University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A comparative analysis of academic achievement for CalWORKs students in a K--12 public school system

(USC Thesis Other)

A comparative analysis of academic achievement for CalWORKs students in a K--12 public school system

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT FOR CALWORKS STUDENTS IN A K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM by Taffy Antoinette Molen A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION August 2005 Copyright 2005 Taffy Antoinette Molen Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3196861 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform 3196861 Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Dedication To my brothers Sean and Tino and their families; my sister Amber; my husband Guy, my son Nick and my Mom and Dad (I miss you Dad) With Love Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge my committee chairman, Dr. Dennis Hocevar for his support and expert guidance through out this process. In addition, thanks to Drs. Stuart Gothold and Maurice Hitchcock for being on my dissertation committee and providing helpful suggestions. Thanks to Deborah Chang for her expert assistance and keeping me moving through the dissertation process. I also would like to acknowledge all my coworkers at the Vacville Unified School District (VUSD) who helped and encouraged me through out this endeavor. In particular, a world of thanks to the following individuals; Superintendent John Aycock; Deputy Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction (retired) Dr. Linda Ownby, Director of Special Assignments, Mark Frazier; Assistant Superintendent for Learning Services, Peggy Alexander; the expert VUSD clerical and secretarial staff of Charmaine Thompson, Julianna Wade, Linda Beckett and Jackie Johnson, and Country High School secretary, Lisa Galloway who assisted me with Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. AERIES questions. In addition, thanks to Jim Wasielewski in the VUSD technology department and Harry Lascano from Vacaville High School for providing a laptop when I needed it. I also am very lucky to have a great Adult Education staff who held down the fort when I was unavailable while working on this dissertation - many thanks to my secretary Cheryl Lawson; my testing coordinator Judi Martin; and my counselor Sandy Ohara - what a team! A heartfelt thanks to my family for their encouragement and support, and to Vicki Good for her "you can do it" attitude. Also, to my husband Guy and my son Nick for their editorial suggestions, input and constructive criticism. They truly believed in me and kept me going and were my pillars of strength! Finally, thanks to my friends and colleagues and family for putting up with me and sharing my experience! Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V Table of Contents Dedication .............................. ii Acknowledgements ......................... iii List of Tables ........................... vi List of Figures .......................... vii Abstract ................................ viii Chapter I: Introduction .................. 1 Chapter II: Review of Literature ......... 21 Chapter III: Methodology ................. 107 Chapter IV: Findings ..................... 123 Chapter V: Summary ...................... 155 Bibliography 18 6 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. v i List of Tables Table 1: Test Scores ..................... 127 Table 2a and 2b: CalWORKs Test Scores .... 135 Table 3: CST Summary Statistics .......... 139 Table 4: CalWORKs Scores by Ethnicity ... 141 Table 5: CST ELA Scores-Ethnic Distribution. 143 Table 6: CST ELA Scores PEL Classifications. 143 Table 7: CST ELA and Math ................. 150 Table 8: ELA Math: Annual Measurable Objectives ............................... 154 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. List of Figures Figure 1: CAT/6 Math 2004 .............. 129 Figure 2: CAT/6 Reading 2004 ........... 129 Figure 3: CST ELA 2004 .............. 130 Figure 4: CST Math 2004 ................ 130 Figure 5: CAT/6 Math 2003 .............. 131 Figure 6: CAT/6 Reading 2003 ........... 131 Figure 7: CST ELA 2003 ................. 132 Figure 8: CST Math 2003 ................ 132 Figure 9: SAT/9 Math 2002 .............. 133 Figure 10: SAT/9 Reading 2002 ............ 133 Figure 11: CST ELA 2002 ................. 134 Figure 12: CST Math 2002.................. 134 Figure 13: CST ELA 2002-2004 ............ 146 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. v iii Abstract Equalization of student achievement levels is most certainly the goal of educators. However, faced with increasingly diverse student bodies, with many new students being immigrants of low socio-economic status, this has become a difficult task. The state of California, for example, has a K-12 student population that is not only enormous but quite diverse. There has been a concern for some time regarding the achievement gap between low and high socio-economic status students in the public school system. For over a generation, efforts have been made and programs established to help low-income children close the gap both in school and on standardized tests. Despite numerous theories and programs designed to change this pattern, educators have not been very successful. The primary purpose of this study will be to determine through the use of standardized testing data, and ethnicity and gender data if students from low socio-economic households (CalWORKs) are achieving comparable academic success compared with other students in their peer group. In this study an attempt Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. will be made to identify and evaluate on aspect of the effectiveness, quality and design of academic services offered to this specific group of CalWORKs students who are enrolled in a public school system in California. This study will provide valuable information to the school district regarding the magnitude of success that socio-economically disadvantaged students have had on standardized tests in the past three years. In addition, this study will provide the school district with data regarding the academic success of socio economically disadvantaged students in the school district based on their ethnicity, gender, and parent education level. The district will be able to use the information, data, and recommendations provided in this study to make appropriate changes in the school district policy and programs that directly and indirectly effect the learning outcomes of low income and disadvantaged students in their charge. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 Chapter I: Introduction There has been a concern for some time regarding the achievement gap between low and high socio-economic status students in the public school system (Brooks, 2002; Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000; Hofferth, 2000; Maruyama, 2003; Reid, 2001; Rosenshine, 2002; Tournani, 2004). For over a generation, efforts have been made and programs established to help low-income children close the gap both in school and on standardized tests. Since 1963, "a great deal of time, money and effort has been devoted to closing the gap in reading scores" and bringing low-income children up to grade level (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 273). Despite numerous theories and programs designed to change this pattern, educators ''have not been very successful" (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 273) in reducing the persistent achievement gap. The effort to reduce the achievement gap between high and low-income students remains one of the primary goals of the educational reform movement, which has swept through education since the publication of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001). That