary School 74
Research Question 1: Cultural Norms 87
Research Question 2: Practices 97
Shared Leadership 98
Parent leadership 98
Student leadership 99
Grade-level leadership 100
Teacher leadership 100
Differentiated Instruction/Intervention 103
Research Question 3: Programs 106
Emergent Themes From the Data Collection 110
Collaboration 111
Shared Leadership 113
Differentiated Instruction 114
Implementation of the Core Curriculum 115
Themes Woven Within Bolman and Deal 116
Summary 119
Chapter 5: Discussion 122
Summary of Findings 122
Collaboration 123
Shared Leadership 124
Differentiated Instruction 124
Implementation of the Core Adopted Program 125
A Comparison of Emergent Themes From the Literature and the Case Study 125
Additional Findings 126
Implications 127
Areas for Further Research 128
Conclusion 129
References 131
Appendices
Appendix A: Document Review Master List3Categorized 139
Appendix B: Staff Input Survey 141
Appendix C: School Observation Form/Guide 146
Appendix D: Observation Log 149
Appendix E: Closing the Achievement Gap Interview Questions 154
Appendix F: Staff Input Survey Results 156
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Descriptors of the School Studied 57
Table 2: School Enrollment by Racial/Ethnic Category 57
Table 3: Academic Performance Index (API) Scores 1999-2008 58
Table 4: Statewide Academic Performance Index (API) Scores by School Year
and Subgroup 59
Table 5: Academic Performance Index (API) Scores by Ethnicity/Economic
Status 59
Table 6: Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 1 91
Table 7: Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 2 102
Table 8: Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 3 109
Table F1: Staff Input Survey Results, Items 1-23 156
Table F2: 4/)%%'5,$&/'4&67"*'8"+/+9'5/"0':;<'.8)/"'/!"'=>##>(2,?'5,+/6&@/2>,)#'
Strategies You Use />'A,!),@"'4/&-",/'B")6,2,?1 160
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The conceptual framework proposed by Clark and Estes 52
Figure 2: The conceptual framework designed by the cohort and applied
in this study 53
viii
ABSTRACT
The achievement gap problem is a growing phenomenon in the United States of
America. In many schools, minority student populations are failing at alarming rates and
are looking at different outcomes than those of their White and Asian counterparts.
However, a few schools are breaking through the barriers of poverty, poor school
attendance, low academic achievement, low assessment results, and other factors that
contribute to the achievement gap. These schools are scattered across the country in sur-
prisingly few numbers but are making a marked difference in the lives of minority
youths.
This case study examined one elementary school and its cultural norms, practices,
and programs that have contributed to closing the achievement gap for minority student
populations. Data were collected from four main sources: documents, surveys, inter-
views, and observations. The factors that emerged from Crestline Elementary School
included collaboration as a cultural norm, shared leadership and differentiated instruction
as a practice, and faithful implementation of the core literacy program for all students
(specifically, English language learners). These factors were clearly evident in many
settings and observations throughout the data collection process. The essential learning
at Crestline could help similar schools to reduce the achievement gap and ensure that all
students learn.
1
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Achievement gap is a term that refers to a disparity in academic achievement
between minority and low socioeconomic students and their White and Asian counter-
parts as demonstrated on standardized achievement tests. Everyone has an opinion about
the achievement gap or why the gap persists. The common layperson, the teacher, the
administrator, the politician, the student, most people in the United States have exposure
to education; thus, most people have an opinion about how to fix education and its
current problems. Some people blame families: lack of structure or environment,
poverty, limited preschool experiences, and lack of parent education. Some people blame
the government and unattainable policies. Some people blame historical injustice and
mistreatment. Some people blame less qualified teachers and inferior schools. Some
people blame a lack of resources. Some people just blame, failing to look at the entire
structure and system that created this great injustice or put a face to the millions of
students who are underachieving in America. By acknowledging the individual students
who comprise the achievement gap, everyone is collectively responsible for doing
something about the gap.
The face of one student in one low-income school in America mirrors the typical
image of the minority student who sits in classrooms across the country. Mac Kidd was
an African American fourth grader that had been retained in the first grade. Mac was
physically huge in comparison to his grade-level peers and the other students called him
.Big Mac,1 which he absolutely hated. He was referred to special education in the third
2
grade and had numerous discipline problems in school. He was charming and sassy at
the same time. As an administrator, I was often responsible for .managing MacCs
discipline problems.1 All of his teachers were frustrated with his behavior, lack of effort,
and general disregard for school. Mac never put any effort into his education but he
showed up every day, rain or shine. Mac is the quintessential role model for the
.achievement gap1 problem.
One particular day that I will never forget, that drove me to learn about and study
the achievement gap problem will be etched into my memory forever. Mac Kidd got into
trouble on the bus and hurt a student pretty badly. I was so enraged with MacCs behavior
that I drove over to his house to suspend and berate him for his behavior. As I walked up
to the door, I got the feeling that the neighborhood was a bad place; it felt scary and
looked very run down. It had the feeling of poverty and hopelessness. The community
looked as if it had seen a lot of crime and there were many people loitering about. The
windows had bars on them and the doors had security screens. When I knocked on the
door, MacCs mother came out; she was clearly under the influence of narcotics and his
mother immediately started yelling at Mac. This huge kid hung his head and I listened as
his mother threatened him in front of me. She said, .You are going to end up in jail.
You are so stupid and you are never going to amount to anything in life.1
This narrative reflects one of many experiences that I have witnessed as an
administrator in California. In the past 7 years I witnessed many events that should be
considered injustice by the average person. However, in the daily life of a minority
student, it is routine. Disadvantages occurred everyday3some blatant and some so far
3
beneath the surface that the average person would have no idea that the disadvantage
occurred. I have witnessed good teachers who have the best intentions for students give
minority students an easier curriculum because the curriculum is perceived to be too
difficult. Students exhibit behavior problems for many reasons, and sometimes the
behavior is a direct result >%'/!"'+/&-",/C+'%6&+/6)/2>,'with the school environment or
experience. This dissertation is a direct result of my individual frustration that there are
no solutions. My quest was to change my perspective of the problem, look at all of the
solutions, and change the lives of the 02,>62/*'+/&-",/+C'whom I affect.
The effective school is a place where students are given an opportunity, where
there is a rigorous program, and where there are high expectations for students. The
school site should have structures and systems in place that ensure that all students learn,
especially meeting the needs of low-performing minority youth. The current research on
closing the achievement gap has concluded that schools that recognize and create
effective environments narrow the achievement gap and make learning possible for
minority students (Blankenstein, 2004; Haycock, 2001; Marzano, 2003; Reeves, 2002;
Schmoker, 2006). A few schools are demonstrating remarkable progress in closing the
achievement gap. These schools are implementing cultural norms, programs, and
practices that reduce the gap, and their progress is being documented.
How do all schools emulate and sustain their success in ways that a high-quality
education becomes normative for all students, specifically traditionally underperforming
minority students? This study examined one elementary school that has sustained
success over time with minority student populations and has started to eliminate the
4
achievement gap. The purpose of the study was to share their story to allow other
educators to replicate their cultural norms, programs, and practices to close the
achievement gap.
Background of the Problem
Achievement gap is a term that refers to a disparity in academic achievement
between minority and low socioeconomic students and their White and Asian counter-
parts as demonstrated on standardized achievement tests. The achievement gap is the
largest social injustice for minority student populations. The economic effects of shifting
demographics and unskilled workers make addressing the achievement gap of critical
importance. Minority student populations are increasing, and education must address
their needs. Historically, minority students have been underserved. Current legislation is
highlighting the need for all students to be proficient in skills. In the future, workers will
need highly specialized skills to be globally competitive. There are lasting implications
such as perpetual poverty for society and minority cultures if the achievement gap
continues. Unless this achievement gap problem is resolved, all people will suffer the ill
effects of the achievement gap, especially minority students.
The lagging performance by ethnic minority students in the United States has
lasting economic effects for the country and a globalized economy. A study undertaken
by McKinsey and Company (2009) concluded that the gross domestic product of the
United States is definitely impacted by the lack of educational skills among ethnic
minorities. The report found that, if the achievement gap were closed, the U.S. gross
domestic product would be trillions of dollars higher. The perpetual state of poverty of
5
which minority students are part negatively impacts the United States and a globalized
economy. Minority students who cannot support themselves financially become
dependent on the government for assistance, which further impedes their economic
conditions and the countr*C+ fiscal resources. The long-term effects of an inadequate
education have to address the learning needs of minority youth, which are critical to a
positive economy.
Demographically, minority youths constitute a large percentage of students in
schools today and are generally clustered in densely populated urban areas. There were
an estimated 54.8 million students enrolled in public schools in the United States in 2005-
2006 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). The population of at-risk minority
students is a concern for educational stakeholders attempting to narrow the achievement
gap. According to the NationCs Report Card (U.S. Department of Education, 2008),
White students have decreased from 80% in 1975 to 56% in 2008 in the 9-year-old
student categories. The Hispanic population has increased from 5% to 20% over the
same time period. One caveat is that the Hispanic population is difficult to count due to
immigration, migrant families, and the transiency rate of Hispanic populations. The
Black population has remained relatively stable over time, at 14% in 1971 and 16% in
2008 (U.S. Department of Education, 2008). Minority student populations are increas-
ing; education must reflect the demographic shift.
Historically, minority student groups were left out of education or placed in
inadequate facilities with ill-equipped teachers. The current trend in legislation is to end
the achievement gap through policy initiatives. In 2001 President Bush signed the No
6
Child Left Behind law (No Child Left Behind Act [NCLB], 2001) and catapulted the
achievement gap issue to the forefront of educatorsC minds. The main premise of
accountability structures such as NCLB is to improve academic achievement by all
student populations but specifically by underperforming subgroup populations. Accord-
ing to the D)/2>,C+'8"$>6/'E)6-'(U.S. Department of Education, 2008), minority studentsC
test scores have increased since 2004 but so have White and Asian studentsC test scores,
which leaves the achievement gap persisting for Hispanics and Blacks. The caveat is that
all student groupsC'+@>6"+ are increasing; thus, the achievement gap is not narrowing for
at-risk populations when comparing the Black and White groups or Hispanic and White
groups (Germeraad, 2009). The current legislation acknowledges the achievement gap
problem and has started courageous conversations among educators.
Highly specialized skills such as technological proficiency, multilinguistic
capabilities, critical thinking, and problem solving will be necessary skills in future
generations as the world becomes more globalized. President Barack Obama (2009)
expressed in his State of the Union Address that many occupations require more skills
than a high school diploma. A study conducted by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills
(2006) found that 40% of all students with new high school diplomas were .deficient1 in
overall preparation for entry-level jobs and basic skills. Critical thinking or problems
solving is ranked first in terms of basic knowledge or applied skills that the emergent
worker will need in the future. It is estimated that 66% of entering ninth graders will
leave high school deficient in reading and mathematics skills; thus, their globalized skills
are even more deficient, especially for minority youth (Gates & Gates, 2007). The skills
7
that will be critical include creativity, innovation, foreign language ability, teamwork,
critical thinking/problem solving, and communication, along with the basic essentials of
reading, writing, and computational skills (Casner-Lotto & Barrington, 2006). Minority
youths are ill prepared in globalized skills, as their educational preparation is not the
same as that of their White and Asian counterparts. The high population of minorities in
urban areas, poverty, language barriers, lack of educational resources such as highly
qualified teachers, and other reasons contribute to minorities being underprepared in
terms of globalized skills. Students who will become the next work force must have the
skills to maintain and foster the economy (Johnston & Viadero, 2000). Minority access
to high-paying jobs and upward mobility in occupations is limited if skills are not at a
competitive level and if the achievement gap persists.
Millions of minority children are not prepared educationally and fail to succeed
academically every year (Johnston, 2000); perpetual or generational poverty is a large
issue for minority students. Approximately 3.4 million students entered Kindergarten in
2000, and researchers are predicting vastly different futures for these students. Hispanic
children are 2.2 times more likely than White children to grow up in poverty, which has
lasting effects for their educational achievement (Johnston & Viadero, 2000). Children
who come from persistent poverty are at a significant disadvantage with their middle-
class White counterparts. The country is ill prepared to meet the financial obligations of
ill-prepared minority youths in the United States.
Minority students are becoming a majority in U.S. schools and educational
institutions. Academic achievement is lagging critically behind for minority students
8
compared to their White and Asian peers. A robust economy requires that the
achievement gap problem be solved, as the nation cannot afford the consequences if the
problem is left unresolved. Minority student populations are increasing throughout the
country and need a quality education. Accountability, as in NCLB, has been the most
recent answer from policy makers and political stakeholders to eliminating the achieve-
ment gap. Highly specialized skills are necessary for all students; specifically, minority
youths are at a disadvantage to acquire 21st-century skills. To fully understand the
achievement gap and its related factors, a full analysis is required for all educational
stakeholders and policy makers.
Statement of the Problem
Many individual factors have assisted in narrowing the achievement gap, and
some schools or educational institutions have been successful in meeting the needs of all
students. The universal factors that have been found to contribute to closing the
achievement gap include effective leadership in terms of district, site and distributed
leadership teams, prioritizing student achievement by holding high expectations for all
students by every stakeholder, implementing a rigorous standards-based curriculum with
effective instructional practices, using assessment and other measurable data to meet
student needs, and having highly qualified teachers (Williams, Kirst, & Haertel, 2005).
Other factors that contribute to high achievement are reading instruction in all academic
areas, the learning environment, and flexible funding (Izumi, Coburn, & Cox, 2002).
These universal external factors work collaboratively to ensure that each student learns at
the highest levels.
9
By implementing these best research-based practices, effective schools have
shown promise in narrowing the achievement gap. However, the number of schools that
are narrowing the achievement gap and sustaining success is small. Few schools actually
achieve an equitable education for all students; thus, the achievement gap problem
persists. Often, schools that address the achievement gap problem are not consistent and
individual factors are rarely sustainable (Barton & Cooley, 2009). This problem is of
particular importance in urban and inner-city school districts that have a significant
population of at-risk minority youth. The problem is that only a few schools are making
progress in closing the achievement gap, and minority student achievement has lasting
effects for the individual, school, community, and nation (American Institute of
Research, 2008).
This lack of sustainability in narrowing the achievement gap formulated the main
premise for the case study design of this study. The research literature is clear that there
is a disparity in academic achievement between minority and low-socioeconomic
students and their White and Asian counterparts as demonstrated on standardized
achievement tests. Utilizing the case study design and examining a school that has
narrowed the achievement gap and sustained success over at least 3 years will relate the
unknown factor of how to achieve sustainability and its related factors. The case study
school will shed light on what factors are necessary to sustain success. Sustainability is
of paramount importance when schools are seeking to be effective and meet all studentsC'
academic needs, especially low-performing minority students who are a majority at the
particular school that was studied.
10
The purpose of this case study was to identify factors that contributed to closing
the achievement gap in a highly populated minority and urban elementary school. In a
larger context, the findings were compared to other successful schools studied by the
dissertation group and analyzed. It is unclear from the research what factors or best
practices narrow the achievement gap and are essential to sustain success over a period of
time. It is unclear which cultural norms, practices, and programs have allowed successful
elementary schools to narrow the achievement gap. The literature does not clearly
delineate which factors are necessary to a school or key stakeholders that want to close
the achievement gap and sustain that success. This study has attempted to clearly
delineate which factors are essential to retain over time to close the achievement gap.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was to identify a school and its cultural norms, practices,
and programs that have succeeded in reducing and effectively closing the achievement
gap over time. An examination of these effective practices and their sustainability in a
school setting formulated the purpose of the study. A thematic dissertation group of nine
doctoral candidates established the focus of this study; the model was an effective way to
compare findings and look at correlations among schools (King & Lopez, 2008). The
researchers conjointly established instruments and a conceptual framework for the
research process that included document review, surveys, interviews, and observations.
Schools in this study were identified by a demographic set in which (a) 40% or more
students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch (NSLP), (b) the student population was
at least 50% non-White, (c) the Academic Performance Index (API) had grown
11
significantly over the previous 3 years, and (d) the schools had shown evidence of closing
the achievement gap for the previous 3 years according to subgroup population data.
Through data collection methodology such as document review, observations, and
interviews, this study elicited the best practices that schools employ to narrow the
achievement gap and sustain success. This study sought to identify the best practices that
successful schools have employed to sustain narrowing the achievement gap.
Research Questions
1. What are the cultural norms that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
2. What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
Significance of the Study
This research case study can assist similar schools that desire to narrow or close
the achievement gaps and sustain success. Results of this study could have profound
implications for educators who want to improve the education of at-risk and minority
populations. By identifying the factors that an individual school site utilizes to narrow
the achievement gap and sustain academic improvement for minority children, the best
practices can serve as a model to other school sites that have similar educational
challenges. Public education needs effective models to emulate in closing the achieve-
ment gap. This study can provide a greater understanding of what practices work over a
12
series of years in narrowing the achievement gap. Site administrators need evidence of
best practices and research that supports these practices. The findings of this case study
will assist site administrators and future research in the domain of sustainability.
Limitations
The generalizability of this study is limited due to the nature of case study design
(Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003). The case study in this research is limited to one school with a
comparative value to other schools by the thematic group dissertation. The research had
interna#'7)#2-2/*F'!>("7"69'/!"'+/&-*C+ external validity was limited because other settings
and populations may not replicate the same sustained success. The school site was
specific and purposeful, sampling was utilized; thus, the overall school community, staff,
administration, and ethnic make-up are not necessarily generalizable to the educational
community at large. Researcher bias was strong throughout the study, as the researcherCs
own bias was confronted daily, both personally and professionally. However, researcher
bias was minimized by triangulation and supporting claims with evidence (Gall et al.,
2003).
Time was limited as the study was bound by a particular time frame. This
researcher identified themes and constructs in a relatively, short time frame. The time
frame produced a snapshot of the school site and its effective practices; there could be
other viable factors that were not identified in the data collection.
A possible limitation to this study was the digressing economy. In a declining
economy, some of the effective practices could no longer exist; thus, sustaining success
may be problematic for the school site.
13
Delimitations
As one study in a group of nine thematic research studies in which each group
member selected one school where the case study would be conducted, there were
delimitations. The school site that was studied did not have a significant population of
African American students. Qualitative data were collected through interviews, observa-
tions, surveys, and document review; thus, the research was only as reliable as the instru-
mentation used. Data were analyzed using current research as a theoretical foundation:
Clark and EstesCs gap analysis and Bolman and DealCs four frames of organizational
leadership.
The criteria used to select the school were bounded to ensure that all schools fit
the model of narrowing the achievement gap. The criteria included having a significant
minority population, located within an urban environment, showing evidence of
narrowing the achievement gap evidenced by standardized assessment results, and at least
40% of its students received free or reduced-price lunches. The thematic group elected to
utilize the API as a measure of standardized assessment results. Also, the study was
bounded by an elementary school because of the researcherCs unique interest and geo-
graphic proximity. The school site was located within the school district in which the
researcher worked and the researcher had prior knowledge about the districtCs programs
that were utilized to instruct all students. However, the researcher had no prior knowl-
edge of the particular school studied; thus, objectivity was maintained.
14
Assumptions
The researcher assumed that all participantsC responses were accurate and honest.
The researcher also assumed that collected data reflected the school site and its practices.
It was assumed that the data collected via document review were valid and accurate. The
researcher assumed that factors such as cultural norms, programs, and practices can
narrow or close the achievement gap.
Definition of Terms
Academic Performance Index (API): CaliforniaCs ranking of schools by academic
performance and growth using a numeric index or scale of scores that ranges from 200 to
1000, with 800 being the statewide performance target. The API score is used to rank
schools with all others of the same type (elementary, middle, high) in the state and,
separately, the 100 schools most similar in terms of student demographics, teacher
qualifications, and other factors (EdSource, 2007).
Accountability: The notion that people or an organization should be held
responsible for improving student achievement and should be rewarded or sanctioned for
their success or lack of success in doing so (EdSource, 2009).
Achievement gap: A term that refers to disparity in academic achievement
between minority and low-socioeconomic students and their White and Asian counter-
parts as demonstrated on standardized achievement tests.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Under NCLB, each state develops and
implements measures for determining whether its schools and local educational agencies
achieve AYP, with the target of 100% of all students reaching at least proficiency level
15
by 2014. In California, AYP consists of four areas: participation rate, school-wide
proficiency, subgroup proficiency and graduation rates (California Department of
Education [CDE], 2008).
California Standards Test (CST): A group of tests that measure progress to
CaliforniaCs state-adopted academic content standards. The tests are given to students in
Grades 2-11 at public schools in California in English-Language Arts, Mathematics,
Science, and History-Social Studies (CDE, 2009).
Culture: A pattern of beliefs, norms, values, and traditions that have been formed
over time .
Cultural norms:
Behavior patterns that are typical of specific groups. Such behaviors are learned
from parents, teachers, peers, and many others whose values, attitudes, beliefs,
and behaviors take place in the context of their own organizational culture. Some
norms are healthy and some are not. Some contribute to the betterment of indivi-
duals, families, and communities; others are precisely the kinds of high-risk
behaviors that mainstream American society would like to reduce or eliminate.
Conflict or uncertainty over which cultural norms should be acceptable and which
circumstances has contributed to change and instability in the fields of education
and prevention during recent years. Cultural norms often are so strongly
ingrained in an individualCs daily life that the individual may be unaware of
certain behaviors. Until these behaviors are seen in the context of a different
culture with different values and beliefs, the individual may have difficulty
recognizing and changing them. (North Central Regional Educational Laboratory,
1020, para. 1)
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA): The federal law affecting K-12
education, originally enacted in 1965 as part of the War on Poverty. It was created to
support the education of the countryCs poorest children. Congress must reauthorize it
every 6 years; NCLB is the latest and most dramatic revision since ESEACs creation
(EdSource, 2009).
16
English Language Learner (ELL): A student who has been identified via the
Home Language Survey as speaking a language other than English or the primary home
language is other than English (EdSource, 2004a).
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): A national test given to
specific grade levels in specific subjects in alternate years. A small sample of students
representative of the state is tested. NAEP scores can be compared to national averages
(EdSource, 2009).
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): Federal legislative act that reauthor-
ized ESEA, the initial federal law affecting education from kindergarten through high
school. NCLB was signed into law in 2002 and developed from four primary principles:
accountability for results, more choices for parents, greater local control and flexibility,
and an emphasis on utilizing scientific research (i.e., best practices; EdSource, 2007).
Program Improvement (PI): A mandatory intervention program for schools and
districts that fail to make AYP for 2 consecutive years. The interventions or sanctions
become more severe if the school or district continues to fail to make AYP; eventually,
restructuring can be required (EdSource, 2007).
School Accountability Report Card (SARC): A system by which each school in
California annually provides information about the school to the general public. The
primary purpose is to inform the public of the student achievement, school environment,
resources, staffing information, and demographics of the school site (Edsource, 2009).
Similar schools ranking: Comparison of a school to 100 other schools of the same
type and similar demographic characteristics (CDE, 1008).
17
Socioeconomically disadvantaged student: A student who participates in the free/
reduced-price lunch program or whose parents are not high school graduates (Edsource,
2009).
Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR): A standardized test that measures
student progress in meeting CaliforniaCs content standards in Grades 2-11 (Edsource,
2009).
Title I: One of 10 sections in NCLB; provides funds for educationally disad-
vantaged students, including migrant workersC children. Funding is based on the number
of low-income students in the school and is intended to supplement district and state
funds (Edsource, 2009).
Urban school: School characterized by (a) an ethnically diverse student popula-
tion, (b) a large ELL student population or significant subgroup population, (c) a signifi-
cant number of socioeconomically disadvantaged students (40% or more of the students
qualifying for free or reduced-price lunches, or a numerically significant subgroup on the
API).
O rganization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is presented in five chapters. Chapter 1 presents the overview,
statement of the problem, and purpose and significance of the study and serves to estab-
lish the foundation for the case study; the chapter addresses limitations, delimitations,
assumptions, and definitions of terms. Chapter 2 is a review of the literature pertaining
to the achievement gap. The achievement gap is discussed in its historical context,
accountability structures, and relevant theoretical perspectives, as well as best practices
18
for narrowing the achievement gap according to the literature. Chapter 3 explains the
research design, conceptual framework, and model and describes the sample and
population, the data collection process, and analysis of the data. Chapter 4 reports the
findings, including data analysis and interpretation. Chapter 5 summarizes the findings,
generates conclusions, and presents recommendations for future research.
19
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The review of the literature is presented to enhance understanding of the achieve-
ment gap and its importance to all key stakeholders in urban schools. The four major
topics related to the achievement gap problem are the history of education and relevant
national reports, current accountability structures that highlight the need to close the
achievement gap, the definition and factors influencing the achievement gap, and the
effective practices that are closing the achievement gap. The history of the achievement
gap and significant national reports are reviewed. The issue of accountability and the
directives of NCLB legislation as it relates to the achievement gap are explored. The
definition of the achievement gap and related factors are discussed. Effective educational
practices are outlined and reviewed. These effective research-based practices include
effective leadership, formative and summative data, professional learning communities
(PLC), standards-based curriculum, quality instruction by qualified teachers, effective
staff development, an effective learning environment, high-quality early education
programs, and daily intervention for disadvantaged students.