report, published by the U.S. Department of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 Education's National Commission on Excellence in Education, claimed that "a rising tide of mediocrity had engulfed (American) schools" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., p. Ill), and called for complete reform that would improve overall student achievement. The Commission recommended the following: strengthening graduation requirements; implementing higher and measurable standards for academic performance; increasing student learning time; strengthening the teaching profession through higher professional growth and teacher preparation standards; and providing leadership by elected officials and fiscal support by all citizens (A Nation at Risk, April 1983). The report further maintained that with falling test scores, and lack luster requirements placed on students, American schools were failing miserably and not able to stack up to comparable institutions in other countries. U.S. schools were considered in a state of emergency with the federal government feeling as though it could not leave the task of educating its students to state and local governments (The Christian Science Monitor, April, 2003). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 3 With this publication, education in American schools was under the microscope. This resulted in a cadre of research studies on effective schools, student achievement and school reform and an influx of resources allocated to education and educational research. However, once educators began to measure achievement by means of standardized tests, glaring disparities were discovered to exist in K-12 students based on poverty, race, ethnicity and gender (Maruyama, 2003). The disparity between various ethnic groups and high achievement was obvious. In California "poor students, African Americans and Hispanics and English learners are over represented among students scoring at the lower levels" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). It was also found that females from disadvantaged households begin to suffer the same sort of achievement gaps that males from similar backgrounds do as they continue through the school system. (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000). Since the 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, " there has been a lot of effort and good will and activity and money spent on our schools, and yet, there has been Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 4 very little to show for it by way of improvement" (The Christian Science Monitor, 2003, P.2). For over the past twenty years, familiar strategies to improve schools and academic achievement have been tried, including new programs, more money, and tighter regulations (Koret Task Force, 2003, p.3). The A Nation at Risk Commission also made recommendations, such as stricter graduation requirements for high school students. However, these additions "produced little by way of improved educational outcomes" (Koret Task Force, 2003, p.3). Thus, through trial and error, it became clear by the latter part of the 1980's that acceptable gains in student achievement would not be accomplished by continuously using the same strategies for improvement over and over again (Koret Task Force, 2003). During the following decade, new national education goals and standards were receiving quite a bit of attention. However, it was not until the Clinton administration's Goals 2000 program that states began implementing their own accountability systems. In fact, "accountability for student results has been Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5 the focal point of education reform since the mid- 1990s" (American Institutes for Research, 2003, p. 1). Indeed, "Nineteen ninety-four was a watershed year for America's schools with respect to educational reform" (U.S. Department of Education, 1994, p.2). Federal legislation such as Goals 2000: Educate America Act, called for a comprehensive reform of the entire educational system. Goals 2000 offered funding to states to plan and implement changes in school standards, curriculum design, assessment practices, professional development and teacher preparation, and accountability (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). In addition, the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) was signed into law in 1994. It reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act - ESSA - for five years. This law supported education programs in the K-12 system "such as accelerated education, programs for limited English proficient (LEP) students, and professional development initiatives for teachers" (U.S. Department of Education, 1994, p.6). "The changes in IASA were designed to link existing federal programs and work in tandem with the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. underlying objectives of Goals 2000" (U.S. Department of Education 1994, p.6). Both Goals 2000 and IASA considered high performance standards the key to successfully implementing school reform. Both also emphasized professional development for teachers, parent participation, and community involvement as key elements "in the education of their children and the life of the school" (U.S. Department of Education, 1994, p.6). State legislation also became proactive with respect to legislation for student achievement. For example, California's Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) passed in 1999. The PSAA has kept schools accountable for student achievement since that time (Edsource, 2004). Under the PSAA legislation an accountability system was established so that schools may demonstrate the "academic progress of students in their charge" (American Institutes for Research, 2003 P. 1). The most recent legislative move to reduce the achievement gap among K-12 American students was the passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. Strong Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 7 accountability is the key component of this reform. The system of standardized tests created to ensure that "no child is left behind" has only been in place since 2003 (Seligman, 2004, p. 87). It uses "federal funding as leverage to make sure that all the nation's children are able to read, to write, and to understand math well by the time they graduate from high school" (Edsource, 2004, p. 1). States have the ability to develop their own methods of measuring whether their schools and school districts are making "adequate yearly progress (AYP)" toward the goal of closing the achievement gap between students; however, the federal government must approve each state's approach. In 2003, the California state accountability system was modified to meet the NCLB funding conditions as specified in the legislation. California's accountability system (PSAA.) has used the Academic Performance Index (API) since 1999 as a measure of academic performance and growth in schools within each district. To meet the NCLB AYP requirement, California schools and districts must maintain the following: annual measurable objectives Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8 (AMO's) for state content standards tests (e.g. California Standards Test - CST); other ways to measure the progress of each student; improvement in high school graduation percentages; and 95% of students within a school district must be tested (Edsource, 2004, p. 1). However, it is already being argued that the emphasis on testing in NCLB only ensures that more students will be left behind. In California for example, the fact that many of the failing schools "are in areas of high poverty should cause us to look very carefully at the nature of the test that produces this label" (Boaler, 2003, p. 507). In addition, the No Child Left Behind system fails to take into