The achievement gap has persisted over many generations and is a growing
concern in the United States. Historically, educating minority students was not addressed
in the United States until landmark judicial cases brought the inequalities to the attention
of educators and policymakers (Patterson, 2001). The current accountability structure
illuminates the pressing concern for the achievement gap to be examined and remediated
(Cross, 2004b). Minority student populations are increasing at a significant rate and
20
White student populations are decreasing; thus, the achievement gap is becoming a larger
issue for society. The economy in the United States and around the globe is being
impacted by numerous factors; however, the achievement gap is a problem that affects
the economy negatively. Addressing the achievement gap through policy and legislative
actions has not adequately narrowed or closed the achievement gap. The problem for this
case study is that, unless this achievement gap problem is resolved, students, parents,
educational stakeholders, policy makers, society, and a globalized world are doomed to
dismal results academically, economically, socially, and globally.
The definition of achievement gap has shifted the focus from typically African
and minority students to a larger context of disadvantaged populations (Edsource,
2004b). Numerous factors such as historical inequalities, judicial decisions, national
reports on achievement and the achievement gap, current accountability structures, and
family structures and cultures collided to enlarge the achievement gap phenomenon
(EdSource, 2004b; Harris & Herrington, 2006; Lee, 2002). Many promising research-
based practices are effective in narrowing or eliminating the gap. Through research of
the existing literature that focuses on practices that have narrowed or closed the achieve-
ment gap, it is hoped that effective practices will be evident in schools over a significant
period of time defined as sustainability and, thus, implementation of these effective
practices by schools with high populations of disadvantaged students will close the
achievement gap (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2006; Schmoker, 1999).
21
History of the Achievement Gap and Public Policy
To fully understand the nature of the achievement gap, a brief history of education
in the United States is presented, reviewing significant historical events through legis-
lative actions and current accountability structures (Harris & Harrington, 2006). The
Constitution of the United States authorizes education under the Fourteenth Amendment.
However, the Constitution does not specifically mention education; therefore, the
authority of education resides primarily within the states. Education policy and practice
have been interpreted and implemented differently among the states (Zirkel, 2001).
The history of segregation has been challenged via landmark judicial decisions
(Zirkel, 2002). In the past decade the implementation of state standards and current
accountability structures, both federal and state, have illuminated the need for an analysis
of the achievement gap problem. Academic rigor has become a national buzz word,
defined by high school competency tests and more stringent coursework, state standards,
and assessment tests for students. This academic acceleration has made key stakeholders
aware of the achievement gap problem. Addressing the achievement gap has been an
underlying assumption throughout the judicial process and legislative policies; however,
policy outlined the benchmarks for student achievement for all students. Many large-
scale studies have been conducted to examine the achievement gap and the common
practices that are helping to close the achievement gap in effective schools (Williams et
al., 2005). The achievement gap has occurred throughout the history of the United States
and this problem will continue without adequate research-based practices. A review of
these issues will illuminate the need for an analysis of the achievement gap problem.
22
A brief review of judicial decisions and desegregation as it relates to the achieve-
ment gap problem is presented. Desegregation via landmark judicial decisions, expand-
ing fiscal resources, and social pressures affected the academic access that minority
students acquired over the past century in the United States (Zirkel, 2002). A discussion
of two crucial documents, The Coleman Report (Coleman et al., 1966) and A Nation at
Risk (Guthrie & Springer, 2004) are review because these two documents addressed the
issue of equal opportunity and access for all students, including disadvantaged and
minority students. The implementation of state standards and current accountability
structures are discussed as related to the achievement gap.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees all citizens equal
protection under state and federal law. The Constitution is the highest level of law in the
country and establishes powers over education. This guarantee of equal protection
includes the prohibition of discrimination in U.S. public schools (Russo, 2004). The right
to an education is deferred to state law; however, the U.S. Supreme Court has the
authority to supersede state legislation that is of federal interest. In 1954 the Supreme
Court set precedent about minority education and educational access by minority students
(Zirkel, 2002). The landmark cases of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka and others
shifted the appearance of traditional classrooms, schools, and school districts by allowing
minority students access to traditionally White schools and acknowledging a disparity in
the education of disadvantaged students. After more than 50 years of segregation, the
.separate but equal1 doctrine of Plessey v. Ferguson was struck down and Brown v.
Board of Education (1954) ruled that segregation was unconstitutional (Zirkel, 2002).
23
The Brown decision became the landmark event by which all federal laws and court
decisions affecting civil rights in public education are measured (Wong & Nicotera,
2004).
Minority children were deprived of equal educational opportunities, such as
adequate facilities, highly qualified teachers, and access to the core curriculum. The
Brown decision allowed access to better schools and teachers that had previously been
denied to minority children. As a result of the Brown decision, local school districts
poured fiscal resources into largely minority schools in an attempt to keep minority
students from changing schools. The fiscal resources included federal dollars to serve
disadvantaged students (Cross, 2004b). The Brown decision acknowledged the dis-
crimination that minority students faced and laid the groundwork for crucial conversa-
tions about the achievement gap problem. The fiscal resources allotted to minorities
academic resources such as adequate facilities, desegregated schools, and qualified
teachers that had previously been unavailable to them (Cross, 2004b).
In 1966 the Coleman Report (Coleman et al., 1966) titled Equality of Educational
Opportunity was published. The study was one of the largest to date, with over 150,000
students in the sample. This critical document highlighted the educational opportunity or
lack thereof for minority students. The Coleman Report showed performance on tests in
mathematics, reading comprehension, verbal ability, and nonverbal associations. The
students were tested for their academic achievement and categorized by ethnic and
cultural groups. The Coleman Report stated that student background and socioeconomic
status were as important in determining educational outcomes as was adequate financing.
24
It also found that schools did not remediate between high- and low-socioeconomic
students; the larger finding was that the gap in achievement was due to home environ-
ment or background. The Coleman Report essentially blamed minority student failure on
factors outside of the schooling environment and stated that educator reform would not
be able to remediate. Thus, the Coleman Report confirmed what popular opinion postu-
lated: The achievement gap was a problem that educators could not solve and that was
beyond their scope of influence.
Next, legislators passed the landmark ESEA in 1965, providing funding for
disadvantaged students to reduce poverty in the United States (Cross, 2004a). The
background behind this initiative was that President Johnson, a former teacher, was a
strong believer in equity and education. Having been raised in poverty, Johnson believed
that the answer to overcoming poverty was education; thus, he advocated strongly for the
passage of a bill that would provide funding for disadvantaged students. The primary
function of the ESEA was funding for primary and secondary education; this funding was
earmarked for staff development, instructional resources and materials, and increased
parental involvement. Title I of ESEA gave federal dollars to districts that served low-
socioeconomic students, typically 40% or more of the schoolCs total population (Cross,
2004a). The ESEA provided funding without an accountability structure in place to
monitor the effectiveness of federal dollars (Cross, 2004a). The ESEA was set to expire
in 1970; however, it has been reauthorized every 5 years since its initial inception in
1965. In 2002, the ESEA was reauthorized as NCLB, to include the current accounta-
bility component (Manna, 2004).
25
In 1983 A Nation at Risk (Guthrie & Springer, 2004) highlighted the concern that
American students were not the leaders in terms of .innovation1 throughout the world.
This lack of competitiveness, according to the report, led policy makers to focus on
academic content, especially in mathematics, science, and foreign language, for all
students, including minority and underperforming students (Harris & Harrington, 2006).
A Nation at Risk highlighted the concern that American students were losing their
competitive edge and status in a globalized economy. The document set precedence for
excellent academics for the individual learner. Excellence was identified in public
schools by setting high expectations and goals for all learners, including minority and
disadvantaged students. Programs and educators were put in place to assist students in
reaching their goals. American workers who could skillfully adapt to a competitive
world would fuel the idea that .innovation1 would keep American workers competitive
globally. The key to A Nation at Risk is that it illuminated the concern that American
students were not and would not become the leaders of the world. This report convinced
political leaders to support the collection of student achievement data across the United
States as a national assessment, which is known today as the NAEP.
After a Nation At Risk was published, educational institutions and policymakers
focused on the recommendations highlighted in the report. The focus shifted to rigorous
course content, especially in terms of high school proficiency and more stringent course
requirements. The report recommended more rigorous and measurable standards for all
schools, colleges, and universities. Extended time should also be included in accelerating
student progress (Gardner, 1983). Teachers needed to be more adequately prepared in
26
teacher preparatory coursework and teacher salaries increased. These recommendations
were implemented slowly throughout the country in the next decades.
In the 1980s and 1990s many states adopted standards that delineated the educa-
tional content that a particular student was required to master within a given year. Imple-
mentation of state standards and accountability structures set the stage for increased
accountability for all students, including minority and disadvantaged youths. Before this
time frame, there were universal debate and subjectivity within individual classrooms,
schools, and districts about how and what to utilize to educate students. Concurrently,
there was a focus on accountability, which included promotion and graduation examina-
tions, assessments of all students, and incentives and sanctions for schools that improved
or regressed. A Nation at Risk recommendations shifted the focus of daily instruction
from the traditional model to a model that required rigorous coursework and implemented
state standards and accountability assessments that publicized all student achievement,
including the academic achievement gap.
The current accountability structure that highlights the achievement gap is the
2002 Title I NCLB that Congress passed in December 2001 and President George W.
Bush signed in January 2002. NCLB replaced ESEA. President Bush frequently
promised that the education reforms that he enacted would .leave no child behind1 and
would defeat what he called the .soft bigotry of low expectations1 (Manna, 2004, p. 126).
NCLB placed a spotlight on academic achievement by all students, specifically
students who were traditionally defined as underperforming as determined by standard-
ized testing (Manna, 2004). The central purpose of NCLB is ./>'",+&6"'/!)/')##'@!2#-6",'
27
have a fair, equal and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and
reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging state academic achievement standards
),-'+/)/"')@)-"02@')++"++0",/+1 (EdSource, 2004b, p. 1). NCLB utilized studentsC
academic performance as the essential measure of accountability and had strong
sanctions for schools, districts, and states that did not meet the stated benchmarks.
NCLB allowed each state to define its own proficiency levels; thus, proficiency targets
were different across states. At this juncture, all students receiving federal funding must
be deemed proficient by the year 2014. The achievement gap would be gone and closed,
according to NCLB. The accountability structure of NCLB rewards or sanctions schools
that fail to make AYP according to yearly benchmarks. The lofty and ambitious goal of
NCLB supported the ideology that all students can and will learn. NCLB reports
academic achievement by all students, including what are termed subgroup populations,
which include all ethnicities, ELL students, socioeconomically disadvantaged students,
and Special Education students. All schools, districts, and states must report their efforts
to narrow or close the achievement gap (EdSource, 2004b). The purpose of NCLB
(2004) was a tightening accountability structure, which highlighted the disparity in
achievement among various subgroups. This accountability structure placed a glaring
spotlight on the achievement gap problem that is in dire need of remediation.
In 2008 the NAEP spotlighted the growing achievement gap problem in the
United States. According to the Na/2>,C+'8"$>6/'E)6-'%>6':GGH'IJK4K'L"$)6/0",/'>%'
Education, 2008), minority studentsC test scores have increased since 2004, which was
good news; however, White studentsC test scores have also increased, which maintains
28
the achievement gap. The national test is administered to a representative sample of
26,000 students ages 9, 13, and 17. The average scores have improved 12 points since
1971 for 9-year-olds and 4 points for 13-year-olds; however, there has been no significant
difference for 17-year-olds in reading. In mathematics, both 9- and 13-year-oldsC scores
increased since 1973. The 9-year-olds increased 24 points and the 13-year-olds increased
15 points. Again, the 17-year-olds did not increase significantly since 1973. Black
students have increased 34 points on average since 1971 in reading and Hispanic students
have increased 25 points in the 9-year-old age group. The 13-year-old Black group has
increased by 25 points and scores by Hispanic 13-year-olds have increased by 10 points.
This evidence is similar in mathematics. The caveat is that all student groups are increas-
ing; thus, the achievement gap is not narrowing for at-risk populations when comparing
the Black and White groups or Hispanic and White groups (NAESP, 2008). The achieve-
ment gap is continuing, according to national data assessment results.
In California, closing the achievement gap has been of paramount importance for
the past decade as the percentage of minority and ELL students increases. The State
Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack OCConnell, commissioned a report to develop,
implement, and sustain a plan that holds the state of California accountable to close the
achievement gap. The report, released in January 2008, highlighted the need for address-
ing the achievement gap and its economic, moral, and societal imperatives. The main
themes addressed in the report were access, culture and climate, expectations, and
strategies. Access was defined as the availability of high-quality educational opportuni-
ties for all students and can include effective instruction and teachers and intervention for
29
at-risk populations. Culture and climate included values, beliefs, traditions, and attitudes
that all key stakeholders have at the school site each day. Every stakeholder must hold
the highest expectations for their students, especially minority and disadvantaged youths.
Strategies are effective or best practices that schools employ to ensure that each student
learns, especially the usage of data to make informed decisions (EdSource, 2008).
Underlying these four main themes are specific strategies, programs, and absolute
essentials to close the achievement gap. This report echoes the themes that are woven
throughout the literature and are addressed in detail herein (Munitz, 2008).
California utilizes approximately $2 billion in Title I funding to comply with
the accountability requirements of NCLB. The Title I money funds the Reading First
Initiative, Even Start, staff development for teachers and administrators, and many other
school reform programs in California. As long as California accepts the fiscal resources
of federal funding, the state, districts, and schools are required to comply with NCLB
provisions (EdSource, 2004b).
California operates under a dual accountability structure: NCLB and API. The
SPI gives each school and district in California a numerical score or one-number
summary of various test scores, including subgroup populations. The API is a numerical
value ranging from 200 to 1000, and California has set 800 as the target for all schools.
Any school that does not reach the 800 target must demonstrate an upward growth of 5%
of all students in every subgroup from year to year. The assessment that is utilized
currently is the CST, which is aligned to the rigorous, California state standards that were
adopted in 1996. The API does not recognize individual students or same students from
30
year to year; rather, it summarizes a schoolCs performance from year to year. All schools
in California are required to meet the demands of the API yearly. All subgroup popula-
tions, including all ethnic minorities, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and
special education students, must meet the specified benchmarks and are reported publicly
when the schools do not meet their targets. Schools that fail to meet the benchmarks are
labeled in need of improvement and sanctions are placed on the school and district. The
high-stakes accountability can include sanctions such as restructuring, school choice,
offering tutoring services, new curriculum, and change to a charter school or even school
closure, depending on a variety of factors. These elements of the dual accountability
structure highlight the need to address the achievement gap that is prevalent in California
schools today (King, 2008).
Definition of the Achievement Gap and Related Factors
The achievement gap has various definitions, each of which transfers assump-
tions; thus, a definition of the achievement gap is necessary to avoid ambiguity. Some
scholars and laymen define the achievement gap in terms of racial and economic achieve-
ment gaps; however, there is a broader definition that encompasses the very core of the
achievement gap. Wikipedia defines the achievement gap as !refers to the observed
disparity on a number of educational measures between the performance of groups of
students, especially groups defined by gender, race/ethnicity, ability, and socioeconomic
status1'I$)6)'MKN'For the purpose of this paper, the achievement gap is a disparity in
proficiency based on standard assessments between Caucasian, Asian, and subgroup
populations, specifically ethnic minorities, low-socioeconomic students, special
31
education students, and ELL students (Anderson, Medrich, & Fowler, 2007; Chenoweth,
2004; Lee, 2002; Lynch, 2006).
The achievement gap has lasting effects for the economy, society, and the social
structure as a whole. The population that is most affected by the achievement gap are
minority and socioeconomically disadvantage students; however, the entire social
structure of America is affected by the achievement gap (Coleman et al., 1966). Minority
students account for a small number of students who attend top-rated institutions of
higher education. Routinely, African Americans and other minorities are underrepre-
sented in higher education institutions. The ratio of White students versus minority
students is staggeringly disproportionate in terms of real numbers (Hassell & Godard-
McNiff, 2008). Minority and disadvantaged students perform less well than their White
counterparts on the NAEP (NAEP, 2008). This achievement gap has persisted for
decades and continues to increase (Lee, 2002). The lasting effects of the achievement
gap contribute to limited access to higher education institutions and high-paying positions
and increased factors that contribute to poverty. The rapidly growing population of
minority students in the United States makes addressing the achievement gap important,
as the problem will continue to grow.
According to a Gallup Poll conducted in 2004, Americans largely blamed the
achievement gap on parental involvement, home life and upbringing, student interest, and
community environment. However, non-White respondents said that the achievement
gap was related to school quality. Even though most Americans do not state that school
quality is the largest contributing factor to the achievement gap, 56% of Americans
32
agreed that schools are responsible for closing the gap. The highest factor identified by
the Gallup Poll for closing the gap was parental involvement (97%) and having increased
instructional time for low-performing students (about 90%). These findings are based on
a phone interview sampling of 1,003 U.S. adults in 2004 (Ray, 2004, 2004).
One-dimensional explanations do not adequately explain the factors that contri-
bute to the achievement gap, as the problem has multiple facets. Internal and external
factors contribute to the achievement gap problem. Within many studies, the factors that
contribute to the achievement gap overlap. A synthesis of the related factors culminates
with the dominant factors for the achievement gap: historical inequalities, cultural or
ethnic differences between the home and school environment, low expectations among
the stakeholders for minority student achievement, and a lack of access to an adequate
education for minority students. According to Lee (2002), socioeconomic and family
conditions, youth culture and student behaviors, schooling conditions and practices are
among myriad subfactors associated with minority student achievement.
Historically, minority students have had an inequitable school environment that
led to inequitable outcomes in terms of achievement and access. Minority students
largely grow up with limited fiscal resources. Often, minority families are single-parent
families, which negatively impacts minority students. The external factors include
inadequate school finance, lowered expectations for minority students, home to school
culture, the socialization of minority students, and school culture versus home culture.
Many school personnel exhibit lowered expectations for minority students, which
perpetuates the achievement gap. Social, family, and economic factors contribute to the
33
achievement gap problem but are not inclusive, as many disadvantaged students succeed
despite these obstacles. Attention to the aforementioned factors has shown increased
academic achievement for minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged students
(Rodgers, Wang, & Gomez-Bellenge, 2004). Each factor is discussed as it relates to the
achievement gap. The factors play a role in the achievement gap problem and must be
mentioned in the context of closing the achievement gap.
According to the literature, socioeconomic status contributes to the achievement
gap problem. Poverty includes income, education, family structure, and neighborhood
conditions. Linking socioeconomic status and test score data reveals a difference in test
scores by a standard deviation of 15 points, which means that low socioeconomic status
results in lower test scores (Duncan & Magnuson, 2005). Students who are denied the
bare necessities, including food, adequate shelter, neighborhood safety, and high mobility
rates (moving from school to school), often struggle in the academic environment.
Minority children on average have 2 to 3 times the food insecurity and hunger of White
households (Barton, 2003). Children who grow up in persistent poverty are at a signifi-
cant disadvantage compared to their middle-class White counterparts. Low socioeco-
nomic status is not a sole factor in explaining the achievement gap but there is a correla-
tion between academic achievement and socioeconomic status (Lynch, 2006).
Family structure can contribute to the achievement gap problem. Single-parent
families comprise a large majority of minority student households; often, the families are
led by a female. Children from minority families are less likely to have access to two
parents in the home, which contributes to lower resources, such as time, access, and
34
tangible necessities. Research has pointed to the difference in achievement between
children of two-income and single-income families due to the lower income of single-
parent families (Lynch, 2006). Single parents are typically absent from the home more
often because they have to work and provide for the family alone. This practice
contributes to lower well-being physically and psychologically for minority students,
which makes education difficult for these students (Barton, 2003). The family structure
can positively or negatively affect academic achievement for minority students.
Socialization is seen as a process of acquisition of appropriate norms, attitudes,
self-images, values, and role behaviors that enable acceptance in the group and effective
performance of new roles; in the schooling context, students need to assimilate into the
mainstream school culture to be successful (Long & Hadden, 1985). Students from
different racial groups have difficulty in navigating the conflicting and contradictory
social systems of which they are a part (Davidson, 1996). Some examples include
primary language, conflicting values, access to education, and other competing social
systems. The social challenges that minority and disadvantaged students face on a daily
basis in the school setting in terms of racial relations makes the socialization process
difficult, especially when the social systems are in contradiction (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
The socialization that takes place away from the school environment or in the home
setting makes navigating the school pathways difficult for minority students and
contributes to the achievement gap.
In the school environment, disparity persists in terms of socioeconomic resources
and adequate school financing. As the home environment has lasting academic effects on
35
at-risk student populations, the school system has inadequate funding, which leads to
poor institutional environments and teacher quality. School funding inequality shows
evidence that urban students are more likely to be funded less on average than their
suburban neighbors (Ladson-Billings, 2007). Research suggests that poor and minority
youth are less likely to have adequate facilities and highly qualified teachers (Haycock,
2001). Thus, inequitable funding and allocation of resources add to the achievement gap
problem.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) attested to the factor of culture as a main
premise in low student achievement by minority students. The disparity is actually a
disconnect between the culture of home and the culture of school. For example, in Latino
families there is a focus on respectfulness and good behavior, which is essential for
children to learn; within the school environment there is a focus on academic achieve-
ment and competitiveness to excel. These two priorities are often in conflict, which
creates a disparity among achievement levels. To remediate this cultural problem,
Gallimore and Goldenberg suggested school reform that acknowledges and bridges the
home-to-school cultural connection. The setting or model in which a minority student is
socialized highly determines the ability to perform well academically. Cooperation
among key stakeholders and establishing a school environment that mirrors the home
situation is ideal (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Fullan (2000) called this cultural shift
a .reculturation1 and strongly suggested that it is key to improving schooling outcomes.
Creating conditions that foster a collaborative culture ensures that all students learn
36
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). This focus on culture suggests a relearning on the part
of all key stakeholders, including the school, home, and family.
Practices That A re Reducing the Achievement Gap
Many large-scale studies have been completed regarding the achievement gap.
Both external and internal factors contribute to diminishing the achievement gap problem
in the United States. The internal factors that have been found to contribute to closing
the achievement gap include effective leadership in terms of district, site and distributed
leadership teams, prioritizing student achievement by holding high expectations for all
students by every stakeholder, implementing a standards-based curriculum with effective
instructional practices, using assessment and other measurable data to meet student
needs, and having highly-qualified teachers (Williams et al., 2005). Factors that contri-
bute to high achievement include reading instruction in all academic areas, the learning
environment, and flexible funding (Izumi et al., 2002). Internal factors work collabor-
atively to ensure that each student learns at the highest level. External factors include
positive home and school culture, increased family socioeconomic status, stable home
environments, and higher school funding (Nocegura, 2002).
Effective leadership practices at various levels, including site administration,
leadership teams, and district-level administrators, are commonplace in closing the
achievement gap. Leadership was described by Northouse (2007) as a .multidirectional
influence or relationships and leaders are actively involved1'I$K'3). Marzano (2003)
identified school leadership as a factor in effective schools. Strong leadership is a thread
throughout literature reviews that assist in meeting the needs of all learners (Bosker &
37
Scheerens, 1997; Houston, Blankenstein, & Cole, 2007; Levine & Lezotte, 1990;
Sammons, 1999). Within the leadership practices there are subcategories that have been
proven to increase student achievement. The site and district leadership personnel ensure
that effective instructional practices are occurring for every student (Marzano, 2003).
Leaders who act as managers of school improvement to drive school reform and
effective instructional strategies have more effective schools than do leaders that do not
attend to those school-level factors (Williams et al., 2005). Collins (2001) described the
effective leader as a .level 5 leader,1 which included humility, will, ambition, modesty,
and unwavering resolve. Common leadership practices that effective instructional
leaders utilize are use of vision, clear communication, establishing a safe environment,
monitoring individual and school performance, coordinating curriculum, protecting
instructional time, maintaining visibility, providing internal and external rewards for
students and teachers, establishing good quality staff development, creating trusting
relationships, acquiring necessary resources, and supporting teachers. Site leadership is a
key element to school success (LaRocque, 2007; Northouse, 2007).