account socio-economic background and its impact on the performance of low-income students (Seligman, 2004). The goal of No Child Left Behind is to make all students proficient in math and reading by 2014. This goal has been highly criticized because it ignores the challenges and obstacles faced by low-income students due to their "environmental disadvantages" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 661). That is, "not all children Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. have high quality nutrition, stimulating homes, and extensive learning opportunities prior to entering school" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 661). As a result, it is difficult for them to compete with those students who maintain those advantages. There have been numerous efforts over the years, from legislation to research and to programs, intended to increase student achievement and close the achievement gap between low and high socio-economic groups. However, there still remains an abundance of students from disadvantaged populations that are not succeeding in the American school system. Significance of the Study This study will provide valuable information to the school district regarding the magnitude of success that socio-economically disadvantaged students have had on standardized tests in the past three years. In addition, this study will provide the school district with data regarding the academic success of socio economically disadvantaged students in the school district based on their ethnicity, gender, and parent education level. The district will be able to use the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 10 information, data, and recommendations provided in this study to make appropriate changes in the school district policy and programs that directly and indirectly effect the learning outcomes of low income and disadvantaged students in their charge. In addition, this study will contribute to the broad base of literature concerning the academic achievement of specialized student groups; precisely, socio-economically disadvantaged students (e.g. CalWORKs) in a public school system. Statement of the Problem Equalization of student achievement levels is most certainly the goal of educators. However, faced with increasingly diverse student bodies, with many new students being immigrants of low socio-economic status, this has become a difficult task. The state of California, for example, has a K-12 student population that is not only enormous but quite diverse. Indeed, the majority of students in K-12 public schools in California are minorities, with Hispanics making up the largest group, a group that also is continuing to grow at the fastest pace (EdSource, 2004). Moreover, "more Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 11 than one in five children in California live in poverty and nearly 50% of all K-12 students participate in the federal free and reduced price meal programs offered in schools to students from low-income families" (EdSource, 2004, p. 1). Equalization of student achievement quite often has been tied to variations in funding levels. However, regardless of the variations in funding levels, similar achievement gap patterns have been present. For example, schools in California created equalization by offering more funding to predominately low-income students across the board, while schools in New Jersey received high funding levels for all students (Edsource, 2004). Studies have found that the achievement gap between high and low-income students persists (Edsource 2004), and that "student performance remains low" (Edsource, 2004, p.5). Apparently, funding is not solely responsible for the achievement gap. In fact, researchers have maintained that other variables such as family background, parental involvement as well as parental Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 12 level of education, neighborhood environment school climate, class size, and even student goal-setting, and future outlook are all also partly responsible for the persistence of the achievement gap between high and low income students. Regardless of who or what is to blame, the achievement gap between high and low socio-economic students has continued. Research by the Koret Task Force indicates that "test scores have remained essentially flat since 1970" (Koret Task Force, 2003, p. 3). In addition, their study found that "remediation remains the fastest-growing activity on many college campuses and graduation (high school) rates have actually declined" (Koret Task Force, 2003, p. 3). Furthermore, their report notes that "employers and professors remain dissatisfied with young people's readiness for work and higher education" and "assessments reveal that American 17-year-olds know far less math and science than their peers in most other modern nations" (Koret Task Force, 2003 p. 3). The fact that this gap exists has been sufficiently documented, why this gap exists is a more Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 13 difficult issue. Having said that, how then do we tackle this problem and close the achievement gap between low and high socio-economic students? Numerous researchers state that the only way to close the achievement gap is through concerted programmatic efforts to help low-income students (Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Strahan, 2003). Forcing students to measure up to a standard is self-defeating unless every researched source of inequity is ferreted out and a program is developed to counteract it. Some argue that low-income students must be taught differently, and argue for the importance of quality teachers for these students in particular (Edsource, 2004; Strahan, 2003). For example, One kind of pedagogy over another, such as interactive, humanistic and constructivist has been suggested to be effective for engaging diverse socio economic, multi-ethnic classrooms where students can apply their own knowledge and feel empowered (Carey, 2003, p. 1). Others argue for a complete overhaul of school design; preferably toward effective small schools in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. order to meet the goals currently in place for "teaching our very diverse student population for higher order thinking and deep understanding" (Darling- Hammond, 2005, p. 1). It is further stated that the fact that our world has changed and our school system has not poses a problem. The current educational system in American Schools was not designed to meet the needs of all learners and to teach students at the high standards currently in place. Moreover, "The system we work in today was invented nearly 100 years ago for rote skills and the education of only a few for knowledge work" (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 1). Further support for small schools indicate that they are effective and generally benefit poor or low income students with respect to school performance (Howley, et al., 2000). The effective schools movement believes that only the creation of research-based and theory-grounded effective schools, as originally prescribed by Ronald Edmonds, will help low-income students (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001). An effective school, it is believed, must have "strong leadership, clear emphasis on Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. learning, positive school climate, regular and appropriate monitoring of student progress and high expectations for students and staff" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 660). There have been several effective programs for improving the outcomes of low-income K-12 students, including school-based reforms of teaching practice, various pedagogical approaches, specific structured program for improvement, school funding-based reforms of school elements, and even