Effective leadership sets high expectations for all students, regardless of socio-
economic status, race, ethnicity, and so forth. Key leaders know how to manage data and
use the results to inform decisions and measure student performance (National Associa-
tion of Elementary School Principals, 2008). PLCs are built on the premise of effective
leadership teams and building a collaborative team (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 1999). In
a PLC primary goals are to develop a collaborative culture that articulates the mission,
vision, values, and goals of the school site. Collaboration is a purposeful and strategic
38
relationship among key stakeholders at an institution with the primary purpose of
achievement by all students (Houston et al., 2007). A shared mission, vision, values, and
goals are essential for student learning, especially in narrowing the achievement gap
(DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008). The site administration, leadership team, and district
administration are equally responsible for effective leadership that creates conditions
necessary to narrow and close the achievement gap (Marzano, 2003). A cultural norm of
professional learning communities is to collaborate regularly about student achievement
results and utilize this information to make instructional decisions (Eaker, DuFour, &
DuFour, 2002). This collaboration is critical to an organization that wants to meet the
unique learning needs of all students and narrow the achievement gap through collabor-
ative efforts (King & Lopez, 2008).
According to the literature, the use of both formative and summative assessment
data to improve student achievement and instruction is essential. There is a common
statement among educational stakeholders, .Without data, all you have are opinions.1
Effective schools that are closing the achievement gap utilize data in a continual process
of improvement. The data are used to monitor individual student progress, target specific
instructional goals, and analyze assessment results to ensure that each student learns.
Data can be used to identify studentsC strengths and weaknesses and give teachers
feedback on how to tailor instruction to address learning gaps (Eaker et al., 2002). The
use of formative assessments that are ongoing and short in duration is critical in address-
ing student needs (Schmoker, 1999). Summative assessments are utilized to assess
student progress and, within a larger context, address school-wide goals and deficiencies
39
in instruction or curriculum gaps (Symonds, 2003). Students must receive feedback on
their instructional process; assessment data are the critical tool to feedback (Marzano,
2003).
The current trend of building PLCs is built on the foundation of utilizing data to
establish learning goals (DuFour et al., 2006). Data comprise an essential piece of
working toward instructional goals as they informs the educational community about
appropriate actions (Schmoker, 1999). Formative and summative data can be used to
improve teaching and learning to improve student achievement (Williams et al., 2005).
In PLCs, the focus is on continuous improvement via utilizing assessment data to ensure
that all students learn. Analysis of data is essential to identify best instructional practices
(DuFour et al., 2008). A key focus is on results and utilizing data to analyze effective
practices.
Schools that implement a standards-based curriculum or instructional program
successfully have higher academic achievement for all student populations, including
subgroup populations. A challenging curriculum that is aligned to the standards has been
shown to increase student achievement (Haycock, 2001). Many low-performing students
continue to be taught with a low-level curriculum, which is contrary to what the research
shows. Students who take rigorous coursework learn more and perform better on
standardized tests (Haycock, 2001). Marzano (2003) defined the opportunity to learn as
the strongest relationship with student achievement, including the intended, implemented,
and attained curriculum. The intended curriculum is the content specified by the state or
district for a particular course or grade level. The implemented curriculum is what the
40
teacher actually teaches students in the classroom. The attained curriculum is what is
actually learned by students. By focusing on the attained curriculum, academic achieve-
ment increases for all students.
Datnow and Castellano (2000) discussed the ideology that curriculum programs
are often adopted but rarely implemented as planned. She concluded that instructional
leadership via a highly knowledgeable principal about the adopted curriculum assisted
schools in effective curriculum implementation. Schools that faithfully ensure that all
students attain the required curriculum effectively close the achievement gap as all
students have the same opportunity to learn (Marzano, 2003). Instructional time is
critical for students to learn the curriculum and is a main premise in closing the achieve-
ment gap (Fielding, Kerr, & Rosier, 2004).
Within the core curriculum there is consistency and continuity. The overall
cohesiveness of curriculum within and across grade levels is evident. Datnow and
Castellano (2000) provided evidence that the curriculum is spiral in nature and builds on
previous learning. Classroom instruction utilizing the curriculum is based on standards.
The curriculum has differentiated instructional strategies and plans for meeting the needs
of diverse learners. The clear expectation is that all teachers will utilize the adopted core
curriculum with fidelity and rigor (Williams et al., 2005). The adopted curriculum should
be rigorous to avoid lower content that encourages less performance by disadvantaged
students (Johnson, 2002).
Quality instruction by highly qualified teachers is an essential component of
educating at-risk student populations, according to the literature. Numerous studies have
41
documented that low-income and minority students routinely are shortchanged on teacher
quality (Haycock, 2001; Lynch, 2006; Schwartz, 2001). The most needful students are
often placed in classrooms with less experienced, less educated, and less skilled teachers;
thus, academic achievement vary greatly within a school setting. Highly qualified
teachers are masters of their content and have on-the-job experience and stellar pedagogi-
cal skills to transfer knowledge to children (Peske & Haycock, 2006). The National
Commission on Teaching and AmericaCs Future (1996) strongly encouraged teacher
content knowledge and research-based instructional strategies, particularly for low-
performing, at-risk, student populations. Student achievement has been linked to
effective or highly qualified teachers (Johnson, 2003; Marzano, 2003). Teacher efficacy
is the belief that individual teachers are able to meet diverse learning needs effectively
(Dembo & Gibson, 1984). High teacher efficacy has been linked to positive student
academic achievement (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993).
Effective staff development that is devoted to research-based practices by all
instructional leaders is essential to closing the achievement gap and instructing all
students at rigorous levels; staff development should include culturally relevant methodo-
logies. Teacher professional development includes opportunities for training linked to
standards, curriculum, effective instructional strategies, higher-order thinking skills,
monitoring student progress through ongoing forms of assessment, and noninstructional
issues such as classroom management and student expectations (Darling-Hammond,
2000).
42
Staff development can be utilized to foster student collaboration of data and
curriculum for student learning. Sharing successful practices among colleagues via staff
development decreases the achievement gap. Collaborative staff development efforts are
a key element in PLCs. A coaching model of professional development can be used to
ensure that teachers display effective instructional practices that are research based and
proven to increase student achievement. The effective staff development program builds
the structure of how to increase student learning from a plethora of instructional
resources. Building a cohesive staff development program affords shared best practices,
developing essential instructional skills, increased staff relationships, and support
structures for teachers to increase student learning (EdSource, 2008).
The learning environment and climate play a pivotal role in promoting academic
achievement at optimal levels. The school climate is embedded within the qualitative
realm of a school site but largely determines the amount of educational access that a
minority or disadvantaged student attains. The learning environment and climate are
expressed in how the students and staff .feel1 about being in school each day (Marzano,
2003). School-wide rules and expectations must be articulated and enforced by school
personnel. This creates an element of safety for all school stakeholders.
Nonacademic factors can and do impact studentsC lives, and the ability of the
school climate to navigate those factors is critical in student achievement (EdSource,
2008). According to U.S. Bureau of Justice (Dinkes, Kemp, Baum, & Snyder, 2008)
statistics, younger children are more likely to be victims of crimes at school. Safety is of
paramount importance within the school climate; schools that attend to this critical aspect
43
of schooling are assisting in school improvement. In a 2001 conference that discussed
school safety, conclusions were drawn from the Columbine school disaster. The top 10
security issues were outsiders on campus, fighting, vandalism, theft, drugs, alcohol,
weapons, malicious acts, parking lot problems, fire alarms, bomb threats, bus problems,
and teacher safety. Within these threatening elements school climate and student safety
issues must be addressed for students to achieve. The State Board holds that students
cannot benefit fully from an educational program unless they attend school regularly in
an environment that is free from physical and psychological harm (California Department
of Education, 2001). School climate can significantly impact the health of a learning
environment either positively or negatively (Freiberg, 1998). Schools with rules and
procedures for behavior minimize disruptions to the classroom environment and student
access to a quality education.
In effective schools there is an element of high expectations and fostering
nurturing relationships for student behavior and academic achievement. The underlying
climate is that all students will not fail or will succeed at high levels within a school that
is closing the achievement gap (Blankenstein, 2004). Students who feel connected with
their learning environment are more apt to achieve academically. Schools that are
closing the achievement gap build nurturing relationships with disadvantaged students
and bridge the gaps that undermine the process of learning (EdSource, 2008). There is an
underlying assumption of shared responsibility in an effective school climate for all
students to learn. In effective schools research, high expectations appear to be more
important to the success of minority students than for White students (Ferguson, 1998).
44
The school culture encompasses myriad factors that contribute or detract from student
learning.
High-quality early childhood education affords socioeconomically disadvantaged
students the opportunity to learn the requisite skills necessary to perform successfully in
later years. The achievement gap is apparent even before students enter school, and
quality preschool programs can assist in bridging the achievement gap. For students to
meet the rigorous demands of NCLB, they must enter school with the requisite skills of
emergent readers and thus, universal preschool is essential for later school success.
Quality early childhood education programs assist students academically and have an
added benefit of assisting families with needed child care. A full-day preschool program
can help all families but specifically socioeconomically and minority students (Zigler &
Finn-Stevenson, 2007). According to Rand (Karoly, Reardon, & Cho, 2007), students
who were enrolled in a preschool program fared better academically than students who
did not attend preschool. Preschool participants are less likely to be enrolled in special
education programs, grade retention, and graduating from high school.
Students who have diverse learning goals need extra assistance within the school
environment to attain their academic goals. This extra assistance can look different at
various schools; however, the core requirement is that individual students are afforded
the opportunity to meet their diverse needs. Schools utilize before- or after-school
tutoring by qualified personnel. Many schools have blocks of instructional time set aside
for intervention, in which all students are working toward individual goals. A key
45
component of intervention is that students work in small or individualized settings to
ensure that their individual goals are met, which would be smaller learning communities.
The Tennessee STAR experiment increased the learning of minority and disad-
vantaged students, which prompted many districts to offer the intervention of class size
reduction (Krueger, Hanushek, & King-Rice, 2002). The at-risk population needs inter-
vention that is specific and targeted to their diverse learning needs. Many effective
intervention programs or initiatives have shown progress in closing the achievement gap
(Bennett, 2004).
The internal factors that close the achievement gap are collectively showing great
promise for minority students; however, the factors working in isolation cannot sustain
closing the achievement gap. There is a gap in the literature in terms of sustainability in
closing the achievement gap. Sustainable success is of critical importance if educators
are to close the achievement gap and meet the needs of all students, specifically under-
performing minority youths. Many school reform efforts show initial success and taper
off due to one or more of the aforementioned factors not being in place. Often, the
dynamic leadership of an individual leads to effectively closing the achievement gap;
however, once that leader is no longer a key stakeholder, the effective reform is not
sustained. In dictionary terms, sustainability refers to longevity and institutionalization,
which refers to something becoming an established practice.
In earlier studies the term sustainability is synonymous with institutionalization
(Datnow, Borman, & Stringfield, 2000). In order to close the achievement gap, a factor
that should be examined is sustainability and its role in effective school reform.
46
Sustainability is the heart of all dilemmas. Its definition is not straightforward. It
is not how to maintain good programs. It is not how to keep going in a linear
fashion. It is not how to keep up relentless energy. Sustainability is the capacity of
a system to engage in the complexities of continuous improvement continuous
with deep values of human purp>+"1'I=#),9':GG;9'$K'O2N
Sustainability is a main factor that is often overlooked in research studies that examine
effective practices in closing the achievement gap. Very few studies have been com-
pleted in sustainability, as many school reforms do not last. The key component of this
paper is to examine, via a case study, sustainable school reform that has been institu-
tionalized or established practices that are the collective norm of the school and its key
stakeholders.
Summary
Research provides clear evidence that there are myriad factors related to closing
the gap, such as effective leadership practices, data utilization, building PLCs, adopting a
standards-based spiral curriculum, quality instruction by highly qualified teachers,
effective staff development, positive climate or a school culture with high expectations,
an effective preschool program, and daily intervention for all students, including low-
performing and gifted students. The above factors show great promise in closing the
achievement gap; however, these factors must be sustainable.
The purpose of this study was to identify a school site that had closed or narrowed
the achievement gap and its best practices as measured on state testing data. The case
study design was aimed to identify the cultural norms, practices, and programs that were
sustainable over time. This idea of sustainability was important, as individual factors that
cannot continue can result in decreased minority student achievement. Schools that can
47
sustain results will close the achievement gap for minority student populations. By way
of observations, interviews surveys, and document review, this study provides a per-
spective about how to close the achievement gap and sustain school reform that ensures
that all students learn. The study also examines what cultural norms, practices, and
programs occurred to close the achievement gap.
48
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the design, sample, data collection, instrumentation, and
process used in data analysis. The purpose of this study was to examine the cultural
norms, programs, and practices that contribute to closing the achievement gap in a school
setting where the school has sustained success over a series of years. As identified in the
review of the literature (Chapter 2), the factors that have contributed to the achievement
gap are historical inequalities, cultural or ethnic differences between the home and school
environment, and a lack of access for minority students to an adequate education.
Effective leadership practices at various levels, including site administration, leadership
teams, and district-level administrators, are commonplace in closing the achievement
gap. According to the literature, myriad factors combine to close the achievement gap;
the data collection tools focused on these factors.
The internal factors examined in this study were school leadership, use of both
formative and summative assessment data, implementation of a standards-based curricu-
lum and instructional program with highly qualified teachers, effective staff development,
implementation of an early childhood education, and intervention for at-risk student
populations. The data collection tools were used to examine these cultural norms,
practices, and programs. The research questions and conceptual framework aligned the
study to examine effective practices and established a pathway for future researchers. As
the study unfolded, consistent themes emerged across the data and across the individual
49
studies within the thematic dissertation group. This process enhanced the findings and
generalizability of this research.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the case study.
1. What are the cultural norms that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
2. What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
Research Design
This case study explored the cultural norms, practices, and programs that school
sites employ to close the achievement gap and sustain success. A qualitative study
assisted the researcher in the inner workings of a particular setting and phenomenon that
cannot be discovered with a quantitative research design (Patton, 2002). In this study, a
qualitative approach was used. The qualitative research design was the .best fit1 for the
research questions in this case study. A case study is a process in which the researcher
examines a purposeful setting that emulates a phenomenon in which the researcher is
interested. Case studies have a depth and breadth that are uncommon in a purely
quantitative study. The one-case study design allowed the researcher to become
intimately acquainted with the participants and organization that the researcher studied.
Gall et al. (2003) described the research from an .emic1 perspective, in which the
50
researcher obtains the perspective of the participants through direct observation. The
terminology thick and rich description is synonymous with case study research; thus, the
qualitative researcherCs role was to provide a holistic portrayal of the phenomenon being
studied (Gall et al., 2003).
The utilization of document review, observations, surveys, and interviews assisted
the researcher to find the information necessary to complete a qualitative research study.
The document review examined critical documents relevant to the research questions.
The researcher conducted a relevant survey with all staff members. The researcher
interviewed key stakeholders and observed the participants in their natural setting over a
period of 5 months. The document review and surveys gave the researcher an overall
picture of the school setting and direction for the observation and interviews. The
observations and interviews provided critical information for the researcher to examine
the cultural norms, programs, and practices in depth. This research case study will assist
similar schools that desire to close the achievement gaps and sustain success. This new
knowledge could assist all students and schools that want to narrow the achievement gap.
The researcher utilized many data collection tools for triangulation; thus, validity and
reliability were strengthened. The data revealed certain themes and trends.
Qualitative research designs are an intensive way of studying a particular
phenomenon and one form is called case study research (Gall et al., 2003). All research
methodologies, including quantitative and qualitative designs, have their limitations and
biases. The case study design was used to illuminate a particular phenomenon and what
the researcher studied. A substantial amount of data was collected to observe the
51
phenomenon and describe it in its natural setting. In this case, the natural setting was the
specific school site; hence, a case study approach was recommended. By examining the
participants in their natural setting, the qualitative researcher developed an understanding
of the complex phenomenon of interest (Gall et al., 2003). In qualitative research, docu-
ment review, surveys, observations, and interviews give the research the depth and
breadth that is unavailable in quantitative research designs. The qualitative research
design process found useful information throughout the school sites and the larger
context of all of the case studies within the thematic dissertation process. By selecting a
school that met the criterion of closing the achievement gap, the researcher had accurate
and reliable findings. The case study was rich with information and assisted the study
(Patton, 2002). Ultimately, the case study design will assist schools with cultural norms,
practices, and programs that will assist in closing the achievement gap in future years.
Conceptual Model and F ramework
Group members in the thematic dissertation process conjointly designed the
conceptual frameworks for this case study. The thematic group consisted of nine doctoral
candidates divided into three subgroups. The group developed the conceptual framework
during spring and summer 2009. The conceptual framework was adapted from Clark and
EstesCs (2002) Turning Research into Results: A Guide to Selecting the Right Perform-
ance Solutions. Clark and Estes (2002) assist organizations in making effective decisions
about performance, products, and services. The main strategy is to describe the effective
products and process that lead to an effective organization. Clark and Estes maintain that
an organization can be effective if it is willing to analyze the organization critically, to set
52
goals, to identify individual performance goals and performance gaps, and to evaluate
results. The performance gaps can include organizational processes and materials,
motivation, and/or knowledge and skill gaps. An organization that adapts this model
continually will see improvement in the organization (Clark & Estes, 2002). Figure 1
provides a graphic representation of this concept.
Figure 1. The conceptual framework proposed by Clark and Estes.
The conceptual framework for this study was created by the thematic dissertation
group and is an adaptation of the Clark and Estes (2002) framework (Figure 2).
53
Figure 2. The conceptual framework designed by the cohort and applied in this study.
Through the research questions, the researchers examined teacher factors that
occurred at the school site that closed the achievement gap. The three research questions
were designed to examine the cultural norms, practices, and programs that effective
schools utilize to close the achievement gap. To gain a deep understanding of the factors
that intertwined to create an effective environment for all students, especially those in
disadvantaged populations, the case study was used.
The cultural norms of a school site are the daily practices that often are unrecog-
nizable but are unique to the school site itself. These collective norms are found in the
daily interactions between the various stakeholders, the expectations that school
54
personnel employ and display; thus, the research question on cultural norms was highly
important to the researcher. Cultural norms include how personnel, parents, and students
are treated upon arrival and interactions with other school personnel. Cultural norms
refer to the undercurrent through all school stakeholders and is not easily identifiable by a
casual observer; however, the researcher attempted to uncover the cultural norms of the
particular school to identify factors that closed the achievement gap.
The practices are the daily operations at a school site that are employed by all
school stakeholders. The main premise of practice is the .how things are done around
here1 mentality in terms of attendance procedures, instructional norms, classroom norms,
school site bulletin boards, and main focus objectives for the school.
The research questions that discussed programs of an effective school will allow
the researcher to discover which programs were making gains in closing the achievement
gap and sustaining success. Programs can include any adopted core or supplemental
programs that the school uses to instruct students.
Sample and Population
This study focused on a single elementary school in an urban elementary school
district (K-5) in the eastern sector of southern California. For this study, the target school
was assigned the pseudonym Crestline Elementary School and the district was assigned
the pseudonym Forerunning Unified School District.
School site administrators and teachers were the participants in this case study.
The school site met the requirements as identified by a particular demographic data set:
(a) 40% or more students qualified for free/reduced-price lunch (NSLP), (b) the student
55
population was at least 50% non-White, (c) the API had grown significantly over the past
3 years, and (d) the school had shown evidence of closing the achievement gap for the
past 3 years by subgroup population data. Crestline Elementary School met the above
criteria and was the school examined for this case study. Crestline Elementary School
was selected because its student population and demographics were consistent with the
selection criteria defined by the thematic dissertation group.
This school is located in an urbanized location, defined by the U.S. Census
Bureau as .a central place(s) and adjacent territory with a general population density of at
least 1,000 people per square mile of land area that together have a minimum residential
population of at least 50,000 people1 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, p. 1). The thematic
group defined a qualified school as having a population that causes the school to modify
its practices and/or programs to accommodate the significant risk factors that accompany
such a student population in a particular school defined as an urban school. The student
population can be minority or immigrant students, ELL students, low-socioeconomic
status students, or identified Title I status students. Other characteristics included a
significant minority population either greater than 100 students or 15% of the student
population. The dissertation team defined success toward narrowing the achievement gap
as making progress toward an API score of 800. The subgroup populations were making
significant progress in relation to their White counterparts and narrowing the achieve-
ment gap. Sustainability was defined as significant academic progress in the API over 3
years school wide but specifically among minority subgroup populations.
56
Crestline Elementary School is one of 28 comprehensive elementary schools in
the Forerunning Unified School District. The community was an agricultural town in the
1800s became the home to a large steel mill and in the 1940s. Thus, the school district
was originally founded as a steelworker-settled community. In 1984 the steel mill closed
and over the past several decades major demographic changes have occurred, with a
growing minority population settling in the Forerunning area (City of Fontana, 2009).
This is a reflection of the community, state, and country.
The critical information about the school is found in Tables 1 through 4. Accord-
ing to the SARC, the total enrollment was 791 students in Kindergarten through fifth
grade (Fontana Unified School District, 2008). The school was awarded the California
Distinguished School in 2006 and has shown significant progress in closing or narrowing
the achievement gap. It operates a year-round program with four tracks of elementary
students and has 100% of its teachers fully credentialed. According to the SARC, 74% of
the students were categorized as socioeconomically disadvantaged or qualified for the
federal free/reduced-price lunch program; thus, the school is designated as a Title I
program. The schoolCs API score in 2009 was 804, in 2008 was 782, in 2007 was 771,
and in 2006 was 751. The school has increased its API score by 204 API points in 12
years. Crestline has a state rank of 5 and a similar schools rank of 10, which indicates
that, among 100 schools with similar demographic information, Crestline was performing
at the highest levels. Crestline started at a proficiency rate of 596 in 1999 and was at 804
in 2009. Crestline made the state target of 800 in 2009.
57
Table 1
Descriptors of the School Studied
Descriptor Measure
Percentage of students in NSLP 71.0
Percentage of students of racial minority 87.1
Percentage of ELL students 45.0
API growth, 1999-2009 596 to 782 (net gain 208 points)
Note. NSLP = National School Lunch Program, ELL = English Language Learners, API
= Academic Performance Index. Source: Data and Statistics, by California Department
of Education, 2010, retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel
.asp?bottom=%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
Table 2
School Enrollment by Racial/Ethnic Category
Category %
African American 9
Asian 3
Filipino 2
Hispanic 77
Caucasian 7
American Indian 1
Note. Source: Data and Statistics, by California Department of Education, 2010,
retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=
%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
58
Table 3
Academic Performance Index (API) Scores 1999-2008
Year API score
1999 596
2000 619
2001 642
2002 687
2003 729
2004 716
2005 743
2006 751
2007 771
2008 782
2009 804
Note. Source: Data and Statistics, by California Department of Education, 2010,
retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=
%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
Crestline Elementary School narrowed the achievement gap in terms of the API
score for the subgroup populations and according to the NCLB requirements of AYP.
The API are presented in Table 5 by subgroup population over the past 3 years. This
growth indicates that the diverse learning needs of students who are traditionally
59
Table 4
Statewide Academic Performance Index (API) Scores by School Year and Subgroup
Subgroup 2008-2009 2007-2008 2006-2007 2005-2006
Hispanic/Latino 698 683 666 656
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 696 681 663 654
English Learners 698 663 647 637
African American 674 659 644 635
Note. Source: Data and Statistics, by California Department of Education, 2010,
retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%
2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
Table 5
Academic Performance Index (API) Scores by Ethnicity/Economic Status
Status 2008-2009 2007-2008 2006-2007 2005-2006
African American 781 728 718
Asian 831 753 823
Hispanic 793 775 761 735
Caucasian 811 734 703
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 790 768 751 730
Note. Source: Data and Statistics, by California Department of Education, 2010,
retrieved from http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=
%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
60
underserved in public schools were addressed at Crestline, which made the school an
appropriate setting for addressing the research questions.
CrestlineCs similar school ranking had greatly surpassed that other schools with
similar demographic sets. Crestline was one of nine schools in the Forerunning Unified
School District (28 elementary schools) that met their API targets for 2009. CrestlineCs
2009 statewide rank was 6 and their similar school rank was 9, which means that of 100
schools with similar demographics Crestline was outscoring them by significant margins.
The calculations were based on pupil mobility, pupil ethnicity, socioeconomic status,
fully credentialed teachers, ELL students, class size per grade level, multitrack school,
students with disabilities, identified GATE students, reclassified students, and percentage
of migrant students.
Instrumentation
The data collection tools were developed to address the research questions and
gather information about effective schools that are closing the achievement gap and
sustaining success. The instruments were developed conjointly to address issues of
validity and reliability. The data collection tools were document/artifacts review, survey,
interview, and observation to achieve triangulation. The document review was developed
to give the researcher a broad overview of the school setting and possible avenues of
research. The survey and interview offered a deeper understanding of the schoolCs
culture, practices, and programs. By observing the school site in its original context, the
researcher could validate the evidence as stated in the aforementioned data collection
tools; thus, triangulation was achieved and the research question could be fully answered.