direct cash assistance to low-income families, such as those in the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program. These programs vary in their intent and means, however, the desired outcome is to help students of these families level the playing field vis-d-vis other students (Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; Brock & Groth, 2003; Calserve, 2004; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Klein, 2004; Rand, 2004; Strahan, 2003). The literature in education seeks to find those factors that "are within the grasp of educators" and then do something about them (Signer, et al., 1997, p. 378). However, most of this literature divides up the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16 factors relating to the low-income student achievement gap between "home and school-based factors" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). Some educators acknowledge that the factors which negatively impact low-income students are in place "before students ever cross the school threshold as kindergartners" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). Other educators look to schools as factors, as the problems never seem to go away. Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of this study will be to determine through the use of standardized testing data, and ethnicity and gender data if students from low socio-economic households (CalWORKs) are achieving comparable academic success compared with other students in their peer group. In this study an attempt will be made to identify and evaluate on aspect of the effectiveness, quality and design of academic services offered to this specific group of CalWORKs students who are enrolled in a public school system in California. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 17 Research Questions 1.Are CalWORKs students performing at a different achievement level compared to other students in the targeted school district within their respective grade levels? 2. How are CalWORKs students test scores and achievement levels related to ethnicity, gender, and parents level of education? 3. Is the gap between CalWORKs students and the general student population in the targeted school district decreasing? 4. How effectively is the targeted school district responding to the needs of its lower socio economic students? Assumptions The following assumptions are made for the purposes of this study: 1. Test data are accurate and tests have been properly administered. 2. School data and student information are accurate. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 18 Delimitations This study is delimited to K-12 students in a Northern California school district who were/are members of California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) families over the past 3 years as indicated by the County Department of Health and Social Services. For comparison, all other students including those students enrolled in free and reduced lunch programs in the school district will be measured against the CalWORKs populations. Definition CalWORKs: California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids program (welfare/public assistance program in California) Socio-economic status (SES): An individuals or groups position within a hierarchical social structure. SES depends on variables such as occupation, education, income, wealth and place of residence. STAR: Standardized Testing and Reporting system in California Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 19 CST: California Standards Test CAT6: California Achievement Test, 6th edition (Norm referenced test) SAT9: Stanford Achievement Test, 9th edition (Norm referenced test) API: Academic Performance Index (California) AYP: Academic Yearly Progress (federal - NCLB) FRL: Free and Reduced Lunch program ELL: English Language Learner(s) Summary Research indicates that the rate of low socio economic status (SES) students performing below expectations still remains high and the achievement gap between high and low SES groups continues to grow. Despite numerous theories and programs, educators "have not been very successful" (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 273) in reducing the persistent achievement gap. In this study a review of the literature on academic success and the achievement gap between high and low socio-economic status students in public schools was completed. Academic achievement of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 20 California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) students (K-12) over a period of three years in a public school system in California will be evaluated. In addition, further analysis of student level data will attempt to identify the effectiveness, quality, and design of academic services for this group of students. The results will be assessed relative to all students in the public school district and the State of California general K-12 student population. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 2: Review of Literature Researchers have expressed concerns regarding educational outcomes and standards with the noted achievement gap between high and low socio-economic status children for some time (Brooks, 2002; Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000; Hofferth, 2000; Maruyama, 2003; Reid, 2001; Rosenshine, 2002; Tournani, 2004). For over a generation, efforts have been made and programs established to help low-income children close the gap both in school and on standardized tests. Since 1963, "a great deal of time, money and effort has been devoted to closing the gap in reading scores" and bringing low-income children, for example, those children who receive free or reduced lunch, up to grade level (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 273). Efforts have continued in high school to encourage low-income students to avoid dropping out, or to attend college. In high school, the achievement gap, which has been found to open up between white middle-class boys and girls, and minorities, has also presented a challenge Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 22 to educators. Overall, however, despite numerous theories and programs, educators "have not been very successful" (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 273) in reducing the persistent gap. The educational establishment as a whole is theoretically dedicated to equalization of student achievement levels. Most school systems have been forced to take this position, faced with increasingly diverse student bodies, with many new students being immigrants of low socio-economic status. The state of i California has a K-12 student population that is not only enormous but quite diverse. Indeed, the majority of students in K-12 public schools in California are minorities, with Hispanics making up the largest group, a group which also is continuing to grow at the fastest pace (EdSource, 2004). Moreover, "more than one in five children in California live in poverty and nearly 50% of all K-12 students participate in the federal free and reduced price meal programs offered in schools to students from low-income families" (EdSource, 2004, p. 1). California's schools are funded equitably, and its district level funding totals are the most equalized in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 23 the country (EdSource, 2004). This factor is deemed important as in many other states researchers claim that unequal distribution of educational funding per pupil to low-income schools (as in New York, for example) is a primary reason for the persistence of the achievement gap between high and low-income students (EdSource, 2004). That said, California did not achieve equalized funding by offering more funding to predominantly low-income student bodies, but by restricting spending by the wealthier schools (EdSource, 2004), a policy which may have simply frozen hidden inequities in the system. California, however, has concentrated on equalizing funding, in order to reduce the achievement gap. It has come as something of a surprise then that, in recent studies, it was found that the achievement gap between high and low- income students persists (EdSource, 2004). Faced with these results, researchers argued that it was the reduction to low levels of funding to all, which caused the failure to reduce the gap. But the example of New Jersey, where courts ordered the state to infuse funding into low-income schools that was equal to that Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 24 previously offered high-income schools, resulting in a situation where all schools had high funding levels, but "student performance remains low" (EdSource, 2004, p. 5) . This kind of quandary has cancelled out one argument as to why the gap persists. Researchers have also assumed that family background, parental involvement as well as parental level of education, neighborhood environment, school climate, class size, and even student goal-setting, future outlook and locus of control are all also partly responsible for the persistence of the achievement gap between high and low-income students. These factors are also studied in the context of ethnicity and gender, in order to determine any confluence of factors that may jointly relate to failure to achieve in school (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000). The importance of socialization, and how different ethnicities, as well as genders, are socialized in the school situation, is also studied in order to determine why there remain apparent differences in ability levels (Nowell, 1998). Other studies look at the inadvertently negative signals sent Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 25 to students by bureaucracy practices such as tracking. One study found that how a student was tracked in school had a "long-term effort on the social position the student attained in society" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000, p. 59). Looking at such "branching points" in the school system itself, this line of argument finds that as long as these points remain "where students have to choose between different educational pathways - it is difficult to reduce these kinds of inequalities" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., p. 60). The recent passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) had the effect of translating the effort to reduce the socio- economic based achievement gap into an all purpose means by which to solve the problem. The system of standardized tests created to ensure that "no child is left behind" has only been in place since 2003 (Seligman, 2004, p. 87). Already, anecdotal evidence, and accounts of discontent by school officials, teachers and other stakeholders, indicates that not only is there too much paperwork and bureaucracy attached to the system but that the overemphasis on standardized test results has created a "familiar story Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. line (which) centers on the shock of administrators at first-rate schools when told they are failing" (Seligman, 2004, p. 87). One researcher has argued that the emphasis on testing only ensures that more students will be left behind. The fact that too many of the "failing" schools, in the state of California for example, "are in areas of high poverty should cause us to look very carefully at the nature of the test that produces this label" (Boaler, 2003, p. 507). Others see other problems. First, by stating that all children can learn and then measuring that confidence against a test result, the No Child Left Behind system fails to take into account the impact of socio-economic background on causing lower IQ or performance of many low-income students (Seligman, 2004). Second, standardized testing often goes against the grain of real learning, the "barrage of short questions with fill-in-the-bubble answers" are disorienting for most students (Boaler, 2003, p. 507), and the tests demand a practice that is not related to "best practices" in real learning classrooms (Boaler, 2003). Finally, NCLB is premised on a goal of making all American students proficient in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 27 reading and math by 2014. This is not only an impossible goal, but a implicit understanding of its difficulty has been evident in the wiggle room provided to states to define "proficiency", resulting in "fuzzy" standards that apparently undermine the standards altogether (Seligman, 2004). But most researchers come back to the point, when criticizing No Child Left Behind, that, in the name of standards, it deletes the reality of very real challenges and obstacles faced by low-income students due to their "environmental disadvantages" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 661) . This "unexamined belief may be used to deny differential financial support for those who come to school with environmental disadvantages" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 661). That is, "not all children have high quality nutrition, stimulating homes, and extensive learning opportunities prior to entering school" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 661). As a result, their minds have not developed on par with children who were raised in stimulating environments: thus the achievement gap may be brain-based and necessitate remedial programmatic treatment. V Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. As a result of such arguments, numerous researchers state that the only way to close the achievement gap is through concerted programmatic efforts to help low-income students (Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Strahan, 2003). Forcing students to measure up to a standard is self-defeating unless every researched source of inequity is exposed and a program be developed to counteract it. Some argue that low-income students must be taught differently, and argue for the importance of quality teachers for these students in particular (Edsource, 2004; Strahan, 2003). For example, one kind of pedagogy over another, such as interactive, humanistic and constructivist has been suggested to be effective for engaging diverse socio-economic, multi ethnic classrooms where students can apply their own knowledge and experiences and feel empowered (Carey, 2003, p. 1). Others argue for a complete overhaul of school design; preferably toward effective small schools in order to meet the goals currently in place for "teaching our very diverse student population for higher order thinking and deep understanding" (Darling- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 29 Hammond, 2005, p. 1). It is further stated that the fact that our world has changed and our school system has not poses a problem. The current educational system in American Schools was not designed to meet the needs of all learners and to teach students at the high standards currently in place. Moreover, "The system we work in today was invented nearly 100 years ago for rote skills and the education of only a few for knowledge work" (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 1). Further support for small schools indicate that they are effective and generally benefit poor or low income students with respect to school performance (Howley, et al., 2000). The effective schools movement believes that only the creation of research-based and theory-grounded effective schools, as originally prescribed by Ronald Edmonds, will help low-income students (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001). An effective school, it is believed, must have "strong leadership, clear emphasis on learning, positive school climate, regular and appropriate