61
Data Collection
Data collection was the responsibility of the doctoral candidate from July to
December 2009. To make the research valid and reliable, the research study design
included triangulation methodology. The data collection instruments were document
review, written surveys, observations, and interviews. The data collected provided ample
evidence to address the research questions regarding cultural norms, practice, and
programs that close the achievement gap and sustain success. The data collection tools
were designed to align with the research questions and literature to increase validity and
reliability. The collection and analysis of the data were completed without undue bias or
influence on the outcome. The researcher received certification from the Collaborative
Institutional Training Initiative Course in the Protection of Human Research Subjects
prior to the data collection phase of the study. The researcher also obtained approval
from the University of Southern CaliforniaCs Internal Review Board before collecting
data. The researcher gained consent and obtained a signed IRB consent letter during the
initial meeting with the site administrator.
Document Review
The document review was collected from a plethora of resources in the summer of
2009. These documents were collected from the school site, the district office, and
available public resources available through the Internet. The document review master
list is located in Appendix A. The thematic dissertation group covered grade spans from
Kindergarten through twelfth grade; thus, the master document review list was compiled
to accommodate all of the studiesC participants. The list demonstrates all documents that
62
could be reviewed for information about the district-level and specific school-level
artifacts. The document review list was obtained via many sources, including the CDE
website and school personnel. The CDE website provided school information, district
information, and student performance data over the past 3 years disaggregated by
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and ELL data.
The data were reviewed to examine the cultural norms, practices, and programs
that assisted the school in narrowing the achievement gap and sustaining success.
Documents were reviewed to identify emergent themes supported by the literature that
narrow the achievement gap. The document review was completed before the actual
entry to the school setting. The researcher asked the office staff and site administrators
for a specific list of artifacts that were necessary to address the research questions.
Survey
The survey instrument for this case study was developed by a subgroup of the
thematic dissertation group and was based on the themes reported in the literature review.
The survey was designed around the themes that emerged, such as collaboration, school
leadership, classroom instruction, intervention, and program implementation. The 32-
item survey (Appendix B) was developed conjointly by the thematic dissertation group.
A copy was given to all school administrators and teachers at the school site. The
questions were designed with a 4-point Likert-type scale (4 = Strongly Agree, 3 = Agree,
2 = Somewhat Agree, 1 = Strongly Disagree). The survey also included an open-ended
response section for participants to utilize if so desired in reference to the above themes.
63
An pilot study was conducted with the teacher instrument survey for field testing,
validity, and reliability. The beta or field test was given to a leadership team at the
elementary school where the researcher was employed. After the initial field test, the
dissertation group revised the survey to reflect the feedback. A second beta test was
conducted by the thematic dissertation group, who further revised the instrument for
clarification and specific information about the cultural norms, practices, and programs
that narrow the achievement gap. This process of field testing the instrument ensured
validity and reliability of the survey questions. The dissertation group ensured that the
survey instrument was aligned to the research questions.
The survey took approximately 40 minutes for each participant to complete. The
survey was discussed with the site administrator prior to administration to ensure a high
volume of participation. The site administrator suggested a paper copy of the survey
versus an online format, as the staff was more comfortable with the paper version. The
survey was distributed at two staff meetings because the school has multitracks; it was in
a sealed envelope to protect the participantCs confidentiality and privacy. The site
administrator was not in attendance when the research was seeking participants. The
survey was submitted to the office in the envelope and the office staff collected it. The
researcher then collected the survey instrument from the office staff.
Observation Guide
The development of an observation tool (Appendix C and Appendix D) was a
collaborative effort. Bolman and DealC+ (2003) four frames of leadership framework
were utilized to gain an understanding of the school, the key stakeholders, and cultural
64
norms. The observational tool was developed to examine the cultural norms, programs,
and practice in their natural setting. The researcher participated in the natural school
setting in classroom visits, professional development opportunities, school site leadership
team meetings, grade-level meetings, and staff meetings. The observation template
included information about the initial encounter with the school site, the key stakeholders
and their roles and interactions, professional development, data analysis interactions, and
program implementation. The information was coded using Bolman and DealCs (2003)
four organizational frames.
Interview Protocol
The interview protocol was developed by a subgroup of the thematic dissertation
group. After the subgroup developed the initial protocol for the interview process, the
group revised the protocol for clarity and alignment to the research questions. The
researcher piloted the interview questions with school participants from a different school
to ensure validity and reliability. The interview questions were designed to gather in
depth information into the research questions and propel the findings as valid and
reliability. The interview questions were categorized to fit within the proposed frame-
work to assist in analysis. Questions were designed for both teachers and school site
administrators to gain all key stakeholdersC perspectives. The interviews were digitally
recorded with consent of the participants individually and transcribed into a word
processing document. The interview took approximately 50-60 minutes, depending on
the participantCs responses. The interview protocol (Appendix E) included 50 questions
aligned to the areas in the survey to ensure triangulation. In the interviews, the
65
participants were asked the same questions for comparative value; however, the
researcher asked clarifying questions or follow-up questions in response to the interview
and pertinent information relevant to the study. Interviews were conducted after the
survey implementation so the researcher could gather in-depth information that emerged
from the survey results.
Data Analysis
Creswell (2003) provided a thorough approach to data analysis and it is relevant
to this research study design. The six steps of data analysis provided the research with
effective means of collecting data and its analysis. Each step allowed the researcher to
disseminate pertinent data and gather meaning from its interpretation. For the data
analysis process, the researcher organized the collected data. This included a transcrip-
tion of the individual interviews and listening for key concepts, themes, and repetitive
comments. The researcher coded the data collected from the document review. This
process was to color code the various data into organized information to see emerging
themes. The researcher then reviewed all of the document artifacts to gain a holistic
perspective and identify initial generalizations. Next, the researcher chunked the data in
organized titles on display boards according to the research question to identify themes.
Bolman and DealCs (2003) four frames assisted in establishing themes and
categories when analyzing data. The survey was color coded in conjunction with the
overall themes identified in the data collection by the thematic dissertation group. Next,
the researcher provided a broad and rich description of the key stakeholders, events, and
school setting to visualize the school site and the themes that emerged from the data
66
collection tools. Each of the themes was established through triangulation and supported
through evidence using the data collection tools. Next, the researcher provided a synthe-
sis of the data in narrative form and identified themes. The themes are interconnected
and a rationale was given from the researcher about appropriate conclusions. Last, the
researcher interpreted the data into meaningful conclusions. The researcher explained
what was learned from the study, how the findings compared to similar studies, and how
the findings were different from similar studies. The study concluded with possible next
steps or the influence the research had on future research.
Summary
The researcher attempted to identify factors that narrow the achievement gap and
sustain success. The researcher studied an urban elementary school that had narrowed
the achievement gap over the past 3 years, using document review, surveys, observations,
and interviews. The case study design was utilized to examine depth and breadth in a
educational setting successful in narrowing the achievement gap. The findings and
themes that emerged from the qualitative case study were found throughout the data
analysis and emerged as major factors that contributed to the success and narrowing of
the achievement gap at Crestline Elementary School.
The data were collected and analyzed throughout the study using CreswellCs
steps (2003) and Gall et al.C+ (2003) characteristics for analysis. The qualitative study
examined the participantsC cultural norms, programs, and practices in their natural
environment and examined their perspective about how they achieved their success. All
of the data were collected, coded and analyzed following CreswellCs (2003) steps. The
67
interpretation of the data was discovered via triangulation to ensure consistency, validity,
and reliability of the findings.
The data collection included hard and soft data. The hard data included the
SARC, the school site plan, the CDE website for assessment results, the staff develop-
ment plan and other pertinent information, the school website, the school bell schedule,
rotation schedule for the school, classroom data analysis sheet, school site plan, the staff
development plan, clustering schedules for differentiated instruction, and parent involve-
ment documents. The soft data included survey results, interviews, classroom observa-
tions, and school observations. By combining the various data sources, the researcher
triangulated the data through coding and chunking to determine what cultural norms,
programs, and/or practices were utilized to reduce the achievement gap and meet the
educational needs of typically underperforming student populations.
68
CHAPTER 4
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
The purpose of this case study was to understand how one particular elementary
school sustained success in narrowing the achievement gap between African American
and Latino students and White or Asian students and sustaining this narrowing over time.
The case study was designed to examine the cultural norms, practices, and programs that
one school employed to narrow the achievement gap. The elementary school that was
studied implemented specific cultural norms, practices, and programs over time that
assisted in minority student achievement.
Three research questions guided the study:
1. What are the cultural norms that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
2. What are the practices that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
3. What are the programs that have been employed by the school that have
allowed them to close the achievement gap and sustain success?
First, a brief description of the case study school is provided. This description
provides pertinent information about Crestline Elementary School. The description
allows the researcher to expand on the assessment data results, staffing, and student
population characteristics. A normal day at Crestline is outlined to provide a vivid
description of the normative school culture and routine activities. The practices that are
69
normative and routine lend a narrative credibility to the findings. Next, the findings are
presented by research question. Last, salient points are presented.
Description of the School
Crestline Elementary School is located approximately 30 miles east of Los
Angeles, close to the San Bernardino Mountains, the Ontario airport, and centrally
located in the Inland Empire. The school is one of 29 elementary schools serving
approximately 42,000 students in Forerunning Unified School District. The district is a
large urban district with seven middle schools and four comprehensive high schools.
Crestline opened in 1992 to accommodate the growing student population in the Inland
Empire region.
The CDE website reported CrestlineCs student population as 760 students in 2008-
2009, enrolled in preschool through fifth grade. The student ethnicities at Crestline were
80% Hispanic or Latino, 8.3% African American, 5.9% Caucasian, 2.8% Asian, 1.4%
Filipino, and 1.8% multiple ethnicities or no response. The school participates in the
NSLP and 68% of the students qualify for free/reduced-price lunch and are considered
socioeconomically disadvantaged. Crestline has a high student turnover rate. In 2008-
2009, 78% of the student population remained at Crestline for the duration of the school
year, according to the SARC. During the 2008-2009 school year 45.4% of the student
population were ELL students and 10.24% qualified for Special Education services. The
average class size was 19.0 students in Grades 1-3, 27.5 in Grade 4, and 32.8 in Grade 5.
In June 2009 the district changed the class sizes in Grades 1-3, opting to increase class
70
size to 24.9 in the 2009-2010 school year; this decision was due to budget cuts and
resulted in several certificated employees being laid off from employment.
Currently, Crestline Elementary School employs 29 certificated teachers, with a
music enrichment teacher, science enrichment teacher, instructional support teacher, two
Special Education teachers, one Resource Specialist, and one Severely Handicapped
teacher. In 2007-2008 Crestline employed 40 credentialed teachers, a reduction of 6
certificated teachers due to budget cuts. In 2008-2009, the ethnic make-up of the creden-
tialed teachers was 72% Caucasian, 11% African American, 14% Hispanic, and 3%
Asian. The teaching staff was experienced, with an average of 14.9 years of service and
2 teachers in their first or second year. The teaching staff is 100% fully credentialed and
highly qualified under NCLB guidelines. There were 18 classified personnel, including a
secretary, attendance clerk, community aide, librarian, six part-time tutor monitors, two
custodians, a health aide, and noon area supervisors. Crestline has two full-time adminis-
trators, a principal and an assistant principal, and both are Caucasian. The school princi-
pal earned a doctorate from the University of Southern California with a quantitative
study pertaining to direct instruction.
The district has five main goals: learning for all students, safe positive well-main-
tained schools, quality staff providing quality service, school/community partnerships
and communication, and acquisition and allocation of resources that support the above
goals. The students at Crestline are provided many opportunities to learn through the
cultural norms, practices, and programs employed by the staff, students, parents, and
administration. The school earned the California Distinguished School award in 2006.
71
In 2009 the API score was 804, which is an increase of 28 API points. The school met 16
of 17 AYP benchmarks in 2009. Crestline missed the AYP target within the subgroup
population of ELL students. The school had a proficiency rate of 45.3% and the target
was 46% for 2009; thus, Crestline is on the watch list for Program Improvement status in
2010.
Participants
The researcher met with the principal at the end of June 2009 to explain the
research study in depth and to gain her full cooperation as a participant and a supporter of
the study. Initially, the principal and researcher informally discussed entrance strategies
and how to approach the study to obtain accurate results. The site principal and
researcher went over the upcoming calendar and events that the researcher could attend to
collect data. The researcher spent a total of 6 days in various intervals observing the
school site to gain an in-depth perspective of the cultural norms, practices, and programs
at the school. The survey was given to all staff members at a staff meeting on two
different calendar days as the school is a year-round school; thus, one fourth of the staff
is on vacation at various intervals. The survey was given on July 6 and July 28, 2009, to
all staff members. There were 29 surveys completed, which is 98% of the staff at the
school. The researcher conducted five in-depth interviews: Three formal teacher inter-
views and interviews of the assistant principal and principal were completed. The
document review, surveys, observations, and interviews contributed to a full analysis of
the cultural norms, practices, and programs utilized by Crestline Elementary School.
72
The initial interview was completed with the assistant principal, who was new to
the school site; this was her first year at Crestline. Her pseudonym is Ms. Bonnet. Ms.
Bonnet has worked within the district for 12 years. She started as an elementary school
teacher and has worked as an assistant principal for 3 years. Ms. Bonnet was recently
transferred to Crestline Elementary School. Her knowledge of the school site was
limited; however, the researcher elected to begin with .new eyes1 and then selectively
move to more veteran employees of Crestline to ensure that the novice and veteran
perspectives were included within the scope of the study.
The first teacher was a primary teacher who had 29 years of teaching experience
and had been at Crestline since it opened 17 years ago. Mrs. Smith was the representa-
tive for the local bargaining unit for the certificated staff. She has held this position for
many years and works collaboratively with the site administration. In fact, the principal
stated on numerous occasions, .My site FTA [=>,/),)'P")@!"6C+'Q++>@2)/2>,] rep is
fantastic. She works with me. If I make a contractual mistake, she lets me know and we
fix it together.1 Mrs. SmithCs approach during the interview was positive about the
researcherCs questions. During walkthrough observations, the researcher noticed that
Mrs. SmithCs classroom was extremely organized and devoid of clutter. The site
administrator stated that Mrs. SmithCs classroom had undergone a radical transformation.
She cleaned her classroom and removed unnecessary materials. Mrs. Smith also lost a
plethora of personal weight and was proud to highlight her accomplishments. The site
administrator expressed her pleasure with Mrs. SmithCs accomplishments.
73
The second teacher was the Instructional Support Teacher (IST), whose primary
responsibility was meeting the needs of at-risk students; she had been a teacher for over
30 years, along with a veteran of Crestline Elementary School. The IST position is a
recently created position that is categorically funded to increase student achievement.
Many schools in the district had a grant that afforded them an instructional coach;
however, Crestline was not part of this grant. Crestline decided to provide an IST to
support student achievement. The site administrator routinely referred to the IST during
observations as a person with a wealth of knowledge about teaching and learning,
especially with at-risk populations. Mrs. King was a veteran teacher who wanted the best
from every student.
The next interview was conducted with a fifth-grade teacher who continually was
referred to by other colleagues as .having critical information1 about the school site and
its cultural norms, practices, and programs. Her interview was shortened due to an
appointment; thus, the researcher received minimal information from Ms. South. Ms.
South allowed the researcher to call her on her personal cell phone to finish the interview;
however, the amount of information collected from the other participants showed ample
evidence. Ms. South was vocal at the leadership meeting that the researcher attended.
Her colleagues and the site administrator respected her opinions. Ms. South voluntarily
tutored students who were at risk without being paid. The tutoring program was cut due
to budget cuts in the winter 2009. Her concern for students was apparent to the
researcher.
74
The last interview was with the school site principal, who had been in education
for over 25 years and the principal for the past 3 years. The site principal was the
assistant principal at Crestline before being promoted to principal. Mrs. Barkley worked
as the assistant principal for almost 2 years before being selected as principal. Her
knowledge of teaching and learning is unusual for a site administrator. She actually
taught the adopted core curriculum for the school district. She is an expert at teaching
and learning practices. The principal worked in another school district as the site
administrator in a difficult assignment. She also worked in the business sector for several
years; her organizational skills are stellar.
A Normal Day at C restline Elementary School
When driving toward Crestline Elementary School, the researcher got the feeling
of a cohesive community. The school was nestled within the Southpoint area of Forerun-
ning School District. Crestline was adjacent to a community center that had a community
pool, baseball field, and playground area for the children. The community center had a
large field that was well maintained and was a joint use facility for Crestline Elementary
School. The school utilized the grassy field for physical education activities. During
recess and lunch the students were allowed to free play in the field. The field area was
not fenced in; thus, the supervision was closely monitored and the school site staff was
comfortable with student safety. The surrounding neighborhood was mostly single-
family dwellings that were pleasing to the researcherCs eye. The lawns and buildings
were adequately maintained and had a general feeling of warmth. The school was
located at a moderately busy intersection; however, there was a traffic light for student
75
safety. The campus was clean and well maintained in terms of grounds and maintenance.
The school was beige and brick in color and was self-contained. There were multiple
entrances; however, the gates were locked during school hours for safety purposes.
The central office was located in the front of the school and visitors checked in
upon arrival. The central office acted as the hub for school activity as the office was
connected to several primary locations. The library, IST, cafeteria, staff lounge,
administrative offices, and conference room all connect to the central office. The office
staff were personable with the researcher and offered friendly greetings when the
researcher arrived. All visitors must sign in upon arrival and sign out prior to departure.
The visitors receive a badge to wear while on campus for security. Within the office area
there was a waiting area for parents. The waiting area had comfortable couches, an area
for students to sit, and literature for parents to browse. There were three bookshelves
with student books to read while waiting for assistance. A rug made the area attractive
and welcome. The parent waiting area was in the center of the central office in the shape
of a jack. The spokes of the jack were corridors to the various locations within the
building. The various hallways were lined with specific bulletin boards for specific
purposes.
The bulletin boards along the west wall were lined with attractive features such as
school site council, PTA (parent-teacher association) and ELAC (English Language
Learner Advisor Committee) information. The bulletin boards were updated over the
months that the researcher observed the school site. The hallway had a feeling of pro-
fessionalism and care for students, parents, and staff members. There was a feeling of
76
warmth and invitation to join the Crestline community. There were myriad pamphlets
and information for parents to utilize. The topics ranged from parenting and community
resources to general school information.
The site principal had set a goal to increase parent involvement. The hallway was
a symbolic and visual representation of the goal. The first look at Crestline let the
researcher know that parent involvement was important. The bulletin boards had current
information and the site principal had specifically hired a community liaison to update
the information. The community liaison was funded out of Title I and other categorical
funds. Her main job was to increase parent involvement. She ensured that the hallway
was helpful to all parents who entered Crestline.
The north hallway wall had information for students. The bulletin boards were
designed to encourage student participation and highlight student success. The bulletin
boards included Accelerated Reader awards, drug-free pledges, Words Read Award
board, and student work samples. The Words Read bulletin board display was arranged
to highlight students who had read from 1 book to a student who had read over one
million words. The bulletin board had student pictures to personalize and celebrate
student success. There was a trophy case display with the evidence of Crestline being a
Title I Distinguished School in 2004 and a California Distinguished School in 2006,
History Day participants and winners, Math Field Day awards, and many other trophies.
The work samples were map projects that a teacher had asked the principal to display.
The north hallway was a student-centered environment. The average onlooker
would realize that student achievement was important at Crestline. The school valued
77
literacy, mathematics, and student projects. The trophies represented a competitive
nature that revolved around academics. The work samples were of high quality and
indicated attention to detail and academic rigor that the literature states is critical to
success (Hechinger Institute, 2010).
Along the east wall was a library book display with various themes projected. An
abundance of music books was in the display case. The east hallway had five bulletin
boards. First, there was a bulletin board with the first trimester awards recipients and
staff memberCs pictures. The trimester awards included outstanding citizenship, out-
standing achievement in language arts, mathematics, and overall academic excellence.
This bulletin board was categorized by track and teacher. The heading for the bulletin
board was Building the Foundation of Knowledge, with a coyote howling. Coyote was
the mascot for Crestline. The next bulletin board delineated CST information for
Crestline, including subgroup information and a 3-year comparison chart. There were
various graphs and visual representations of CrestlineCs proficiency information. These
two bulletin boards have been changed several times since the researcher first began data
collecting; the information was updated to reflect current performance data. There was
an attendance bulletin board that had positive posters. The messages stated, .Get a good
nightCs sleep and be on time.1 Attendance was reported by track and teacher. The site
administrator informed the researcher that the bulletin board was .a work in progress or
something she dreamed up in the middle of the night.1 The bulletin board was going to
highlight teachers who had a 98% attendance rate and studentsC responses to what they
learned in school. Also, the bulletin board would highlight why students were glad to
78
come to school today. The site administrator was going to post their actual responses on
the bulletin board for parents, students, and staff members to read. The bulletin board
also had a 3-year comparison of school attendance. One bulletin board had evidence of
writing by grade level; however, it was not updated over the course of data collection.
The writing was dated January 2009.
The south hallway had a tutor monitor working with students on reading skills
one day when the researcher observed. However, the researcher saw evidence of this
practice on only one occasion. Again, the bulletin boards were lined with student work
samples. The first time the researcher observed Crestline, there were extra materials,
such as televisions, computers, printers, and so forth lining the south hallway. Over the
months of data collection the hallway was cleared of the debris and utilized by the school
as a working space. There was a bulletin board display with pictures of students and
teachers for students of the month. The next bulletin board had fourth-grade information
for California regions, created by students. The last two bulletin boards were empty
except for butcher paper and borders. The hallways in the central office provided a
wealth of information for the researcher, parents, students, and staff members.
These visual representations at Crestline sent a message to the researcher that
parental involvement, student achievement, literacy skills, attendance, and student
projects were important to the Crestline community. The nonverbal messages were
evident throughout the data collection process. These symbols represented the core
structure of Crestline. The principal was primarily responsible for their implementation
and upkeep. On more than one occasion the site principal was seen directing her
79
employees to update the hallway and make the information relevant. According to
Bolman and Deal (2003), the symbols that organizations utilize allow participants to
embrace their organization and rally behind the organizationCs goals and objectives. By
visually portraying their goals along the hallway, CrestlineCs message was clear: .These
things are important to us and this is what we collectively are about.1
At the beginning of the day students milled around the front of the school, waiting
for the school to open. The parking lot was wide in actual space and was organized to
accommodate parents dropping off or picking up students. The school site received
speed bumps in October 2009 in response to parent+C concerned about speeding cars.
This concern was expressed to the site principal during an informal collaboration meeting
with the parents called .Coffee with the Principal.1 The principal responded by putting
in new speed bumps. There were signs to delineate which way to enter the parking lot
and which way to proceed. Most of the parents followed the directions and the parking
lot area was efficient. The school day for students at Crestline begins at 7:20 a.m.;
however, many students were on campus at 7:00 a.m. The researcher observed some
students who arrived at 6:45 a.m., well before most school staff arrived. Classified and
certificated staff arrived at various times; the bulk of the teaching staff arrived at approxi-
mately 7:10. The parking lot became increasingly congested as the students were
allowed on campus. The students were able to enter the campus at 7:15 a.m. and
promptly reported to the cafeteria.
The sense of order was apparent to the researcher throughout the data collection
process. The students and faculty knew what to do and what was expected of them. The
80
students were trained to follow clearly established rules and procedures throughout their
school day. Within the context of the case study, these basic procedural operations
allowed the school site to focus on academic issues and meeting the need of all students.
Often, less effective school sites focus on routine operations such as dismissal pro-
cedures, conflict resolution, and other daily routines.
The site principal and assistant principal meet informally every day to discuss
issues, problems, daily schedule, and other pertinent information. After this informal
meeting, the principal or assistant principal typically supervise the students in the
cafeteria. The cafeteria was organized in rows of tables with a divider in the middle. The
left side had students who were eating breakfast, which is provided by the NSLP. On the
right side students waited for the bell to ring to exit the cafeteria. The custodian was
serving breakfast to the students, which is not a normative practice at other school sites
that the researcher had observed. The site principal stated, .I have the most wonderful
custodian in the world. He never looks busy and yet he gets everything done.1
The bulletin boards in the cafeteria were bright and attractive. The site adminis-
trator stated that the after-school program staff regularly updated the bulletin boards.
Students who need child care are offered free care after school 5 days per week for
approximately 3 hours; thus, students do not go home to unsupervised households.
When the students exited the cafeteria, there were certificated teachers on duty
who supervised the playground area. Students were milling about, talking to friends,
playing on the jungle gym, and generally waiting for their teacher to arrive. The play-
ground was orderly, with a few students running; however, the site principal or duty
81
teacher stopped the students and redirected their behavior. The teachers picked up their
students who were waiting in line and escorted them to class promptly. One particular
grade level escorted their class to an area where the entire grade level participated in
physical education exercises. The site administrator informed me that the entire student
body participated in mandatory physical education time with a core-adopted program
called SPARK (Sports, Play, and Active Recreation for Kids). This practice was imple-
mented 2 years ago. One teacher took his class to the cafeteria and used a parachute to
teach physical education. The students were engaged in the activities and the physical
education was observed over several data collection days. The site principal was
convinced that increased physical activity increased student academic achievement.