monitoring of student progress and high expectations for students and staff" (Thomas & Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 30 Bainbridge, 2001, p. 660). Overall, however, it is acknowledged, "more information and research are needed on the types of involvement that will effectively enhance students' academic achievement" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001, p. 118). In this review, the literature regarding the achievement gap between high and low socio-economic students will be reviewed. The literature, which has studied the various factors to which this achievement gap has been attributed, is also reviewed (Esposito, 1999; Hoff, 2003; Lerman, 2003; Lynch, 2002; Sachs, 2000). Programs, which have been implemented in order to counteract single or multiple factors attributed to the achievement gap, are also reviewed (Alfassi, 2002; Boaler, 2003; Brock and Groth, 2003; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003). Finally, the success or failure of programs like the CalWORKs program in California, designed to assist low-income students in California, will be reviewed. Low-income students and achievement The effort to reduce the achievement gap between high and low-income students remains one of the primary Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. goals of the educational reform movement that has swept through education since the publication of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001). That report claimed that "a rising tide of mediocrity had engulfed (American) schools" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., p. Ill), and called for wholesale reform that would improve overall student achievement. Once educators began to measure achievement by means of standardized tests, however, persistent disparities were discovered to exist in K-12 students based on poverty, race, ethnicity and gender (Maruyama, 2003). These disparities, moreover, were found to develop early, and persist throughout the K-12 years and beyond, and exist at local and national levels as well (Maruyama, 2003). As analysis of data continued, educators began to see more clearly that two worlds existed in education. For children born into high-income families, they received the advantages of a "virtuous circle of success" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25), as parents with university degrees earn more, "set higher educational goals for their children and invest more time in the children's schooling than parents who have a high school education Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32 or less" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25). Moreover, while high- income students experience a virtuous circle, the circle experienced by low-income students is more vicious, as poor parental involvement, lack of motivation and other issues interfere with their education into the college years. While no one will argue that poverty may be a causal factor in low achievement, it remains true that "poverty does set the conditions for low achievement" by exposing students to "lack of access to proper nutrition, health care and decent housing, exposure to substance abuse, and living in high crime communities" (EdSource, 2004, p. 3). All of these factors are believed to have a "synergistic effect on school performance" (EdSource, 2004, p. 3). A study by the Century Foundation provided "stark evidence" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25) of a link between family background and higher education, with a large majority of college students today being from advantaged families (Tyson, 2003). Contributing to the predisposition to failure created by the conditions of poverty, the educational system itself has been found to cause the persistence Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. of problems. Urban schools educate "the majority of students who are at risk for school failure" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 3). Not only do these schools face unequal challenges, when compared to suburban schools, but the schools and the students in them are labeled by the standardized test system in negative ways. As a result, "many of these children are ignored, while others suffer the humiliation of labels such as retarded, learning disabled, socially or emotionally disturbed, educationally deficient or culturally disadvantaged" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 3). As a result, the school system itself does little to alleviate the stigma attached to low achievement. Thus, the "difficulties faced by children of poverty and students of color all too often stay with them throughout their school years" (Maruyama, 2003, p. 656). In the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests, for example, it was found that "over twice as many students eligible for free or reduced price lunches scored below basic proficiency levels in reading achievement than their peers" (Maruyama, 2003, p. 656). Disparities in dropout rates Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 34 of high school students reflect these entrenched problems, with one study finding that "the drop out rates for students between ages 16 and 24 were 3.5% for Asian American, 4.1% for Whites, 6.1% for African American, and 7.4% for Hispanics" (Maruyama, 2003, p. 656) . These inequities have been found to predate the entry of low-income students into K-12 education. A study of child care centers in Boston revealed that teachers in programs for upper-class children received 25% more salary than instructors in low-income child care facilities, and that similar disparities in service meant that low-income toddlers received poorer care than high-income children (Sachs, 2000). While cautioning that not all childcare programs for poor children are poor quality, it nonetheless was proven that, by and large, such programs were under-funded, poorly organized and the teachers poorly compensated. Even the atmosphere of childcare centers for low-income children was telling, as "the prevalence of children milling about is related to lack of training and staff turnover" (Sachs, 2000, p. 385). Infusing additional Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 35 funding into low-income childcare may level the playing field before the onset of the kindergarten years (Sachs, 2000). These findings are important as a study undertaken by the National Center for Education Statistics found that differences in early school experience and achievement by young children were directly traceable to differences experienced by poor children in under- stimulating care conditions (Maruyama, 2003). The study found that "twice as many first graders from families that were not poor were proficient in understanding words in context and in performing multiplication and division than were first graders from poor families" (Maruyama, 2003, p. 655). This is attributable, say researchers on brain development, to the fact that poor children, during the early childhood period of brain development, are not given proper nutrition, and are not provided sufficient sensory stimulation in order to encourage "synaptic connections" which heighten intelligence (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 662). As a result, "some potential neural pathways are shut down" with the result that "children from impoverished Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 36 environments...generally achieve at lower levels than children from more enriching environments" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 662). A number of additional studies have focused on the impact of social factors or various kinds on educational achievement of K-12 students (McCallum & Demie, 2001). Such studies have investigated the effect which social class, ethnic background, "parental occupation and the proportion of one-parent families" (McCallum & Demie, 2001, p. 147) have on educational achievement, with most of the studies finding strong correlations between "pupil background and levels of school performance" (McCallum & Demie, 2001, p. 155). Elements of background studied, in order to pinpoint the source of the achievement gap in low-income K-12 students, include parental involvement, often measured by their "instructional supplies expenditures" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001, p. 110). A study of fourth grade students in North Carolina found that their achievement in mathematics was "individually related" to the amount of the expenditures their parents made for school supplies (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001). As Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37 a result, a simple way to reduce the achievement gap between low-income students and others is for their parents to increase the expenditures they make "that directly relate to instruction" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001, p. 112). When focusing on mathematics, however, this factor did not measure up to a statistically significant level, indicating that type of parental involvement, related to interacting ethnic and home environment dynamics, not any single factor, may contribute to lower achievement (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001). A number of studies focusing on the achievement gap of low-income students have focused on the larger relationship between "educational expenditures and student achievement" using a basic model that "defines achievement as a function of school resources, student ability and student socio-economic status" (Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001, p. 112). Studies have found persistent inequities in spending per pupil, in urban schools serving primarily low-income students. For this reason, students who enter the educational system behind the curve often remain so. By the time low- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. income students arrive at the end of the K-12 period, the achievement gap remains. Studies have shown even more clearly at this level that "a young person's chance of getting into a college or post-graduate program depends on family income" (Tyson, 2003, p. 24). That is, "children from low-income households are much less likely to graduate from college than children raised in high-income households" (Tyson, 2003, p. 24). This problem is by no means being remedied by reform. Rising tuition costs, and growing general inequities between rich and poor in the U.S. have meant, "as family income becomes more unequal, there are signs that the relationship between income and college graduation is becoming stronger" (Tyson, 2003, p. 24). Indeed, cost is becoming a critical issue, in limiting low-income admission to college, often canceling out hard effort to overcome the achievement gap. One study found that "low-income students who graduate from high school with at least minimal qualifications for four- year institutions enroll at half the rate of their high-income peers" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25). Also, "only 78% of students from low-income families who range as Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. top achievers on tests of college readiness actually attend college" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25). These distressing statistics prove that "the financial barriers to college enrollment among students from low-income families are great, and growing" (Tyson, 2003, p. 25). It is argued by some, then, that colleges need to get more involved in "enriching the pool of students who successfully complete high school" (Maruyama, 2003, p. 654), by not only becoming more involved in high school education, but by then also offering financial incentives and scholarships to help low-income students overcome the financial barrier that often neutralizes prior effort to academically overcome the achievement gap (Maruyama, 2003). Given the idea of financial barriers and inequities in the educational system as a whole, it is perhaps not surprising that positive gains in the achievement of low-income students are as yet still viewed as exceptions or anomalies, to be praised and marveled at for positive results that remain not yet entirely transferable to other schools (more such programs will be reviewed below). Top-performing, high- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. poverty schools are focused upon, in order to determine what they are doing right (The Education Trust, 1999). One study from Kentucky found a number of high-poverty schools whose students were outperforming affluent schools on the state assessments (The Education Trust, 1999). A study of several such schools found a multitude of efforts undertaken to improve student achievement. These schools used standards to create curriculum and instruction, constantly assessed student and teacher work and "increased instruction time for reading and mathematics" (The Education Trust, 1999, p. 1). They also invested heavily in professional development, monitored student performance regularly and made substantial efforts to get parents more involved in their children's education (The Education Trust, 1999). As a result of the rare example of exceptional high-poverty schools some researchers argue that "the achievement gap between low-income and other students can be closed if low income students receive high level instruction" (The Education Trust, 1999, p.l) . Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 41 Another exception that proves the rule of the low- income student achievement gap is the existence of individual students who, against all odds, manage to achieve much in school. These students are found to be characterized by exceptional resilience, a personality trait that has been examined with care by researchers (Wasonga & Christman, 2003). Resilience is defined as the "capacity to overcome personal vulnerabilities and environmental adversities effectively or the ability to thrive physically and psychologically despite adverse circumstances" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 63). Resilient children have been found to exhibit innate verbal fluency, a sense of competition and good problem-solving skills (Wasonga & Christman, 2003). They also set goals well, and maintain a healthy optimism about reaching their goals. What is most surprising to researchers is that resilience in low- income children appears to offset the proven negative impact of environmental factors in their upbringing. This paradox has caused some researchers to look more closely into the dynamics of so-called under- stimulating environments, with the result that some Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 42 elements of low-income life have been found to themselves offset the negatives of poverty. These include the richness of social support networks, which have been found to be "positively related to the development of resilience" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 65). Such studies then "suggest that communities with well-developed social networks for their students, and consistent social and cultural norms foster the development of resilience and academic outcomes" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 65). Reinforcing this claim was a study of low-income high school students who demonstrated resilience. It was found that they had strong relationships with adults at the schools, and that those relationships were a strong predictor of their academic success (Wasonga & Christman, 2003). Research on resilience further suggests that "caring relations, high expectations and opportunities for meaningful participation" also create a sense of belonging that in