The Crestline school community had a sense of order and routine. The teachers
and students had clear expectations for procedures and knew what was expected. The
normative culture was that every person had a job to complete. The physical education
program was one of the practices that teachers knew the site principal expected. On more
than one occasion the site principal stated, .I routinely check to ensure that physical
education, English language development, GATE instruction etc. are being implemented
because what gets checked gets done.1 The teachers knew that the principal was going to
check and thus, practices and programs were implemented. As practices and programs
were implemented, they became part of the school culture.
The researcher observed a quiet atmosphere and structure. The teachers and staff
went about their business. The office staff worked on various projects and interacted
amiably with each other. The secretary routinely asked clarification questions of the site
82
administrators. The secretary asked for the principalCs .autograph1 instead of signature.
On one occasion the secretary explained how she was going to handle a potentially
uncomfortable conversation with a parent. The secretary was seeking approval and
assistance from the site principal. The site principal offered a suggestion and together
they came up with a positive solution. The interactions between the secretary and site
administrator were friendly and had a feeling of warmth. For instance. the secretary
came into the assistant principalCs office, where both administrators were discussing the
dayCs events. The principal commented on the secretaryCs sweater and how much she
liked it. The secretary modeled the sweater for the assistant principal, principal, and
researcher. The secretary also informed the principal where she could obtain the sweater.
The interactions led the researcher to the conclusion that the relationship went far beyond
a professional nature and into a collegial/collaborative realm.
When walking into a classroom at Crestline, the researcher got the feeling that the
staff was .on the same page and doing the same things.1 There were universal items in
every classroom that were specific to the core curriculum. Every classroom at Crestline
had the Open Court sound/spelling cards on the wall. The cards were used to teach
students the various sounds that letters make and the various spellings that are associated
with those letters. All classrooms had a concept and question board, related to Open
Court theme, which changed every 6 weeks. Examples of themes that the researcher
observed were City Wildlife, Friendship, Imagination, Astronomy, and Kindness. The
concept and question board had student questions related to the theme and artifacts or
realia associated with the theme. Comprehension strategies and Thinking Maps were
83
posted in every room. The comprehension strategies included Fact and Opinion,
AuthorCs Point of View, AuthorCs Purpose, Sequencing, Main Ideas and Details, Cause
and Effect, Compare and Contrast, and Drawing Conclusions. These posters were in
every classroom.
Crestline started two new projects related to mathematics in the 2009-2010 school
year. First, every student was given a math journal to record pertinent math data, such as
definitions, key terms, and diagrams, or examples from the Houghton Mifflin district-
adopted curriculum. Next, the teachers were implementing interactive math bulletin
boards in their classrooms. The researcher saw beginning stages of implementation
across the grade level; however, there was not a universal visual. Many teachers were
implementing the interactive math boards at various stages of implementation. One
teacher stated during an observation that he .needed more training1 for math bulletin
boards. Another teacher commented, .The training is coming soon.1 The researcher saw
evidence of the math journals being implemented in various classrooms.
The routine and structure was one of collaboration and implementation. The staff
implemented the Open Court curriculum with fidelity and worked together to ensure that
all students learned. The hidden culture was one of collegiality and friendship. The
casual observer would see the same routines in different classrooms and watch all
students being challenged daily.
Crestline utilized minimum days for staff development, leadership meetings, and
staff meeting days. The site administrators are allowed up to half of the minimum days
for professional development activities. The site administrators utilized a major portion
84
of the allotted minutes for collaboration by the various stakeholders, shared leadership,
and staff development purposes. The school site had a yearly minimum day schedule that
all certificated teachers were given at the beginning of the year. At two staff meetings,
the agenda included information about assessment results, parent survey results, data
analysis, general school operations, and family night information.
Both staff meetings were conducted by the site principal; however, the teachers
were free to ask questions or clarify information at any time. One particular leadership
team meeting was conducted with the site principal controlling the agenda in terms of
topics discussed. The leadership team was composed of the grade-level leaders and the
assistant principal. This meeting was different from the staff meetings, with an open
forum feeling. All of the participants freely discussed items on the agenda, gave input,
and reported back to their constituents. The decision making was more of a shared style
than autocratic. The topics were discussed at length until the team heard every opinion
and came to consensus.
The cultural norm was one of collaboration at meetings; the teachers spoke about
their core beliefs and how to make Crestline better. The site administrators listened to
their opinions and gathered input. The goal was not only to reach consensus but also to
ensure that all .voices were heard and understoodK1 The teachers listened to each other
and listened to the site administrator. One interview respondent stated, .Our principal is
very knowledgeable and she listens to our opinionsK1 Collaboration was the key element
in the faculty meetings.
85
Coyote Kids was a practice that Crestline utilized to include students in the
decision making, improving the school climate and allowing student leadership on
campus. The Coyote Kids were elected by their peers in Grades 3, 4, and 5. They met
weekly. These student leaders must maintain good grades, be model citizens, and repre-
sent Crestline appropriately. The elections for Coyote Kids are held every trimester. The
Coyote Kids were responsible for Spirit Days, which included days for dressing up in
costume, such as Sports Day or Halloween. The assistant principal led the Coyote Kids
and the researcher observed several interactions with the student leaders from Coyote
Kids. The students were planning Sports Day and creating a dance based on the Michael
Jackson song Thriller. Many of the interview respondents approved of Coyote Kids and
were positive about its implementation. Student leadership was important to the stake-
holders at Crestline. All of the interview respondents were pleased with Coyote Kids and
stated that the student leadership contributed to the positive school climate. The student
leaders were positive and their activities made the staff and students excited about school
attendance.
The site principal worked to increase parent involvement at Crestline. On the first
day of school she met with the Kindergarten parents and welcomed them to the Crestline
community. The principal explained Kindergarten expectations, how to get involved
with the school site, student safety, and various other school operations. She also
coordinated Back-to-School Night, Family Math Night, Literacy Night, and Family
Spaghetti Night and assisted the PTA with a school-wide yard sale on a Saturday. The
site principal attended all PTA functions and meetings regularly. She also analyzed the
86
parent survey results singlehandedly. The site principal has monthly .Coffee with the
Principal1 meetings as an open-forum to discuss school-wide issues with the parents.
The school secretary reported several problems to the principal with families and the site
principal responded quickly to concerns. Her motto was to respond within 24 hours to
any concern from the families and she said, .I am going to try and help you1 on several
occasions with parents.
At the end of the day the students leave the building quickly and parents wait for
their students. There were many gates open for students to exit the school and much
teacher supervision. The parking lot area was organized and traffic flowed smoothly.
Many students walked home because the school was surrounded by homes; some
students took the school bus and other students were picked up in cars by their parents or
guardians. The principal and assistant principal went out to supervise students. The
teachers were allowed to leave as the bell rang, according to the bargaining unit contract;
however, most teachers were still on campus long after the dismissal bell rang. The
principal often met with parents or had a school site meeting after school dismissed for
the day. The after-school program occurred every day in the cafeteria. Students were
completing homework, some students were eating a healthy snack, and other students
were involved in physical activities such as relay games and dodge ball.
The researcher was left with the feeling that this small school is making a major
impact on the minority students at Crestline Elementary School. The normative practices
were inclusive of all key stakeholders. The students and staff knew what they were
supposed to do and did it. The learning environment was effective and the evidence was
87
clear that teachers were .on the same page1 regarding curriculum and instruction. The
routine practices at Crestline are of order and purpose. The daily climate is one of order
in which all key stakeholders are accomplishing their tasks without undue pressure from
site administration. The hallways have a sense of purpose, collaboration, and com-
munity. The hallways send a nonverbal message about what is important to the Crestline
staff, which Bolman and Deal (2003) discussed from the symbolic leadership style, which
is through the signs, symbols and stories told3a theme emerged that what is important is
shared. Visitors were keenly aware that parental involvement, attendance, and student
achievement are extremely valuable at Crestline. Without saying a word, the message is
sent clearly. In the classroom, the nonverbal messages continued with universal signs
and symbols throughout the school site. The staff adopted the core program universally
for language arts, including the supplemental materials for ELLs and intervention guides.
The core curriculum was utilized in every classroom that the researcher observed over
several days and months. The purposeful instruction has shown great promise in closing
the achievement gap and sustaining success.
Research Question 1: Cultural Norms
In a magical school, the school has the following cultural norm:
We want our kids to be in unity and be educated. We want our staff to be the
same way. If we are happy and motivated, the kids are happy and motivated. We
need to maintain collaboration and that positive attitude. Not everyone has to like
each other but you have to respect each other. And then, once, you have that, offer
the training and professional development that is site specific according to student
needs. (Assistant Principal Bonnet)
The collaborative nature at Crestline Elementary School made narrowing the
achievement gap possible as the staff members were working together to ensure that
88
.every student be successfulK1 The atmosphere was magnetic to the researcher through-
out the case study. According to King and Lopez (2008), exceptional collaboration takes
place on a routine basis, with the key stakeholders developing a model of collaboration
that supports student achievement. At Crestline there is evidence to support a collabor-
ative culture that has aligned the mission, vision, values, and goals to increase student
achievement. DuFour et al. (2008) discussed the idea of collaboration as building con-
sensus among key constituents, leading to shared mission, vision, and values. Consensus
is a critical element in reducing the achievement gap and a collaborative culture is key,
according to DuFour et al. The collaborative nature that King and Lopez (2008) dis-
cussed involves a .sense of urgency1 to assist students who are struggling and formulat-
ing a collaborative plan that includes lofty goals for student achievement. At Crestline
the collaboration includes both of these elements within the interactions among key
stakeholders.
The findings revealed an overarching theme of collaboration with three related
factors. Collaboration occurred (a) among all key stakeholders, including staff members,
students, administration, and parents, (b) formally, and (c) informally (King & Lopez,
2008).
First, there was evidence to support collaboration among key stakeholders at
Crestline. This is important, as collaboration among all key stakeholders leads to many
other important factors in closing the achievement gap for minority students. Next, the
formal and informal structures support the finding that a collaborative culture is evident
at Crestline Elementary School. Mrs. Smith stated in her interview, .Collaboration is
89
done on both a formal and informal basis.1 There was an overarching theme of
collaboration that had been present at Crestline since its opening 17 years ago.
According to the literature, effective schools utilize many practices, such as data analysis,
differentiated instruction, ensuring instructional resources, focus on standards, and
increased parent involvement, to increase student achievement to close the achievement
gap; collaboration is held as one of the key elements (Williams et al., 2005). The
collaboration was employed by the school staff to ensure that all students learn,
especially the minority student population.
From document reviews, collaboration was evident within the school site plan and
staff development plan in depth of teachers collaborating about instruction, supplemental
materials, and data analysis and organizing programs. In fact, teachers at Crestline
Elementary School had conjointly developed the school site plan with the principal and
parents. Within the school site plan there are fiscal and human resources aligned to
ensure collaboration. The information presented in the school site plan was evident in the
daily routines at Crestline.
Collaboration was centered around data analysis and planning effectively as grade-level
teams, which consisted of ensuring that all students learn and achieve. The grade-level
teams meet formally at least five times per year to analyze student data and formulate
instructional plans according to the school site plan. The grade-level teams developed
SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, and timely) goals within the PLC
model outlined by DuFour et al. (2008) displayed in the hallway of the school office.
The school has staff meetings which are scheduled at the beginning of the school year.
90
The meetings include two whole staff meetings per month and 25% of the staff meetings
are devoted to staff for collaboration or planning instruction. Also, the school site has
leadership meetings that are scheduled for collaboration between the grade-level chairs
and administration. Ms. South stated, .ThereCs a lot of after school meetings for teachers.
Not always specified grade level meetings; sometimes, the agenda is given to them, we
want you to focus on this and other times the teacher come up with what they want to
focus on.1
The document review also included a staff development plan, which had teachers
collaborating around the district pacing guide, grade-level standards, and CST blueprints
for an entire day. Collaboration as a cultural norm was reflected in the school site plan,
as the practices outlined in the plan required the staff to work together effectively to
ensure student success. Without effective collaboration, Crestline would not be able to
implement the plan. Table 6 summarizes the responses to survey questions related to
research question 1.
Twenty-nine participants responded to the survey questions, which included an
open-ended response section. Of the 29 participants, 21 indicated that the school
supports collaboration among teachers with a strong agreement. Twenty participants
responded that teachers collaborate around student data most of the time and 9 partici-
pants stated sometimes in response. Twenty-three participants stated that teachers lead
collaboration sessions and 15 stated that the administrators lead the collaboration
sessions. The participants identified topics discussed within the collaboration sessions.
First, data analysis emerged with the highest rating of 25 participants. Twenty-four
91
Table 6
Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 1
SA A SoD StD
Item Most Some Rarely Never Other
1. The school supports collaboration
among teachers. 72.4 27.5 3.4 0.0
2. The teachers believe that students can
achieve at high levels. 55.0 44.8 0.0 0.0
3. School administration creates a positive
school culture for teachers and students. 39.0 59.0 3.4 0.0
5. Teachers collaborate to discuss student
data to improve student learning. 69.0 31.0 0.0 0.0
19. Who leads the collaboration sessions?
Teachers 23
Administrators 19
Counselors/Coaches 7
Others 2
20. What topics are discussed at collaboration
sessions?
Data Analysis 25
Curriculum 22
Instruction 20
Intervention 24
Standards 14
Operations 7
Note. SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SoD = Somewhat Disagree, StD = Strongly Dis-
agree. Most = Most of the Time, Some = Sometimes. 8"+$>,+"+'/>'2/"0'RM9'.E>00",/+'
about the role of collaboration which helped close the achi"7"0",/'?)$1<'S>6T'/>?"/!"6'
as a grade-level team, share best practices, provide differentiated instruction, strong com-
02/0",/'.>,'/!"'+)0"'$)?"1'0",/)#2/*9'7"6*'+/)U#"'+/)%%'@>002//"-'/>'(>6T2,?'/>?"/!"6K
92
participants selected intervention as a discussion topic within collaboration sessions, 22
selected curriculum, 20 selected instruction, 14 selected standards, and 7 selected
operations. Twenty participants responded that staff meetings are the venue for
collaboration time (Appendix F).
In the open-ended response section the staff reported that the grade-level team
meetings were of paramount importance to assisting struggling students and closing the
achievement gap. The grade-level collaboration focused on sharing best practices, com-
municating across the grade levels, and working together to .be on the same page and
share ideasK1 The staff perceived collaboration as .extremely valuable,1 especially in
differentiating instruction and having a .stable staff.1 One respondent said, .Collabora-
tion is really needed at a multi-track school for us to work togetherK1
The interviews revealed both formal and informal collaboration at Crestline.
Formal collaboration consists of the structures that ensure collaborative practices, such as
SMART goal development, implementing the PLC, grade-level meetings with agendas,
and other mandated conversation topics. Informal collaboration consists of interactions
among staff members that are voluntary. All 5 of the respondents discussed the formal
collaboration being initiated by the school principal; however, the collaboration was led
by the task that was needed. All respondents stated that they collaborated with their
closest staff member, either grade-level teams or site administrators. The staff meetings
were reserved for collaboration time within and across grade levels.
We collaborate on practically any major decisions that pertain to a child.
Everybody has some viewpoint on the situation. We collaborate as whole staff
about individual students and as grade levels. The meetings are always around
student data and doing what is best for kids. (Principal Barkley)
93
Formal collaborations occur at the school site on a regular basis. The site
principal constantly collaborated with other staff members about the daily operations and
instructional decision making that is essential to school success. According to Cargile
(2009), successful principals guide transformational change in their schools by constantly
collaborating .to develop and roll out instructional implementation strategies, timelines,
goals assessments and a plan for sharing progress1 (p. 1). The Crestline staff collabor-
ated formally on several occasions during the data collection process. On August 10,
2009, an observation of a leadership team meeting was conducted. While many items
were discussed, including professional development, parent workshops, Math night,
parent survey results, student assessment results, parent volunteers, and other items, the
majority of the time was spent in discussion about the Math night that was being
developed by the school staff. The grade-level leaders were giving input and suggestions
and the principal was taking notes and asking for clarification. The suggestions were all
taken into consideration and grade-level leaders spoke positively and negatively about
ideas. The atmosphere was of discussion around the Math night and the discussion
continued until no staff member had another suggestion. At the end of the meeting Mrs.
Barkley stated, .I will put this discussion in a summary and you will talk to your grade
level.1 The grade-level leaders were then to report back to the principal for the decision.
In that same meeting there was a discussion about the PTA providing financing for field
trips or something else. The principal wanted input and the grade-level leaders were
divided about their priorities. A long discussion was held and the resolution was to
discuss within grade levels and reach a consensus.
94
Informal collaboration occurred, according to the interview respondents, on a
regular basis: .the picking of the brain1 mentality by staff members, according to Mrs.
King, to ensure that students learn and asking questions about how one particular teacher
attained success. Mrs. King discussed the idea that collaboration was cultural norm
because many of the staff had been at Crestline for a long time and there is a .culture1 of
collaboration, which is a key point.
Probably the strongest thing we have going for this school is a long line of people
who have been here for a long time. And the people who have been here set the
tone and that has carried over from other principals and other people who have
been here at this school. (Mrs. Smith)
The collaboration transcends the school site and many of the staff members are
friends outside the workplace. The culture at Crestline is to assimilate new staff mem-
bers into the cultural norm of collaboration. Two of the interview respondents stated that,
when new staff members come to Crestline, veteran staff members teach them about
Crestline in a positive manner. If the teacher does not respond or is negative about
Crestline, they politely .give them the cold shoulder1 and let the new staff member know
that negative behavior will not be tolerated at Crestline.
[Collaboration is about] what kinds of things you can do to help other teachers
and what things you can get from them. The new teachers are coming in with
good ideas and some of them, I am amazed at; however, we [veteran teachers]
have a lot of knowledge and a way to do things. (Mrs. King)
On numerous occasions the researcher observed interactions that were informal
but demonstrated the collaborative culture of Crestline Elementary School. In one
instance a teacher was having a conversation with the school site principal. The teacher
was expressing her concern about a sensitive topic that involved her own child. The
95
teacher wanted input from the principal about how to proceed. The teacherCs body
language showed concern and her comments were concerned with her child but also her
other colleagues at Crestline. The teacher realized that she needed to proceed carefully
and was looking to the principal for advice. The principal recognized the teacherCs
concern and immediately assisted her with the decision and gave the teacher advice. The
principal even stated, .Sometimes, as teachers, we neglect to support our own kids
because we donCt want to hurt one of our colleagues. It is important that you as a parent
are his voice.1 Her demeanor and approach gave the teacher confidence and a direct
approach. The principal stepped out of her role as site administrator to support the
teacher in both roles as a teacher and as a parent. This encounter demonstrated the
collaborative nature of this individual relationship between site administrator and teacher.
At one point in an interview a teacher stated, .We are given a lot of credit for our
knowledge; our principal recognized that we are knowledgeable people.1
The second encounter that showed the informal collaborative nature of the school
site was in a combination classroom. A particular teacher has a combination classroom,
which means that two grade levels are in the same classroom. One student had been
inappropriately placed; thus, another colleague was concerned about this placement and
went to the principal with her concern. The teacher stated to the researcher,
I went to the principal and asked if I could take a particular student out of the
class and into my classroom. That kind of thing happens because you are looking
out for the good of the kids. Not all of us but most of us try to.
The researcher observed the site principal asking two teachers to assist a teacher
who was struggling with the transition into Crestline. The teacher had received a pink
96
slip and had been involuntarily placed at Crestline. The site principal was concerned
with myriad performance issues and offered assistance to the teacher. The site principal,
informally, asked the teachers to help the teacher by allowing her to observe their class-
room environment, classroom management, and implementation of core curriculum.
Both teachers readily agreed to help the teacher and were in agreement with the site
administratorCs estimation. The site principal completed a conference and gave
suggestions for improvement. Also, the site principal afforded a coach to stay with this
particular teacher and mentor her through the core curriculum for an entire week. The
practice of collaboration with teachers seemed normative to the researcher, as the assist-
ing teachers were not surprised by the site administratorCs request and quickly agreed to
assist. In a conference summary the last line stated, .We believe in collaboration and
everyone is here to helpK1 Crestline held collaboration in high regard.
The evidence suggests a correlation at Crestline Elementary School between
collaborative practices, both formal and informal, and a cultural norm. The data
collection instruments (document review, survey responses, observations, and interviews)
revealed a connection between collaboration and student success. The collaborative
nature of the key stakeholders at Crestline assisted in narrowing the achievement gap.
The collaborative cultural norm assisted Crestline in narrowing the achievement
gap for minority student populations. Creating a culture of universal achievement
through working together as a cohesive staff in the daily interactions was critical for
Crestline. According to King and Lopez (2008), consensus is critical for school success
and minority student achievement. The key stakeholders must hold a shared mission,
97
vision, and values and daily emulate their resolve to ensure that the students learn. The
formal collaborative structures at Crestline are emulated as best practices delineated by
DuFour et al. (2008), Marzano (2003), Schmoker (2006), and Williams et al. (2005), all
of which discuss collaborative practices such as data analysis, standards-based curricu-
lum and implementation, and access to core materials as practices that were evident at
Crestline. Informal structures such as the teacher representative and site administrator
working collaboratively, not as adversaries, assisted in student achievement. The norma-
tive practice of informal collaboration was evident in the daily interactions that the
researcher encountered. The underlying tone of the school was positive and helpful from
all participants. The teachers greeted the researcher and offered assistance. The secre-
tary and janitor were very friendly to all who entered Crestline. The informal collabora-
tive nature was evident at every junction of the case study.
Research Question 2: Practices
At Crestline Elementary School there were several school-wide practices that
promoted student achievement. The school-wide practices were shared leadership and
differentiated instruction for all student groups. This reflects the work by DuFour et al.
(2008). There was evidence of shared leadership practices throughout the school site.
The key stakeholders all indicated that shared leadership played a pivotal role in
narrowing the achievement gap. There are three key points to shared leadership. First,
leadership roles are distributed among the key stakeholders and every person has a
critical voice. According to Bolman and Deal (2003), organizations need peopleCs ideas,
opinions, and talents. Second, the shared leadership leads to share decision making.
98
LaRocque (2007) contended that site leadership is the key to school success. Third,
shared leadership leads to critical decision making, which leads to differentiated
instruction (Ferguson, 1998). Differentiated instruction is a key practice that, according
to Hassel and Godard-McNiff (2008), assists in closing the achievement gap. In many
school systems teachers do not know what to do when students do not learn (DuFour et
al., 2008). The evidence at Crestline revealed that minority student populations received
the individualized instruction necessary to narrow the achievement gap and sustain
success.
Shared Leadership
Parent leadership. Crestline had numerous opportunities for leadership roles.
The SARC revealed that parents, teachers, and students conjointly developed the school
site plan, which is the blueprint for all curricular, instructional, and fiscal decisions. The
school site has a teacher leadership team, a student leadership team called Coyote Kids,
and several parent leadership teams, including the School Site Council (SSC), which is
the decision-making body for all categorical funds. The SSC consists of key parents,
teachers, classified personnel, and site administration. The PTA was active at Crestline,
assisting the school with various projects and fundraising. The ELAC was important at
Crestline. The ELAC parents routinely meet to discuss issues about ELL students and
their education. Crestline also has a Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) parent
advisory group that meets three times per year. The document review revealed a master
schedule of events that included information about parent meetings and the various
committee meetings such as SSC, ELAC, GATE, PTA, and other meetings. The SARC
99
contained an entire section on parent involvement in leadership positions at the school
site. The school has a minimum day schedule for staff meetings, leadership team
meetings, and professional development. Crestline has a home-to-school compact that
includes a pledge by parent, student, teacher, and principal. Each pledge delineates the
specific role that key stakeholders should accomplish to educate the students.
The survey revealed that leadership is shared among school personnel. Out of 29
respondents, 15 stated that leadership is shared most of the time and 14 stated that leader-
ship is shared sometimes. No respondents stated that leadership was rarely or never
shared.
Student leadership. Coyote Kids was a student leadership team that afforded the
opportunity for students to hold a voice in the dealings at Crestline Elementary School.
The school site plan discussed a positive culture and climate as critical to the importance
of CrestlineCs daily operations. The school site plan indicated that Crestline selects
student leaders from Grades 3 to 5 each trimester to serve as Coyote Kids. The Coyote
Kids lead Spirit Days and meet weekly. The researcher witnessed a Coyote Kids
leadership meeting in which the students discussed upcoming events and how to get
involved in the school site. The Coyote Kid team was mentioned by all of the interview
respondents. One respondent stated,
Coyote Kids is a student leadership team that runs very well because the team
they look at everything from Spirit Days or motivational days where everyone
gets involved [Spirit Days]. All the teachers and kids wear Sports memorabilia.
It makes everyone happy and the staff comes together especially the kids because
they put it all together.
100
G rade-level leadership. The leadership team at Crestline was comprised of
grade- level leaders who met regularly to discuss student and school issues. The master
schedule delineated their meeting days; the site principal had an agenda to follow. The
teachers elected the leadership team or, in some instances, the leader was whoever
volunteered at that particular grade level. The leadership team placed a heavy emphasis
on collaborative practices and shared decision making. In the open-ended response
section of the staff input survey, several respondents stated that school leadership was
very strong and supportive. The leadership was within the staff itself that teachers
provided leadership because the teachers are hardworking and motivated.
Teacher leadership. The teachers at Crestline were experts at their field. The
staff was composed of an extremely veteran crew. The average years of teaching was
14.9. All of the interview respondents stated that teachers were to deliver the core
curriculum and ensure that students learn. The teachers were given the authority to lead
their classrooms and to work cooperatively with colleagues. In many instances, the site
administration alluded to the teacherCs expertise and knowledge.
When the principal and I c>##)U>6)/"9'+!"')#()*+'+)*+9'.Bet me talk to the teachers
and find out what they think. Let me get their input.1' She will take things to the
team and say, .P)T"'/!2+'/>'*>&6'?6)-"-level team and see what they think.1''P!"*'
are very honest; if they think it is a bad idea, they will let us know but in a very
professional way. (Assistant Principal)
According to the document review, the student intervention team led by teachers
and administrators was important in shared leadership practices and to provide differenti-
ated instruction for students at need. The parent-student handbook stated,
Students are most successful where there is a strong spirit of cooperation between
home and school. Based on our shared responsibility, the SIT meets at school to
101
explore possibilities and strategies that will best meet the educational needs of
your student. Students are typically referred by the classroom teacher, but any
member or the school staff may request support from the SIT team for a student
whose learning, behavior or emotional needs are not being met under existing
circumstances. (Canyon Crest Parent Student Handbook, 2009-2010, p. 5)
The SIT team met regularly to discuss students and implement instructional or behavioral
strategies to ensure student success. The SIT team was composed of the general educa-
tion teacher, IST, site administrators, grade-level leaders, parents, and any other school
personnel who had pertinent student information. The other staff members could include
a nurse, psychologist, or tutor monitor. Table 7 summarizes the responses to survey
questions related to research question 2.
The shared leadership opportunities at Crestline involved all key stakeholders.
Parents, staff members, site administrators, and even students had many venues to lead
the school. The leadership team was where the grade-level leaders could share input and
make decisions. The teachers were given the authority over their own classroom, their
content delivery, and instructional decisions. The principal respected the teachers and
their experience by granting them authority over their individual classrooms and content
delivery.
In an elementary school setting it is rare that students have a leadership capacity.
At Crestline students were valued and given many opportunities to get involved.
Northouse (2007) described leadership in two capacities: assigned and emerged.
Assigned leadership are those roles that are delineated by title or positions. Emerged
leadership is found in roles that emerge based on need or influence. At Crestline many of
102
Table 7
Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 2
SA A SoD StD
Item Most Some Rarely Never
8. The school has a systematic process for
identifying and assisting struggling students. 62.0 34.0 3.4 0.0
9. School administration communicates
vision and goals to the staff. 83.0 17.0 0.0 0.0
10. School administration ensures the
analysis of student assessment data. 96.0 4.0 0.0 0.0
11. School administration provides support for
implementation of new instructional practices. 76.0 24.0 0.0 0.0
12. School administration provides ways to
improve instructional strategies to meet the
needs of students with diverse backgrounds. 55.0 45.0 0.0 0.0
13. CST scores and district assessments are
used to plan your instructional program. 76.0 21.0 3.0 0.0
14. Student data is used to identify the
instructional needs of my students. 86.0 10.0 3.4 0.0
15. You utilize the California State Standards
to plan and deliver instruction. 96.5 3.4 0.0 0.0
Note. SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SoD = Somewhat Disagree, StD = Strongly
Disagree. Most = Most of the Time, Some = Sometimes. Responses to item 30,
.E>00",/+')U>&/'/!"'6>#"'>%'+@!>>#'#")-"6+!2$'(!2@!'!"#$"-'/>'@lose the achievement
?)$1<'Data analysis, very strong and supportive leadership at Crestline, helps guide the
discussions at grade level meetings for individual student needs, leadership has changed a
lot over the years, leadership teams are the grade-level chairs, administration works with
staff to solve problems and get things done, leadership comes from within the staff3
teachers provide leadership, great principal, extra time for planning.
103
the shared leadership roles have emerged based on need or skill set within the key stake-
holders. These leadership roles have taken on a structure that is unique to Crestline.
Differentiated Instruction/Intervention
Differentiated instruction, or intervention, also played a pivotal role in narrowing
the achievement gap for minority students. In this dissertation differentiated instruction
and intervention are synonymous terms that refer to assistance for at-risk student popula-
tions or enrichment for gifted students. The school has school-wide clustering for ELD
or GATE by student levels on a daily basis, as noted in the schoolCs master schedule.
The differentiated instructional clustering was scheduled 4 days a week for 40 minutes.
The regular day bell schedule has two parts. First, the bell schedule consists of actual
instructional minutes delineated by a bell; second is the ELD, GATE, and physical
education clustering schedule. This bell schedule was unique to Crestline as it sent a
message through the document review that differentiated instruction was critical to
Crestline Elementary School.
The differentiated schedule was broken down further in another document.
Differentiated instruction was called clustering at Crestline, in which students across
grade levels rotated to classrooms for instruction. The students were grouped according
to ELL and California English Language Development Test (CELDT) results, CST
results, and GATE identified status. The principal created the clustering schedule and
administrators conducted walkthroughs to ensure implementation. Of 29 respondents, 28
responded that they strongly agreed or agreed that school administration conducts class-
room observations frequently. This schedule delineated who was teaching the clustering
104
levels by teacher, track, and date. It was extremely detailed but the site administrators
left the instructional time, curriculum, and content delivery to the individual teacher and
grade-level leaders.
During one observation the researcher observed the site principal, Mrs. Barkley,
compiling information about ELL levels according to the CELDT. Her purpose was to
ensure that the English learners were progressing in language development and that the
staff recognized that the clustering was working for the ELL students. Preliminary
CELDT scores revealed that Crestline ELL students were making adequate progress.
Eighteen respondents stated that they strongly agreed and 10 agreed that the
school has a systematic process for identifying and assisting struggling students. Accord-
ing to DuFour et al. (2006), .Phe school will develop consistent, systematic procedures to
ensure each student is guaranteed additional time and support when needed1 (p. 1). This
practice was evident at Crestline by using data to identify at-risk students. All of the
interview respondents stated that Mrs. Barkley used data on a regular basis and shared it
with the teachers. These data were disaggregated for individual students who were in
need of extra assistance or intervention. Then the teacher knew exactly which student
needed differentiated instruction.
According to the staff input survey, the school addresses the needs of struggling
students. All of the staff input survey responses are listed in Appendix F. Twenty-six of
the 29 respondents stated that the school addresses the needs of struggling students most
of the time and 3 respondents stated that sometimes the school addresses the needs of
struggling students. Twenty-four of the 29 respondents stated that they provided
105
differentiated instruction to meet the needs of all students and 5 respondents chose
sometime. The types of interventions or differentiated instruction offered at Crestline,
according to the staff input survey, included after-school tutoring, in-class tutoring,
pullout intervention, peer tutoring, off-track classes, and homework assistance. In the
open-ended response section 10 respondents stated that differentiated instruction was
extremely important. The idea was that differentiated instruction .catches kids who are
starting to fall through the cracks.1
The researcher observed a clustering classroom of gifted and talented students.
The lesson was fast paced and highly cognitive, according to BloomCs taxonomy. The
students in a fourth- and fifth-grade classroom were studying homelessness. The teacher
reviewed key vocabulary such as empathy and apathy. The teacher asked the students
whether apathy could be a feeling. The teacher kept repeating the statement, .I have no
idea if apathy is a feeling, what do you think?1 At one point in the lesson one student
was not listening or paying attention to the lesson. The teacher said to him, .This is a
class where we think. If you donCt want to think, you should tell your teacher to put you
in another class.1 The expectation was that GATE students should think about content
and higher-order thinking. The lesson continued with a survey about why people become
homeless and a bar graph representation including the terminology that the researcher had
learned in an advanced statistics class in college. The differentiated instruction was
abundantly clear throughout the lesson.
All of the interviewees stated that workshop was a critical element to providing
differentiated instruction. Workshop was a component of the Open Court curriculum that
106
focused on teaching a specific skill to students who need assistance. The teacher utilized
differentiated instructional strategies to assist students. The school coordinated the pull-
out programs such as the IST, tutor monitors, and Resource Specialist program at the
same time as the classroom workshop activities. The site administration and leadership
team worked collaboratively to make workshop time specific targeted instruction for at-
risk students. By coordinating the various pullout programs, the general education class-
room was smaller in size and assisted the teacher in small group instruction.
Shared leadership and differentiated instruction were two school-wide practices
that allowed Crestline to narrow the achievement gap. There were numerous opportuni-
ties for the educators, parents, and students to voice their opinion and make decisions.
This shared leadership led to school decisions that were best for academic achievement.
Differentiated instruction was critical for minority student achievement at Crestline.
Students who have diverse learning needs must receive the proper instruction. Daily,
Crestline demonstrated that students would receive instruction that was tailored to their
specific learning needs.
Research Question 3: Programs
The aim of the research question regarding programs was to discover what
programs had been purchased or created to assist in narrowing the achievement gap. In
the age of a plethora of resources available to school site personnel, the decision to
purchase a program that assists school sites is difficult at best, almost impossible. The
publishing companies are constantly selling their products as the best purchase to ensure
that students learn. Haycock (2001) stated that a challenging curriculum aligned to
107
standards has been proven to increase student achievement. The literature also revealed
that schools should provide a rigorous core curriculum based on the standards (Marzano,
2003). The case study design examined the programs currently employed at Crestline to
instruct all students but specifically minority student groups. In this section the core-
adopted curriculum is discussed as important to narrowing the achievement gap and
ensuring individual student success. Williams et al. (2005) discussed access to quality
core materials and alignment to state standards as critical to minority student
achievement.
The adopted core curriculum, Avenues for ELL students, Open Court for
language arts, and Houghton Mifflin for mathematics, emerged as school-wide programs
that supported all students. The literature review concluded that having an adopted core
program that is fully implemented increases student achievement (Marzano, 2003). Open
Court was adopted in Forerunning Unified School District in 2002 and was implemented
as the core language arts curriculum.
The document review revealed that the teachers for direct instruction and work-
shop to .meet the needs of all learners1 used Avenues, Open Court, and Houghton
Mifflin. Workshop was a component of Open Court Language Arts that was a small
group instruction model of intervention that was scheduled in both language arts and,
recently, mathematics. The teachers were able to .differentiate instruction and work to
assist or challenge children in flexible, skill-based groups1 (Canyon Crest Parent Student
Handbook, 2009-2010, p. 19) according to the school site plan. Crestline provides all
materials to implement the core-adopted curriculum, Open Court and Houghton Mifflin.
108
The materials are state approved and aligned with the California content standards, which
the literature review suggested was a key component in narrowing the achievement gap.
The Open Court curriculum is aligned with a data management system called Online
Assessment Reporting System (OARS), which has 6-week assessments built into every
grade level. The assessments are designed to monitor and assess learning on skills taught
in the Open Court curriculum; thus, the adopted core program Open Court assisted staff
in narrowing the achievement gap. The 6-week unit assessments, according to the
SARC, assist teachers in .forming flexible skill groups for small group instruction during
workshop1 (Canyon Crest Parent Student Handbook, 2009-2010, p. 19). The ability to
identify underperforming students on a monthly basis allowed the staff members to
intervene appropriately. The unit assessments are also reported in OARS for language
arts and mathematics. This information is used to develop SMART goals according to
the Open Court and Houghton Mifflin assessment results. Table 8 summarizes the
responses to survey questions related to research question 3.
All of the respondents in the interviews concluded that the core adopted program
was crucial for success in narrowing the achievement gap. During the interview the
principal stated,
I am a big believer with the core curriculum; these days the core program comes
with a lot of resources for student. I would say that in terms of meeting the needs
of all students that the core program has all of the components. It meets the needs
of the advanced students, students who need intervention and other students with
diverse needs.
Three of the 5 interview respondents specifically mentioned Open Court as a program
that has improved student achievement in literacy skills. The mathematics program has
109
Table 8
Summary of Survey Results for Research Question 3
Item Responses
25. What specific program does the Developing SMART goals
school use to promote collaboration? Using OARS data
Staff and grade-level meetings
Minimum Day usage
Principal directed
27. What instructional programs do you Open Court Program (f = 11)
use in your classroom that have helped Avenues, ELD, and clustering
close the achievement gap? Intervention programs (SRA,
Thinking Mpas, Kaleidoscope)
Step Up to Writing
Accelerated Reader/Accelerated Math
Reteaching and direct instruction
Small group instruction
28. Please share any comments you may Working together
have about the role of intervention in ELD and Avenues/Rotations
closing the achievement gap at your After-school tutoring (cut due to
school. budget concerns)
Small group instruction
Note. Responses to item 18, The school utilizes a specific program to analyze student
data: 45% Most of the Time, 55% Sometimes. SMART = specific, measurable, attainable,
realistic, timely, OARS = Online Assessment Reporting System, ELD = English
Language Development.
not been a core focus at Crestline because, as reported by the two of the respondents,
.We have always been pretty good at math. Our scores in Math have never gone down,
we have always been alright in mathK1''Phus, Crestline spends more time with Open
Court and Avenues.
110
Avenues is a program to assist ELL students with English development. The
ELD program revolved around Avenues and the systematic implementation of a supple-
mental program to develop literacy skills in English. The ELL students are clustered in
small instructional groups based on their CELDT scores and the teachers use Avenues to
instruct for 38 minutes per day four times per week. The teachers switch students within
their particular grade level to ensure that students are receiving the right curriculum, as
Avenues has multiple levels of proficiency. Avenues was reported by 3 of the 5 inter-
viewees as a key element that teachers utilize to narrow the achievement gap. The ELD
time was started 2 years ago and continues through the 2009-2010 school year, as
evidenced by the document review, interviews, and observations.
Nine of the 29 respondents to the open-ended survey item rated Open Court as the
top program that has helped to close the achievement gap. In classroom observations
there was evidence of Open Court implementation in the Sound/Spelling cards posted in
the front of all classrooms. Concept/Question boards were being utilized in classroom
observations. Avenues had 4 respondents positively associating it with narrowing the
achievement gap for ELLs and during clustering for differentiated instruction.
Emergent Themes F rom the Data Collection
The themes that emerged through the case study were due to the collaborative
culture that Crestline has established over the years. Several themes emerged throughout
the data collection and analysis process: collaboration, shared leadership, differentiated
instruction or intervention, and an implemented core instructional program. These
themes were evident across multiple data sources. The documents, surveys, interviews,
111
and observations soundly supported the themes; however, the element of sustainability
was a secondary criterion for the emergent themes. The survey responses are reported at
length in Appendix F. The cultural norm of collaboration was evident. This collabora-
tion was among all school stakeholders, both formally and informally. Effective
collaboration has lent itself to shared leadership practices among school personnel. The
current principal regularly ensured that teachers had time to collaborate during staff
meetings and grade-level meetings. The staff discussed best practices and strategies to
meet the needs of all students, including ELLs, GATE students, and minority students.
The FTA contract delineated up to half of the preparatory time to be used for collabora-
tive purposes (FTA, 2009). Bolman and Deal (2003) discussed this practice from the
human resource framework. A common assumption is that people and organizations
need each other.
The organizations need the ideas, energy and talent of its people; people need
careers, salaries and opportunities. A good fit benefits both. Individuals find
meaningful and satisfying work . Organization get the talent and energy that they
need to succeed. (Bolman & Deal, 2003, p. 115).
Crestline has this symbiotic relationship via the collaboration that occurs at the school
site and a narrowing of the achievement gap occurred via the API assessment results.
Collaboration
Trilling (2009) discussed the ability to collaborate and communicate as a critical
skill that 21st-century learners will need to be globally competitive in the worldCs market.
Working together to solve problems and become innovative are necessary for students to
learn to be future leaders. Crestline Elementary School capitalized on this skill when
they created a collaborative culture for all students, staff members, parents, and
112
administrators. The formal structures in place at Crestline include what the literature
refers to as a PLC (DuFour et al., 2008). CrestlineCs collaborative strategies align with
the PLC model of effective schools, including ensuring that all students learn, a school
culture of collaboration for school-wide success, and a focus on results using assessment
data to drive instructional practices and programs.
Data analysis was an integral part of the daily routine at Crestline. The site
administrator routinely updated a spreadsheet that held pertinent information about every
student and shared this spreadsheet with the teachers. The documents at Crestline
indicate that collaboration was important by aligning fiscal resources and having
collaboration times/days for staff members to discuss important topics. The topics
included identification of struggling students, formulation of a plan, and instructional
strategies to accomplish the plan.
All of the interviewees stated that the underlying culture was one of cooperation
not competition. Relationships were found to be important both in the literature and in
the case study; the collaborative relationships within Crestline could be the most
important factor that helped to narrow the achievement gap, according to the data. Mrs.
King stated informally,
The culture is one that helps each other and finds solutions. If someone is com-
plaining in the lounge, the other staff members will listen politely and then turn
the other way. The person will get the cold shoulder if they are not contributing
to helping Crestline achieve their goals. Eventually, the person comes around or
they are no longer at Crestline.
Collaboration was perceived by the staff members to be integral to CrestlineCs success.
During observations the staff meetings and leadership team meetings were collaborative
113
and the key stakeholders met together to discuss best practices, data analysis, and shared
decision making, which are key elements to the PLC mantra (DuFour et al., 2008).
Shared Leadership
Shared leadership was another emergent theme regarding practices at Crestline
Elementary School. The data collection process revealed numerous leadership
opportunities in which decision making was shared among the key stakeholders.
Teachers were given freedom over instruction and content delivery. The leadership team
was what Bolman and Deal (2003) referred to as the political frame. The leadership team
was composed of grade-level leaders who were the spokespeople for the other teachers.
The parents held numerous leadership roles via various committees and specifically as
key decision makers on the SSC.
Students were afforded a voice via the Coyote Kids student leadership team. All
interviewees discussed Coyote Kids as improving the school climate. The assistant
principal stated, .Coyote Kids is a student leadership team that runs very well because
they look at everything from Spirit Days or motivational days in which all the teachers
and kids participate. It makes everyone happy.1 Darling-Hammond (2000) discussed the
idea that students learn more deeply when they apply classroom knowledge to real-world
problems and when they take part in projects that require sustained engagement and
collaboration. The Coyote Kids team offered Crestline students the opportunity to assist
the school and solve problems. They controlled the school-wide Spirit events and
assisted site administrators in the family nights to increase parent involvement.
114
The site administrator stated on numerous occasions, .I love this staff. They
never fight me on things. We have discussions about issues and come up with the best
solution together.1 This shared leadership was evident throughout the data collection
process.
Differentiated Instruction
Crestline also had a school-wide practice of meeting the needs of all learners,
including subgroup populations. Daily, the students participated in differentiated
instruction in terms of rotations for ELLs of various literacy levels and GATE students.
During the initial implementation phase, teachers were hesitant to share students; since
this practice was enacted 3 years ago, the evidence of student learning has assisted
teachers to continue the rotations. The uninterrupted rotation block occurred daily and
was scheduled by the grade-level team. The grade level decided the time block and the
site administrator managed which teacher taught the particular rotation group. Instruction
was tailored to meet the individualCs educational need, whether it was language level or
cognitive ability.
During observations the intervention groups showed that students were more
likely to participate in small group settings and take .risks1 within the group that were
not apparent in the whole class setting. The IST stated that .the students feel safe and
confident because it is not scary for them to try in a small group setting; this helps them
to learn faster and catch up to their peersK1 The IST and the Resource Specialist worked
collaboratively to schedule intervention during the same time block, thus reducing the
class size in the general setting and giving individualized instruction to students in need.
115
As with the PLC model, the teacher examined assessment data to ensure that
students were placed appropriately in instructional programs. The rotation groups were
built on using assessment data, and teachers had the freedom to move students into
different groups based on ability.
We monitor the students classroom placement closely. That is why we have
SERT [Special Education Review Team] meetings, IEP meetings, and the SIT
process. We go through the cums [cumulative records] and talk to previous
schools. (Assistant Principal)
During staff development, rotations and ELD were core topics for the entire staff. One
staff development day in August 2009 was devoted entirely to ELD for rotation teachers.
The observations revealed that CrestlineCs documents supported differentiated instruction
and daily operations validated the finding. Differentiated instruction also included
tutoring for at-risk student populations and intervention during the core language arts
population in small groups. This scheduling allowed the general education teacher to use
differentiated instruction in the classroom and be more effective with at-risk student
students. Differentiated instruction was identified by teachers as a critical element in
narrowing the achievement gap for minority students.
Implementation of the Core Curriculum
The core adopted program and differentiated instruction with diverse student
populations constituted a critical theme that emerged in data collection. The intervention
practice was implemented with the adoption of the core language arts program in 2002.
The school has become more specific over the past 3 years in planning and implementing
effective instruction for students of diverse populations with the inception of clustering
groups daily. The Open Court curriculum is designed to be cyclical and consistent.
116
Every year that a student is emerged within the Open Court program, skill level increases
until mastery is achieved in literacy skills. The principal stated that the program that
improved content learning especially for students with diverse needs was .the core
curriculum because it comes with a lot of resources for students. It has all of the
components to meet all studentCs needs including the advanced or at riskK1
The Open Court program was mentioned by many staff members as essential to
improving student achievement in literacy skills. Part of the Open Court curriculum
included workshop time. Four of the 5 interviewees listed workshop as how classroom
instruction is differentiated to meet the needs of all students in Open Court. Workshop
time, according to the principal, ensured that .kids are doing things instead of just
listening and the kids are working independently. Teachers are working within a small
group on needed skills.1 Crestline had purchased the supplemental materials for Open
Court and mathematics to assist students with their academic achievement. Crestline has
fully implemented the core-adopted programs for language arts, mathematics, and ELL.
This has assisted the school in closing the achievement gap and continuing success.
Themes Woven Within Bolman and Deal
The central focus of Crestline was improving academic achievement by each and
every student; the core ideology was to make every student proficient or advanced. The
collaborative nature of Crestline was consistent with Bolman and DealC+ (2003) human
resource frame of leadership.
The relationship between the people and organizations. Organizations need
people and people need organizations. When the fit between people and
organizations is good, it benefits both parties: Individuals find meaningful and
117
satisfying work and organizations get talent and the energy they need to succeed.
(p. 132).
The staff meeting and leadership time was delineated to analyze student performance data
and collaborate with colleagues on best practices. The staff at Crestline consisted of
many employees who were veteran to the organization. The median years of service was
14.9, which Bolman and Deal (2003) referred to as .keep the employeesK1 When people
are satisfied in their positions, they are more apt to stay within the organization and do a
good job, according to the human resource framework. The collaborative nature at Crest-
line transformed the school site into a successful organization because the administration
recognized the human resource potential in all staff members.
The political framework was apparent through the interactions with the site
administrator. On several occasions the researcher observed the principal fighting for the
rights of the school site, staff members or students. .When problems arise, I work with
the parent, I work with the teacher, and it always comes back to what is best for the
studentK1 In one instance the principal was attempting to get new technology into the
school for individualized instructional purposes. The school district blocked her decision
by not approving due to a .streamlining of equipment1 at the district office level. The
principal appealed the decision to the proper authority because .our school has unique
needs and the district needs to think about thatK1 Bolman and Deal referred to this as
position power within an organization. The site administrator used her position power to
obtain needed resources for Crestline on several occasions.
The shared leadership at Crestline had evidence of the structural framework of
Bolman and Deal. The site administration, grade-level leaders, and classroom teachers
118
believed and were motivated to ensure that all students learn at the highest levels. This
structural belief aligned with Bolman and Deal (2003) in their .belief in the rationality
and a faith that the right formal arrangements minimize problems and maximize
performance1 (p. 44). The leadership opportunities afforded Crestline the opportunity to
succeed. For example, the leadership team made site administrators aware of problems
and allowed grade levels an opportunity to make decisions. In an elementary school set-
ting, it is rare that students have a voice; Coyote Kids allowed the structure for students
to make decisions and fix problems. The grade-level teams planned and implemented
instructional strategies for diverse student groups; this structure ensured that the students
would learn at the highest levels. Crestline decided that the school structures should
align for student achievement to occur. Bolman and Deal (2003) cited the structural
framework as critical for an organization to be efficient.
The symbolic framework was evident as the researcher entered the building. The
hallways were lined with important symbols and signs. The hallways told a story without
saying a word. The evidence that Crestline was interested in parent involvement,
academic achievement, attendance, student performance, and collaboration was written
on the walls. Throughout the interviews many respondents discussed stories about
particular students that epitomized CrestlineCs caring nature toward student achievement.
During one observation the assistant principal was sitting under a tree talking to a student
who was having a rough day. She coaxed the student back to the classroom and then
explained his entire social and academic history. The way in which she described this
119
student led the researcher to feel empathy while maintaining high standards for his
behavior.
Summary
Crestline challenged ideology that .there is nothing a person cannot do to close
the achievement gapK1 Crestline employed cultural norms, practices, and programs that
helped them to sustain success for all student groups. The document review allowed the
researcher to gain a sense of what was important to Crestline and helped to guide the
inquiry. While observing Crestline, administering surveys, and conducting interviews,
the information was made clear to the researcher. The themes that emerged cut across
data sources to achieve triangulation. Collaboration, shared leadership, differentiated
instruction, and a core adopted and implemented instructional program combined to
ensure that students learned at the highest levels.
Sustainability was identified b y the thematic dissertation group as critical for
student success. Crestline has sustained success using collaboration, shared leadership,
differentiated instruction, and core adopted programs. The staff members at Crestline
collaborate about student success and school success. This has been a cultural norm
since its opening 17 years ago and has helped to sustain the schoolCs success. The staff at
Crestline have largely remained the same and their operating principle of .doing what is
best for kids every day1 has remained constant. This ideology has transcended changes
in administration, staff and student populations; it is the core of the Crestline school
community. This core was sustained by the concerted efforts of the school staff and was
emulated throughout their cultural norms, practices, and programs. The collaborative
120
efforts have led to shared leadership, differentiated instruction, and fidelity to the core
program.
Protheroe (2010) defined turnaround as a .documented, quick, dramatic and
sustained change in the performance of an organization1 (p. 28). Turnaround schools and
turnaround efforts have been the discussion of educators for the past decade. The main
premise is that organizations must drastically alter their cultural norms, practices, and
programs to achieve and sustain success. CrestlineCs cultural norms, practices, and
programs challenge this premise as their daily operations, interactions, and instructional
strategies have sustained success. The achievement gap had narrowed over the past 10
years as measured by state assessment data and the similar schools ranking. The drastic
idea of turnaround was not necessary at Crestline because the school had sustained
success within the organization. Sustainability was about becoming an effective school
organization that utilized fiscal and human resources efficiently and narrowed the
achievement gap. Crestline decided and acted on becoming a place where every student
learned at the highest levels to become proficient.
During the case study the researcher discovered that Crestline was unique in many
ways. The most profound way was that the collaborative nature and shared leadership
was different from other schools. The staff members talked and discussed issues in a
professional manner. Yet, there was a hidden element that was sustained throughout the
years. The hidden element was not evident within the documents or casual observation.
The undercurrent at Crestline was one of friendship. The staff members were friends,
inside and outside of the workplace. They believed in each other and were a source of
121
support in good times and bad times. When a new staff member joined the Crestline
staff, he or she was oriented by the subtle interactions of professionalism and a positive
school culture. The new staff member was inducted into a culture that held high expecta-
tions for students, a practice that has continued since Crestline opened. When a staff
member complains or is negative, other staff members ignore them or let them know
quietly that this practice is unacceptable at Crestline. Their interactions at staff meetings
and in the lounge were friendly and supportive; that culture was evident in many inter-
actions. The school capitalized on the collaborative culture by creating a climate that
centered on student achievement.
122
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
To be competitive as a nation, the achievement gap problem must be addressed.
Minority student populations are increasing across the country but the achievement gap is
also increasing. Many educators and laymen continue to find excuses for minority
student achievement. Some examples of typical excuses include that, if these students ate
a good breakfast, if they had supportive parents, if they arrived to school on time, if they
spoke English, if they were well behaved, if their families were not dysfunctional or
avoided gangs, drugs and alcohol3then, they would learn. These common excuses run
rampant in educational institutions across the country (King & Lopez, 2008).
These factors are external to the school environment and yet they are routinely
employed by school personnel to abdicate responsibility for teaching minority students.
The personnel at Crestline employed strategies to ensure that all students learned,
regardless of external factors. Crestline has achieved an API score of 804, which is the
statewide target in California; this achievement score is a milestone for Crestline due to
the significant student minority population. The statewide rank of similar schools placed
Crestline at 9 in terms of similar demographics and assessment results, which translated
to Crestline far exceeding expectations.
Summary of Findings
The data collection process included document review, surveys, observations, and
interviews to achieve triangulation to increase validity and reliability for the case study
design. Several key themes emerged: collaboration, shared leadership practices,
123
differentiated instruction, and implementing a core adopted program for all students.
These themes were observed and documented through the various data collection
instruments.
Crestline has a unique culture in that the staff consists mainly of veteran teachers
who opened the school 17 years ago. The school has had a high turnover in administra-
tion, with eight administrators over the years; thus, the teachers reported in their inter-
views that they had learned to band as a collective group to assist students. The underly-
ing culture was described by one staff member:
Probably the strongest thing we have going for this school is a long line of people
who have been here for a long time. And the people who have been here for a
long time set the tone and that has carried over from other principals and other
people who have been here at this school. When new teachers come in, we kind
take them under our wings and help them out.
This mentality was repeated throughout the data collection process. The people set the
tone and lead the school.
Collaboration
As described in Chapter 4, collaboration occurred in the school community,
which included parents, staff members, administration, and even students. The collabor-
ative nature at Crestline was apparent to the researcher at arrival and continued through-
out the data collection process. Building relationships is important, according to DuFour
et al. (2008) and critical to the development of a highly successful team. The collabora-
tion occurred among all key stakeholders, both informally and formally.
124
Shared Leadership
Leadership at the school was typically fluid, with site administration routinely
replaced every few years by district personnel. Principals who show remarkable progress
are routinely commended and then promoted out of the school site. This practice is
normative across school districts throughout the country. If having an established site
leadership is an essential factor in narrowing the achievement gap, then schools that have
shifting site administration are at a significant disadvantage. A theme that emerged from
the data was shared leadership. The school site experienced several site administrator
changes since opening 17 years ago. The assistant principal was new to the school site.
The Crestline staff respected the current principal and worked cooperatively with her; the
principal respected the staff and listened to their opinions. This symbiotic relationship
led to shared leadership, which led to shared decision making and a quality educational
program for all students.
Differentiated Instruction
Crestline addressed the needs of diverse learners. For ELLs, Crestline had
specific instruction and materials to increase language and vocabulary in English daily by
CELDT level. For gifted students, daily instruction at high levels was offered to increase
student achievement. Every student was involved in clustering on a daily basis for a
specific length of time. The site administrator assisted teachers in identifying the
studentCs diverse learning needs and monitored via assessment results. She routinely
updated and shared this information with the school staff. Daily, teachers instructed in
small learning groups for further intervention. The school schedule was built on the
125
premise that differentiated instruction would take place at Crestline. The support
personnel such as the IST and Resource Specialist pulled students out of the regular
education classroom for further intervention, decreasing the class size for small group
instruction.
Implementation of the Core Adopted Program
Forerunning Unified School District provided Crestline with core materials for all
student populations and Crestline implemented those materials. The result was universal
norms for instruction and a cyclical program designed for student mastery. Open Court
was implemented in 2002 and became the sole language arts program. Open Court came
with supplemental materials for ELLs, challenge materials for the gifted, and intervention
guides for at-risk students. Crestline faithfully implemented the Open Court curriculum
for students and has seen clear success reflected in assessment results. The mathematics
program was adopted 2 years ago and the CST mathematics scores show clear progress
by student groups. Avenues was employed by the Crestline staff to teach English to
ELLs. During the clustering many teachers used Avenues for instructional purposes.
Minority students demonstrated their literacy skills and Crestline was a Title I
Distinguished School in 2006.
A Comparison of Emergent Themes F rom the
Literature and the Case Study
The factors identified in the literature and the themes that emerged from the case
study were similar. There was evidence that many of the best practices outlined in the
literature review were occurring at Crestline Elementary School. The school personnel
felt the effects of the current NCLB initiative. None of the respondents could name the
126
actual mission statement for Crestline. Instead, two interviewees stated that every student
should be proficient or advanced or meet the AYP and API criteria. The literature
revealed that the achievement gap was a main priority for policy makers and educational
stakeholders; however, the researcher did not hear the words achievement gap mentioned
during data collection. The students were referred to individually, not by race, socioeco-
nomic status, or special education status. The emphasis was on student achievement for
all students and ensuring that all students had access to a rigorous academic program.
PLCs were a key element in the literature review; however, the researcher did not
hear or observe Crestline staff discuss the PLC model. Crestline had many of the
normative practices that DuFour et al. (2008) discussed as keys to increasing student
achievement. Crestline had a collaborative culture, looked at student data, provided
intervention, and re-assessed for student learning. They also utilized a style of shared
leadership for many things. Collaborative culture, shared leadership, and intervention
were key themes that emerged from the data collection.
Additional Findings
There are two additional factors at this school that might be factors in considering
the narrowing of the achievement gap and sustaining success. First, the school is
relatively small, with only 790 students, and one fourth of the students are off-track, as
this is a year-round school. Small schools routinely outperform larger schools due to the
personalization of education (Cotton, 2001). The school organizes students into small
learning units by utilizing support personnel to decrease class size. The IST, Resource
Specialist, and tutor monitors are used to make regular education classes smaller, thus
127
providing smaller class sizes. The staff consists mainly of veteran teachers, which could
be a major contributing factor to implementing the literatureCs best practices.
Second, many of the respondents stated that after-school tutoring was critical to
the schoolCs success. Due to budget cuts, tutoring practices were not available in 2008-
2009 or 2009-2010. The tutoring program was mentioned in the document review,
surveys, and interviews as critical to minority student achievement. The researcher had
no opportunity to observe the tutoring program; thus, tutoring could have played an
important role in narrowing the achievement gap at Crestline over the years.
Implications
The implications of this case study design are promising for practitioners in
similar schools. Schools that learn how to sustain success and forward momentum in
closing the achievement gap defy the odds for minority student populations. The current
educational system has a spotlight on subgroup populations due to NCLB. Historically,
minority student populations have been ignored. It is fortunate that this practice has
ended and that schools are challenged to address the learning needs of all students,
specifically minority student groups.
Crestline Elementary is defying the odds and narrowing the achievement gap.
Their cultural norms, practices, and programs work together to ensure that all students
learn. Their individual and collective actions help to educate minority students. This
school has sustained success due to many factors, such as collaboration, shared leader-
ship, intervention, and core adopted programs. Crestline is a school where the main issue
is not the achievement gap but educating all students.
128
A reas for Further Research
Popular opinion states that minority students cannot learn for many reasons.
These opinions are not based on research but on feelings. Feelings should be replaced by
facts. The majority of the staff at Crestline agreed that all students could learn and
operated under that core belief. There is promising research from Damon and Lopez
(2008) that outlines what schools can do when they truly believe that every student can
learn and there are no excuses for failure. Further research could examine schools that
are under the No Excuses University (King & Lopez, 2008) and compare findings to
those reported in this case study.
Crestline had a unique approach to intervention or differentiated instruction.
Students were clustered daily into homogeneous learning groups and offered differenti-
ated instruction. Concurrently, Crestline offers tutoring for at-risk populations and
specialized teachers such as the IST and Resource Specialist coordinate efforts to
decrease class size in general education classrooms. This practice is unique to Crestline
and could be the strongest factor in narrowing the achievement gap. Further research
could examine this practice and measure the effectiveness of this coordinated effort for
minority students. The research questions could focus on specific interventions for
minority student groups.
It would be beneficial to continue this study into further implementation of the
NCLB benchmarks. As NCLB continues, proficiency targets increase. Crestline has met
its proficiency targets for the past 7 years; however, last year the school failed to meet
AYP criteria for the first time. It would be interesting to determine whether the school
129
held its same core values and daily operations in the face of the threat of Program
Improvement status, to answer the question, Does this school sustain cultural norms,
practices, and programs in the face of political pressures to perform? Further research
with this school could shed light on the ramifications of policies for minority student
achievement and the growing achievement gap.
Conclusion
We live in a world in which we need to share responsibility. ItCs easy to say, .ItCs
not my child, not my community, not my world, not my problem.1' Then there are
those who see the need and respond. I consider those people my heroes. (Rogers,
2001, para. 12)
The Crestline community consisted of heroes who saw a need and responded.
The findings for Crestline Elementary School hold promise for educational practitioners
working in high-poverty minority schools. The daily operations at Crestline outlined the
best practices highlighted in the literature review. The school personnel worked daily to
ensure that all students learn. With declining fiscal resources, school personnel must be
strategic about what their organization uses to educate students. Crestline learned how to
educate students by using what they had to close the achievement gap: personnel, parents,
and students.
Crestline created a collaborative culture with shared leadership opportunities and
used the best instructional strategies to assist at-risk students. These cultural norms,
practices, and programs are rare in education and should be replicated because many
minority student groups are underachieving. A school that has these characteristics has
the potential to change the lives and futures of countless minority students. With limited
fiscal resources and a history of changing site administrators, Crestline has learned to
130
capitalize on their most important resources: human resources and relationships. This
case study highlighted the need for key stakeholders to work together to ensure that all
students learn.
131
REFERENCES
American Institute of Research. (2008). Success stories selection methodology:
California Comprehensive Center. Retrieved from http://www
.closingtheachievementgap.org/cs/ctag/view/resources/82
Anderson, S., Medrich, E., & Fowler, D. (2007). Which achievement gap? Phi Delta
Kappan, 88, 547-561.
Barton, P. (2003). Parsing the achievement gap: Baselines for tracking progress.
Princeton, NJ: Research & Policy Development Center, Educational Testing
Service.
Barton, P., & Cooley, R. (2009). Parsing the achievement gap II. Princeton, NJ: Research
& Policy Development Center, Educational Testing Service.
Bennett, A. (2004) All students reaching the top: Strategies for closing the achievement
gap. Retrieved from http://www.closingtheachievementgap.org/cs/ctag/view/
resources/34
Blankenstein, A. M. (2004). Failure is not an option: Six principles that guide student
achievement in high-performing schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and
leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bosker, J., & Scheerens, R. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Re-
trieved from http://books.emeraldinsight.com/display.asp?K=9780080427690
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
California Department of Education. (2001). Board policy #01-02. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ms/po/policy01-02-mar2001.asp
California Department of Education. (2008). Closing the achievement gap: Report of
Su!"#$%&"%'"%&()*+,(-./0%%"11.2(/*1$30#%$*(4-16 Council. Retrieved from
http:www.cde
California Department of Education. (2009). Standardized Testing (STAR) Reporting
System. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/documents/
star09explpts.pdf
California Department of Education. (2010). Data and statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?
bottom=%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D07%26reportNumber%3D16
Cargile, D. (2009). The voice of the principal. Communicator, 33(4), 1-2.
132
Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers'
perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st
century U.S. workforce. Retrieved from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/
documents/ FINAL_REPORT_PDF9-29-06.pdf
Chenoweth, K. (2004). 50 years later: Can current education policy finish the work
started with Brown? Black Issues in Higher Education, 21(9), 40-42.
City of Fontana. (2009). A short history of Fontana. Retrieved from http://www.fontana
.org/main/history.htm
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2002). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the
right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfield, F., & York,
R. (1967). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: National Center
for Educational Statistics.
Collins, J. (2001). 500'(&0(6#"*&7(89:(20;"(+0;!*%$"2(;*,"(&9"(1"*!(*%'(0&9"#2('0%.&<
New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Cotton, C. (2001). New small learning communities: Findings from recent literature. Re-
trieved from http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache: uRtAQhUDIboJ:
scholar.google.com/++author:%22Cotton%22+intitle:%22New+small+learning+
communities:+Findings+from+recent+literature%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2000&as_
vis=1
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cross, C. T. (2004a). The Kennedy and Johnson years: Failures and finally success. New
York, NY: Political Education Teacher College Press.
Cross, C. T. (2004b). Political education: National policy comes of age. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teaching Edu-
cation, 51(3), 166-173.
Datnow, A., Borman, G., & Stringfield, S. (2000). School reform through a highly speci-
fied curriculum: Implementation and effects of the core knowledge. Elementary
School Journal, 101(2), 167-191.
Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. (2000). Managing and guiding school reform: Leadership
in Success for All Schools. Education Administration Quarterly, 37, 219-249.
Davidson, A. L. (1996). Making and molding identity in schools: Student narratives of
race, gender, and academic engagement. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Dembo, M., & Gibson, S. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 669-682.
133
Dinkes, R., Kemp, J., Baum, K., & Snyder, T. (2008). Indicators of school crime and
safety: 2008 National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs08.pdf
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting learning communities at work.
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R. & Many, T. ( 2006). Learning by doing: A handbook
for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree
Duncan, G., & Magnuson, K. (2005). Can family socioeconomic resources account for
racial and ethnic test score gaps? The Future of Children, 15(1), 35-54.
Eaker, R., DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2002). Getting started: Reculturing schools to
become professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
EdSource. (2004a). A glossary of school finance terms. Retrieved from http://www
.edsource.org/advanced-search.html? cp1&action=srch&advSerCate=
all&advSerKeyword=glossary&advSerType=
Edsource. (2004b). No Child Left Behind in California? The Impact of the Federal NCLB
Act so far. Retrieved from www.edsource.org
EdSource. (2007). A glossary of accountability terms. Retrieved from http://www
.edsource.org/pub_AccountabilityGlossary2_07.html
EdSource. (2008). A glossary of school finance terms. Retrieved from http: www
.edsource.org/advanced-search.html? cp1&action=srch&advSerCate=
all&advSerKeyword=glossary&advSerType=
EdSource. (2009). Glossary terms. Retrieved from http://www.edsource.org/
glossary.html&glossary_list =ALL
="6?&+>,9'8K8K'IMVVHNK'P")@!"6+C'$"6@"$/2>,+'),-'"O$"@/)/2>,+'),-'/!"'W#)@T-White test
score gap. Urban Education, 38, 460-507.
Fielding, L., Kerr, N., & Rosier, P. (2004). Delivering on the promise. Kennewick, WA:
New Foundation Press.
=>,/),)'P")@!"6C+'Q++>@2)/2>,K'I:GGVNK'The collective bargaining agreement between
=0%&*%*(>%$3$"'(?+9001(@$2$+&(*%'(&9"(=0%&*%*(A"*+9"#.2(B220+$*&$0%< Re-
trieved from http://fontanateachers.org/FTA_FUSD%20Contract.htm
Fontana Unified School District. (2009). School Accountability Report Card. Retrieved
from http://www.fontana.k12.ca.us/SARC/200708/CanyonCrestES.pdf
Freiberg, H. J. (1998). Measuring school climate: Let me count the ways. Educational
Leadership, 56(1), 22-26.
Fullan, M. (2000). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
134
Fullan, M. (2004). Leadership and sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gall, M. P., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction
(7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to
connect minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45-56.
Gardner, D. (2983). A nation at risk. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/puybs/
NatAtRisk/risk.html
Gates, B., & Gates, M. (2007). All students ready for college, career and life: Reflections
0%(&9"(30C%'*&$0%.2("'C+*&$0%($%D"2&;"%&2< http://www.edtrust.org/dc/press-
room/press-release/education-trust-statement-on-the-2008-naep-long-term-trend-
results
Germeraad, S. (2009). Education Trust statement on the 2008 NAEP long-term trend
results. Retrieved from http://www.edtrust.org/dc/press-room/press-release/
education-trust-statement-on-the-2008-naep-long-term-trend-results
Guthrie, J. W., & Springer, M. G. (2004). A Nation at Risk revisited: L2-'.(6>,?1'6")-
+>,2,?'6"+/'2,'.62?!/1'6"+/+X'Q/'(!)/'@>+/X'Peabody Journal of Education,
79(1), 7-35.
Harris, D., & Herrington, C. (2006). Accountability, standards and the growing achieve-
ment gap: Lessons from the past half-century. American Journal of Education,
112, 209-238.
Hassel, B., & Godard-McNiff, M. (2004). Closing the achievement gap through school
development and reform. Retrieved from http://www.serve.org/downloads/
publications/closinggap.pdf
Haycock, K. (2001). Helping all students achieve: Closing the achievement gap. Educa-
tional Leadership, 6(6), 78-79.
Hechinger Institute. (2010). Primer for journalists: Understanding and reporting on aca-
demic rigor. Retrieved from www.cccangle.com/media/.../Academic.Rigor-
670177.shtml
Houston, P., Blankstein, A., & Cole, R. (2007). Leaders as communicators and diplo-
mats. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hoy, W., & Woolfolk, A. (1993). TeachersC sense of efficacy and the organizational
health of schools. Elementary School Journal, 93, 355-373.
Izumi, L., Coburn, K., & Cox, M. (2002). They have overcome: High-poverty, high-
performing schools in California. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Research Institute
for Public Policy.
135
Johnson, R. S. (2002). Using data to close the achievement gap: How to measure equity
in our schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Johnston, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2000). Unmet promise: Raising minority achievement.
Education Week, 19(27), 1-7.
Karoly, L., Reardon, E., & Cho, M. (2007). Early care and education in the Golden
State. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from http://www
.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2007/RAND_TR538.pdf
King, J. D. (2008). Stealing our schools. New Politics, 11(5), 69-73.
King, J., & Lopez, D. (2008). Turnaround schools: Creating cultures of universal
achievement. Ramona, CA: TurnAround Schools.
Krueger, A., Hanushek, E., & King-Rice, J. (2002). The class size debate. Washington,
DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.epi.org/publications/
entry/books_classsizedebate/
Ladson-Billings, G. (2007). Pushing past the achievement gap: An essay on the language
of deficit. Journal of Negro Education, 76, 316-323.
LaRocque, M. (2007). Closing the achievement gap: The experience of a middle school.
Retrieved May from ProQuest Multiple database.
Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward
equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3-12.
Levine, D., & Lezotte, L. (1990). Unusually effective schools: A review and analysis of
research and practice. Madison, WI: National Center for Effective Schools
Research and Development.
Long, T. E., & Hadden, J. K. (1985). A reconceptualization of socialization. Sociological
Theory, 3(1), 39-49.
Lynch, M. (2006). Closing the racial achievement gap. Chicago, IL: African American
Images.
Manna, P. (2004). Leaving no child behind. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexan-
dria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
McKinsey and Company. (2009). The economic impact of the achievement gap in Amer-
2@)C+'+@!>>#+K'Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/
Social_Sector/our_practices/Education/Knowledge_Highlights/Economic_impact.
aspx
Munitz, B. (2008). Closing the achievement gap: Report of Superintendent Jack
-./0%%"11.2(/*1$30#%$*(4-16 Council. Retrieved from http://www
.closingtheachievementgap.org/cs/ctag/print/htdocs/about_publications.htm
136
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2008). Long-term trend assessment. Re-
trieved from http://nationsreportcard.gov/ltt_2008/ltt0001.asp?tab_id=tab3&
subtab_id=Tab_1#chart
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2008). Leading learning com-
munities: Standards for what principals should know and be able to do. Alexan-
dria, VA: Author.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Fast facts. Retrieved from http://
nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
D)/2>,)#'E>002++2>,'>,'P")@!2,?'),-'Q0"62@)C+'=&/&6"K'IMVVYNK'What matters most:
A"*+9$%6(30#(B;"#$+*.2(3C&C#"< New York, NY: Rockefeller and Carnegie Foun-
dation.
No Child Left Behind Act, 20 U.S.C. & 6301 (2002).
Nocegura, P. (2002). Understanding the link between race and academic achievement
and creating schools that can be broken. Retrieved from http://sra.sagepub.com
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2010). Definition of cultural norm. Re-
trieved from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/
sa1lk2.htm
Northhouse, P. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Obama, B. (2009). Presidential state of the union address. Retrieved from http://
2008caucus.blogspot.com/2009/02/barack-obama-state-of-the-union-
transcript.html
Partnership for 21
st
Century Skills. (2006). Assessment of 21
st
century skills. Retrieved
from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/Assessment092806.pdf
Patterson, J. T. (2001). Brown v. Board of Education: A civil rights milestone and its
troubled legacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Peske, H., & Haycock, K. (2006). Teaching inequality: How poor and minority students
are shortchanged on teacher quality. Retrieved from www.edtrust.org
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
Poliakoff-Rogers, A. (2006). Closing the achievement gap: An overview. Retrieved from
http:www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/template.MAXIMIZE/menuitem.e30040c1b90
63eee
Protheroe, N. (2010). Jumpstart: Substantial school change principal. Retrieved from
http://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Principal/2010/J-Fp26.pdf
137
Ray, J. (2004). Academic achievement: Closing the chasm. Lanham, MD: Rowman and
Littlefield.
Reeves, D. (2002). A9"(1"*'"#.2(6C$'"(&0(2&*%'*#'27(B(E1C"!#$%&(30#("'C+*&$0%*1("FC$&:(
and excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Rodgers, E., Wang, C., & Comez-Bellenge, F. (2004, April). Closing the literacy gap
with early intervention. Paper presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Rogers, F. (2001). Famous quotes. Retrieved from http://www.goodreads.com/
author/quotes/32106.Fred_Rogers
Russo, C. (2004). G"C&&"#.2(the law of public education. New York, NY: Foundation
Press.
Sammons, P. (1999). School effectiveness: Coming of age in the 21st century. Lisse,
Switzerland: Swets and Zeitlinger.
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The key to continuous school improvement (2nd ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Schmoker, M. (2006). Results now: How we can achieve unprecedented improvements in
teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Cur-
riculum Development.
Schwartz, R. (2001). Closing the achievement gap: Principals for improving the educa-
tion of Success for All students. New York, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban
Education.
Stanton-Salazar, R. (1997) A social capital framework for understanding socialization.
Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1-4.
Symonds, K. W. (2003). After the test: How schools are using data to close the achieve-
ment gap. San Francisco, CA: Bay Area School Reform Collaborative.
Trilling, B. (2009). Leading learning in our times. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/
resources/2/Principal/2010/J-Fp08.pdf
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). U.S. Census Bureau American factfinder. Retrieved from
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/AGSGeoAddressServlet
U.S Department of Education. (2008). H*&$0%.2(#"!0#&(+*#'< Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/landing.jhtml
Wikipedia. (2010). A achievement gap. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/
Williams, T., Kirst, M., & Haertel, E. (2005). Similar students, differing results: Why do
some schools do better? A large-scale survey of California elementary schools
serving low-income students. Mountain View, CA: EdSource.
138
Wong, K, & Nicotera, A. (2004). Brown v. Board of Education and the Coleman Report:
Social science research and the debate on educational equity. Peabody Journal of
Education, 79(2), 122-135.
Zigler, E., & Finn-Stevenson, M. F. (2007). From research to policy and practice: The
school of the 21st century. American Psychological Association, 77(2), 175-181.
Zirkel, P. A. (2002). Decisions that have shaped U.S. education. Educational Leadership,
59(4), 6-12.
139
APPENDIX A
DOCUMENT REVIEW MASTER LIST3CATEGORIZED
District
1. Textbook adoption list
2. Modified or year-round school
3. Board policy
4. Vision statement
5. Mission statement
6. Staff development plan to meet the needs of diverse learners
7. LEA Plan
8. District policy for ELM placement
9. District policy for SEI placement
10. LEA code of conduct policy
11. LEA discipline policy
12. LEA drug/alcohol use prohibition policy
13. LEA firearms/weapons policy
14. LEA Gun-Free Schools Act policy
15. LEA plan describing availability of Tobacco Use Prevention Education services
16. LEA policy regarding tobacco use
17. Full desegregation
18. District-established criteria/procedures for reclassification
19. LEA catch-up plan for monitoring and overcoming any academic deficits
20. District policy on qualifications for instructional aides
School level artifacts
1. Meeting schedules
2. Staff Development plan/School site plan
3. Instructional minutes/Master Schedule
4. Assessment tools
5. Preschool availability or pre-kinder offerings
6. Literacy programs
7. Character education
8. SST
9. RTI
10. Tutorial programs
11. Saturday school
12. Interventions during the school day
13. Summer school
14. Student-parent handbook
15. Discipline assembly
16. Vision statement
17. Mission statement
18. Staff development plan to meet the needs of diverse learners
19. Equitable groupings of minority students in classrooms
20. Parent Involvement Policy
140
21. School Accountability Report Card
22. Teacher and paraprofessional assignments
23. Student profile data
24. Counseling availability and function
25. Entitlement funding (i.e., Title I funding)
26. School-parent compact for NCLB/Title I
27. Public reports of suspension, expulsion, and truancy rates from Uniform Management
Information and Reporting System
28. Safe school plan (including disaster procedures, crisis management, or emergency plan)
29. Attendance reports
Instructional
1. Department meeting notes
2. Common planning/Common Assessments
3. Classroom Objectives or standards posted in rooms
4. SMART goals or action plan documents
5. Teacher lesson plans
Differentiated or special services
1. Re-classification of LEP
2. Descriptions of English-language mainstream program
3. Descriptions of structured English immersion program design
4. English learner program evaluation report
5. GATE student identification criteria
6. GATE teacher specifications
7. Analysis of California Healthy kids survey (CHKS) core module data
8. Analysis of CHKS resiliency and youth development module
9. California Healthy kids survey
10. Physical education instructional minutes report
California Department of Education website
1. School data to analyze student proficiency (CST and CELDT)
2. School demographic data
3. School data on Program Improvement status (i.e., AYP and API information)
Pertains to High Schools only
1. College prep/AP/IB offerings
2. School data to analyze % of students in CP/AP/IB/Honors courses
3. Freshman advisory
4. AVID
5. Freshman assembly/freshman first day
6. Student placement criteria into CP/Honors/AP/IB
7. CST data, CAHSEE, AP, and college-bound statistics
8. District career technical education plan and course offerings
9. Work Experience Education District plan
10. Process for adding new courses
11. Description of alternative programs
141
APPENDIX B
STAFF INPUT SURVEY
The Staff Input Survey
Your school was chosen for this study based on the success and sustainability in
student achievement. The purpose of this study is to !"#$%!&'(')*+(,-.))/0,(-*/%*+1/(
norms, practices and programs that contributed to the closing or narrowing of the
achievement gap. The results of this study could be useful to schools with a similar
student population. Your input on this survey is anonymous. This research project is
being conducted by a doctoral student from the University of Southern California. The
survey will take about 10-15 minutes to complete. Thank you for your cooperation.
Please circle the appropriate response:
1. The school supports collaboration among teachers.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
2. The teachers at this school believe that students can achieve at high levels.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
3. School administration creates a positive school culture for teachers and students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
4. Leadership is shared among school personnel.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
5. Teachers collaborate to discuss student data to improve student learning.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
6. The school addresses the needs of struggling students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
7. School administration conducts classroom observations frequently.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
142
8. The school has a systematic process for identifying and assisting struggling
students.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
9. School administration communicates vision and goals to the staff.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
10. School administration ensures the analysis of student assessment data.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
11. School administration provides support for implementation of new instructional
practices.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
12. School administration provides ways to improve instructional strategies to meet
the needs of students with diverse backgrounds.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
13. CST scores and District Assessments are used to plan your instructional program.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
14. Student data is used to identify the instructional needs of my students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
15. You utilize the California State Standards to plan and deliver instruction.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
16. You provide differentiated instructions to meet the needs of all students.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
17. School administration initiates programs that promote student achievement.
a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Somewhat Disagree e) Strongly Disagree
18. The school utilizes a specific program to analyze student data.
a) Most of the time b) Sometimes c) Rarely d) Never
143
Please circle all that apply:
19. Who leads the collaboration sessions?
a) Teachers b) Administrators c) Counselors d) Coaches e) Other:_____________
20. What topics are discussed in the collaboration sessions?
a) Curriculum b) Instruction c) Intervention d) Data Analysis e) Operation
f) Standards g) Other: _____________________________________________
21. How does the school make collaboration possible?
a) Substitute release time b) Minimum Days c) Partial Day Release
d) After School Time e) Bank Time Activity f) Staff Meetings g) Preparation
Periods h) Other: ___________________________________________________
22. What type of intervention practices are used for struggling students?
a) Peer Tutoring b) After School Tutoring c) In-class intervention
d) Pull-Out Intervention e) Homework Assistance f) Summer School
g) Off-Track Classes h) Other: _______________________________
23. Who organizes professional development sessions related to intervention programs?
a) Teachers b) Administrators c) Department/Grade Level Chairs
d) Coaches e) Other: ___________________________________________
24. Rate the following instructional strategies you used to enhance student learning.
Extremely Important 1 2 3 4 5 6 Not Important
___ Direct instruction ___ Guided practice
___ Pre-teaching ___ Re-teaching
___ Visual aids/graphic organizers ___ Note-taking
___ Summarizing ___ SDAIE Strategies
___ Cooperative grouping ___ Peer tutoring
___ Individual instruction ___ Higher Order Thinking Questions
___ Scaffolding ___ Using Prior Knowledge
___ Metacognitive Skills ___ Other (please list) ________________
144
25. What specific program does the school use to promote collaboration?
___________________________________________________________________
26. What intervention program(s) at your school have contributed to closing the
achievement gap?
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
27. What instructional programs do you use in your classroom that has helped close the
achievement gap?
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
28. Comments about the role of intervention in closing the achievement gap at your
school:
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
29. Comments about the role of data analysis which helped close achievement gap at
your school:
___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
30. Comments about the role of school leadership which helped close the achievement
gap at your school:
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
31. Comments about the role of collaboration which helped close the achievement gap at
your school:
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
145
32. Comments about the role of your classroom instruction which helped close the
achievement gap at your school:
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Even though this survey is anonymous, please provide the following information:
Your position at the school:
For Elementary Schools -- Administrative Team Teacher Grade level Chair
For Secondary Schools -- Administrative Team Teacher Department Chair
Number of years as an educator: ________________________________
How long have you worked at this school?: ________________________________
Thank you for completing this survey. Your responses are appreciated.
146
APPENDIX C
SCHOOL OBSERVATION FORM/GUIDE
! In all observation situations keep in mind the 4 frames of Bolman/Deal
! Structural Frame: organization and structure of groups and teams to
achieve goals
! Human Resource Frame: organizational ability to meet human needs,
positive interpersonal and group dynamics
! Political Frame: power and conflict, coalitions, internal and external
politics and their impact on the organization
! Symbolic Frame: positive culture that gives purpose, esprit de corps
through rituals, ceremony, story, shared experiences
! An organization demonstrates what is important to it by what it emphasizes in
daily practice
! First Impressions
! Note time of observations and what expected activity at those times may
look like
! Condition of surrounding neighborhood
! Approach to school
! Exterior condition of structures
! Plants and foliage
! Bus turn-arounds, parking lot: teachers and students
! Supervision around/ in front of school and safety
! The Office
! Entrance/security
! Condition of office compatible with exterior?
! Staff interaction, with guests, parents, community, and peers
! Initial Meeting
! S2/!'(!>0X''Z62,@2$)#9'Q++/K'Z62,@2$)#[
! Restrictions on access?
! Are you greeted?
! Staff traffic to administration, open door or appointments
! Staff
! Designated representatives, restricted choice, or free access to staff
! Teacher leaders
! Empowered? Figure heads?
! Emergent leaders or formal structures of leadership
! Experienced or non-experienced?
! Collaboration?
147
! Structured, non-structured
! Common assessments, formative, summative
! Attitudes towards collaboration
! Students
! Student centered culture?
! Connection with staff at all levels? Any levels?
! Student run events?
! Posters? School spirit?
! Curriculum
! Levels of curriculum
! ESL
! SDAIE
! Special Education
! RTI
! Full Inclusion
! Co-teaching Model
! RSP
! SDC
! ED/SED
! SH
! Standard Levels
! Classroom Observations
! Physical condition of room
! Desks or tables
! Student work displayed
! Learning Goal
! Related to Content standard
! Demonstration of Learning
! Asset Development
! Caring
! High Expectations
! Meaningful Participation
! Strategies
! Direct instruction
! Guided practice
! Scaffolding
! Visuals/Graphic Organizers
! Compare and Contrast
! Summarizing or note taking
! TAPPLE (Teach, Ask, Pick, Pause, Listen, Explain, Expand,
Emphasize)
! TPR
! Check for Understanding, summative
148
! Technology
! Extent available
! Extent used
! Teacher use
! Student use
149
APPENDIX D
OBSERVATION LOG
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Narrowing the Achievement Gap with Sustained Success in Urban
Schools
Date:_______________________ Page ____of_____
Time: ___________
Type of Observation(Circle One): School Class Leadership Meeting
Observation Log
First Impression
Condition of Surrounding
Neighborhood
Approach to School
!""#$%&'()'"*)+,(%()+")-"
.%'/*%/'&."
!""012+%."2+,"-)1(23&"
!""4/."%/'+52')/+,.6"
72'8(+3""1)%9"%&2*:&'."2+,"
.%/,&+%.
!"";/7&'<(.()+"2')/+,"2+,"
(+"-')+%")-"%:&".*:))1
The Office
!""#+%'2+*&=.&*/'(%>"
!""?)+,(%()+")-")--(*&"
*)@72%(A1&"B(%:"
&$%&'()'C
!"";%2--"(+%&'2*%()+6"B(%:"
3/&.%6"72'&+%.6"
*)@@/+(%>6"2+,"7&&'.
Initial Meeting
!""D(%:"B:)@C"0'(+*(7216"
!""#$%&'()*(+,-.
!""E&.%'(*%()+.")+"2**&..C"
150
!"";%2--"%'2--(*"%)"
2,@(+(.%'2%()+6")7&+"
,))'")'"277)(+%@&+%.
Staff
!""F&.(3+2%&,"
'&7'&.&+%2%(<&.6"
'&.%'(*%&,"*:)(*&6")'"-'&&"
2**&.."%)".%2--
""\G&2*:&'"1&2,&'."
""\#@7)B&'&,=H(3/'&"
:&2,.C"
""\#@&'3&+%"1&2,&'.")-"
-)'@21".%'/*%/'&.")-"
1&2,&'.:(7
!""?)112A)'2%()+C"
\4/6&@/&6"-9',>,-
structured?
""\?)@@)+"2..&..@&+%.6"
-)'@2%(<&6"./@@2%(<&
!"#$%&"'
!"";%/,&+%5*&+%&'&,"
*/1%/'&C"
!""?)++&*%()+"B(%:".%2--"2%"
211"1&<&1.C"I+>"1&<&1.C
151
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Narrowing the Achievement Gap with Sustained Success in Urban
Schools
Date: ________________ Page: ______ of _______
Time: _______________
Levels of Curriculum Curriculum
!""#;J"
!"";FIK#"
"
!"";0#F"
""\E%K"
\4LE
\AL]4AL
\4^
Standard Levels
College Prep
Advanced Placement
International Baccalaureate
Open Access or restricted
entrance
Support Programs
! AVID
!""?'&,(%"E&*)<&'>"
!""?)+*/''&+%"#+')11@&+%"
B(%:"L/+()'"*)11&3&
!""F(.%2+*&"J&2'+(+3"?'&,(%
152
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Focus: Factors Narrowing the Achievement Gap with Sustained Success in Urban
Schools
Date: ________________ Page: ______ of _______
Time: _______________
Classroom Observation
Physical condition of room
Desks or tables
Student work displayed
Learning Goal
Related to Content
Standard
Demonstration of Learning
Asset Development
! Caring
!""M(3:"#$7&*%2%()+."
(
!""N&2+(+3-/1"02'%(*(72%()+"
"
!")*"%+,%'(
!""F('&*%"(+.%'/*%()+"
(
!"O/(,&,"7'2*%(*&"
"
!"";*2--)1,(+3"
"
!""P(./21.=O'27:(*"
Q'32+(R&'."
!""?)@72'&"2+,"?)+%'2.%"
"
!"";/@@2'(R(+3")'"+)%&"
%28(+3"
!""GI00J#"SG&2*:6"I.86"0(*86"
02/.&6"J(.%&+6"#$712(+6"
#$72+,6"#@7:2.(R&"
153
!""G0E"SG)%21"0:>.(*21"
E&.7)+.&T"
!""?:&*8"-)'"U+,&'.%2+,(+3"
"
-%./&010+2(
!""#$%&+%"2<2(12A1&"
(
!""#$%&+%"/.&,"
"
!""G&2*:&'"/.&"
"
!"";%/,&+%"/.&"
"
!"";%/,&+%=%&2*:&'"-&&,A2*8"
)+"(%."/.&"
154
APPENDIX E
CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Collaboration:
a. What does collaboration look like at this school?
b. Who leads the collaboration sessions?
c. With whom do you collaborate? How often?
d. What are the outcomes for student learning?
e. What programs, practices, and cultural norms does the school have in place to
ensure that students achieve?
2. School Leadership:
a. What is the school mission and vision?
b. What is the primary goal for this school?
c. How is the mission/vision/goal communicated?
d. Who is the school leader? Why?
e. How does the leadership foster or help student learning?
f. Is the leadership shared among the various school personnel? How?
g. How does the leadership meet the needs of at-risk populations?
h. Are school decisions based upon student needs? Give an example
3. Program Implementation
a. What programs have been employed that have allowed the school to close
the achievement gap?
b. Are there programs that have improved attendance? And how is this
affecting achievement?
c. What programs have improved the school climate?
d. What programs have improved content learning for all students but
specifically for students with diverse needs?
e. What programs have improved student achievement in literacy skills?
f. What programs have improved student achievement in mathematics?
4. Data Analysis
a. How is data used to support student learning?
b. Who is responsible for dissagregation, dissemination, and review of data?
c. How is this information shared among the various school stakeholders?
d. Does your school utilize a specific data analysis program? If so, which
program?
e. How often is data analyzed at your school site?
155
5. Intervention:
a. What are the supports that are in place for students and their families?
b. Who determines which students get support?
c. How are supports implemented and monitored?
d. What is intervention is offered to students who are underperforming
academically?
e. How are these implemented? Who is involved?
f. How do you make sure that every student has his or her academic needs met?
g. What is the way things are done that supports learning in student groups that are
traditional underperforming?
6. Practices that Support Closing the Achievement Gap:
a. What are the school-wide practices that support student learning?
b. Who determined that this practice happens?
c. How is effectiveness measured? Or what data is collected?
d. How do you know that it is successful?
e. Has this practice been modified since the beginning?
! How do you know that all (EL, low SES, Special Ed, African American,
Hispanic) students have access to these practices?
! How do you know students are appropriately placed in classrooms or
courses?
f. What are the departmental or grade level practices that support student learning?
7. Classroom Instruction
a. What are the classroom practices that support student learning?
b. What are teachers supposed to know and be able to do?
c. How do you know that they have done it?
d. How is classroom instruction differentiated to meet the needs of all students? List
some classroom examples.
8. Professional Development Practices that support closing the achievement gap:
a. What are the professional development opportunities available to teachers?
b. What is the role of the teacher in professional development?
c. What is the role of the administrator in professional development?
d. How do you know that teachers are utilizing skills learned?
e. In the classroom? In specific content areas?
9. Sustainability
a. Have you sustained success?
b. How have you sustained success?
c. What advice would you give to other schools that want to emulate your cultural
norms, programs and practices to close the achievement gap?
Do you have anything you would like to add to this interview in terms of closing the
achievement gap and sustaining success?
156
APPENDIX F
STAFF INPUT SURVEY RESULTS
Table F1
Staff Input Survey Results, Items 1-23
Item and response choice f
1. The school supports collaboration among teachers.
Strongly agree 21
Agree 8
Somewhat disagree 1
2. The teachers at this school believe that students can achieve at high levels.
Strongly agree 16
Agree 13
Somewhat disagree 0
3. School administration creates a positive school culture for teachers and students.
Most of the time 21
Sometime 8
4. Leadership is shared among school personnel.
Most of the time 12
Sometime 14
5. Teachers collaborate to discuss student data to improve student learning.
Most of the time 20
Sometime 9
6. The school addresses the needs of struggling students.
Most of the time 26
Sometime 3
7. School administration conducts classroom observations frequently.
Strongly agree 11
Agree 17
Somewhat disagree 1
8. The school has a systematic process for identifying and assisting
struggling students.
Strongly agree 18
Agree 10
Somewhat disagree 1
157
Table F1 (continued)
Item and response choice f
9. School administration communicates vision and goals to the staff.
Most of the time 24
Sometime 5
10. School administration ensures the analysis of student assessment data.
Most of the time 28
Sometime 1
11. School administration provides support for implementation of
new instructional practices.
Most of the time 22
Sometime 7
12. School administration provides ways to improve instructional strategies
to meet the needs of students with diverse backgrounds.
Most of the time 16
Sometime 13
13. CST scores and district assessments are used to plan your
instructional program.
Most of the time 22
Sometime 6
Rarely 1
14. Student data is used to identify the instructional needs of my students.
Most of the time 25
Sometime 3
Rarely 1
15. You utilize the California State Standards to plan and deliver instruction.
Most of the time 28
Sometime 1
16. You provide differentiated instruction to meet the needs of all students.
Most of the time 24
Sometime 5
17. School administration initiates programs that promote student achievement.
Strongly agree 13
Agree 16
158
Table F1 (continued)
Item and response choice f
18. The school utilizes a specific program to analyze student data.
Most of the time 14
Sometime 15
19. Who leads the collaboration sessions?
Teachers 23
Administrators 15
Counselors 1
Coaches 6
Other 2
20. What topics are discussed in the collaboration sessions?
Curriculum 22
Instruction 20
Intervention 24
Data analysis 25
Operations 7
Standards 14
Other 2
21. How does the school make collaboration possible?
Substitute time 4
Minimum days 2
Partial day release 1
After-school time 6
Bank time activity 0
Staff meetings 20
Preparation periods 3
22. What type of intervention practices are used for struggling students?
Peer tutoring 15
After-school tutoring 26
In-class intervention 26
Pull-out intervention 27
Homework assistance 5
Summer school 1
Off-track classes 8
Other 1
159
Table F1 (continued)
Item and response choice f
23. Who organizes professional development sessions related to
intervention programs?
Teachers 6
Administrators 23
Department chairs 1
Coaches 13
Other 2
Note. Response choices were (a) Strongly Agree, Agree, Somewhat Disagree, and
Strongly Disagree; and (b) Most of the Time, Sometime, Rarely, and Never.
160
Table F2
Staff Input Survey ResultsI(J&";(KL7(MG*&"(&9"(=0110N$%6(J%2C+tional Strategies You Use
to Enhance ?&C'"%&(O"*#%$%6P
Strategy 1 2 3 4 5
Direct instruction 26 0 1 0 1
Pre-teaching 15 6 4 1 0
Visual aids 21 3 3 1 0
Summarizing 8 7 8 3 1
Cooperative grouping 5 4 15 2 0
Individual instruction 18 2 5 3 0
Scaffolding 17 8 2 0 0
Metacognitive skills 9 7 6 1 1
Guided practice 21 4 2 0 1
Re-teaching 13 6 6 0 1
Note taking 1 3 7 4 5
SDAIE strategies 8 10 9 1 0
Peer tutoring 2 5 13 5 1
Higher-order thinking 7 10 7 1 3
Using prior knowledge 18 4 4 1 1
Note. 1 = Extremely Important to 5 = Not Important. SDAIE = Specially Designed
Academic Instruction in English.
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Sustaining success toward closing the achievement gap: a case study of one urban high school
PDF
Sustainability of a narrowed achievement gap: A case study
PDF
A case study of an outperforming elementary school closing the achievement gap
PDF
Closing the achievement gap: successful practices at a middle school -- a case study
PDF
Closing the achievement gap: breakthrough in the urban high school
PDF
Closing the achievement gap in a high performing elementary school
PDF
A case study: one successful elementary school that reduced the achievement gap
PDF
Factors that contribute to narrowing the achievement gap for elementary age students: a case study
PDF
Urban schools that have narrowed the achievement gap: middle school math achievement in an urban setting
PDF
Overcoming a legacy of low achievement: systems and structures in a high-performing, high-poverty California elementary school
PDF
A case study of factors related to a high performing urban charter high school: investigating student engagement and its impact on student achievement
PDF
Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of an urban school
PDF
A case study of an outperforming urban high school: the relational pattern between student engagement and student achievement in a magnet high school in Los Angeles
PDF
Narrowing the achievement gap and sustaining success: a qualitative study of the norms, practices, and programs of a successful high school with urban characteristics
PDF
Narrowing the achievement gap: Factors that support English learner and Hispanic student academic achievement in an urban intermediate school
PDF
Perceived factors for narrowing the achievement gap for minority students in urban schools: cultural norms, practices and programs
PDF
Effective factors of high performing urban high schools: a case study
PDF
The implementation of strategies to minimize the achievement gap for African-American, Latino, English learners, and socio-economically disadvantaged students
PDF
The impact and sustainability of programs, practices and norms on student academic performance: a case study
PDF
Narrowing the achievement gap: a case study of one outperforming urban school making a difference
Asset Metadata
Creator
Gray, Sandra Jean
(author)
Core Title
Achievement gap and sustainability: a case study of an elementary school bridging the achievement gap
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
03/27/2010
Defense Date
02/19/2010
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
achievement gap,OAI-PMH Harvest,sustainability
Place Name
California
(states)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Gothold, Stuart E. (
committee chair
), Hocevar, Dennis J. (
committee member
), Stowe, Kathy Huisong (
committee member
)
Creator Email
Graysj@fusd.net,Sandragr@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2883
Unique identifier
UC1427112
Identifier
etd-Gray-3527 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-295504 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2883 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Gray-3527.pdf
Dmrecord
295504
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Gray, Sandra Jean
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
achievement gap
sustainability