turn helps low-income resilience students close the achievement gap (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 65). The Youth Development Conceptual Model was developed by WestEd in order to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43 chart out those protective factors that encourage resilience and thus limit the negative impact of poverty on low-income student achievement (Wasonga & Christman, 2003). But as with exceptional schools that have achieved success despite the odds, resilient low- income students at present appear to be exceptions whose lessons have not yet been translated to the K-12 student body of low-income students as a whole. Ethnicity and achievement A primary area of concern over the achievement gap, often cross-sectioning the classification of students as low-income, is the ethnicity and race of the student (Gewertz, 2003; Honora, 2002; McCallum & Demie, 2001; Morris, 2002; Newman & Myers, et al., 2000). Here too, persistent achievement gaps have baffled educators. Indeed, "the achievement gap (between white and black students) has bedeviled the nation's schools for decades" (Reid, 2001, p. 13). The persisting inequality between black and white students is "seen in the lower academic outcomes of black students in schools and colleges" (van Laar, 2000, p. 33). Routinely, on NAEP tests and in various state Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. tests such as that administered in California, "poor students, African Americans and Hispanics and English learners are over represented among students scoring at the lowest levels" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). Because African-American students continue to score poorly on tests, they are "eight times less likely to graduate from college than are other students" (Newman & Meyers, et al., 2000, p. 45). Although the number of African Americans graduating from college has greatly increased over the past two generations, "they are still only half as likely to complete four years of college as white students" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 45). Because a great percentage of African Americans also belong to the low-income demographic, many of the reasons given to explain low achievement levels repeat those for low-income students. An ecological perspective has found that economic conditions, "the nature of the neighborhood, family and extended family relationships" all impact African-American student achievement (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 46). Lack of parental involvement in education is another oft- cited reason for the achievement gap. A specific Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45 quality of parental role in low-income minority parents also has been found to factor in. In their working life, low-income minority parents rarely are given opportunities for autonomous decision-making, a situation that may tend to make these parents' socialization lean toward compliance with authority and "discouraging initiative and creative thought" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 48). Researchers have also looked into problems that emerge in the educational experience of African Americans across the span of their educational years. Studies indicate that "whereas African American students start school with test scores close to those of white students, the longer students are in school, the wider the gap grows between African American and white children" (van Laar, 2000, p. 34). Specifically, the average 13-year old black student is usually reading two years before the average white 13-year-old. But by the time these two students turn 17 years old, the African American student is only "reading at a level comparable to that of a 13-year-old white student" (van Laar, 2000, p. 34). Though these results Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. are contradicted by other studies, which have found indications that African-American children reduce the gap between them, and white students between the 5th and 8th grades (Ludwig, 2003), generally, school culture appears to have a negative impact on African-American students. One study compared the experiences of African-American and white students during their transition to the ninth grade (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000). The study found that African-American male students "liked school less as they got older, their grades dropped, they were more likely to experience behavior problems and their parents were less likely to approve of their friends" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 46). Moreover, studies indicated that the declines in academic achievement may be related to the stress of such transitions, and also that they never regain their status prior to the transition (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000). The fact that, it is well documented; "that some educators have lower expectations for the academic achievement of students of color" (EdSource, 2004, p. 3) also contributes to student alienation. It is thus recommended that African Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 47 American male students may need more guidance in negotiating the transitions of a school career, and need direct and explicit instruction on those skills necessary for them to progress from high school to college (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000). The reason why many researchers look to school policies such as tracking, limited trust, or "cultural mistrust and dis-identification with the academic culture of the school" (Honora, 2002, p. 1), is that, in general, African-American students retain equal expectations of success as white students, on up through high school (van Laar, 2000). At the end of high school, in spite of the fact that less than half as many of them go on to attend college, as many African American as white students fully expect to graduate and go on to college (van Laar, 2000). By contrast, an ethnographic study "suggested that black students are less inclined to try hard in school because their peers may view academic effort as characteristics of 'acting white' (Ludwig, 2003, p. 3). Another cultural orientation that may or may not be derived from historical circumstance and coping is the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 48 finding that African American students tend to have a less positive view of the future, or, indeed, less "future outlook", that is, looking to the future, than white students (Honora, 2002, p. 2). The belief is that this is a cultural value orientation derived from a historical circumstance where "the past is too painful and there is no future" causing African Americans in general to focus solely on the present moment (Honora, 2002, p. 2). As a result, "minority and low-income groups are particularly vulnerable to espousing a limited future outlook" (Honora, 2002, p. 2). Because of such circumstances as unemployment or racism, African American students tend to express uncertainty about the future, and therefore defer planning in favor of the present (Honora, 2002). As school becomes more and more focused on future planning, moving into and through high school, therefore, it would follow that students with a poor future outlook would continue to fall behind. Finally, a surprising aspect of the poor performance of many African-American students is that, as one study found, their poor achievement often has Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. little impact on their self-esteem. Whereas studies have found that some ethnic groups, particularly Asian Americans, "associate negative life consequences with poor school performance" (EdSource, 2004, p. 3), African American and Hispanic students apparently do not believe this. This outlook may be based on what researchers call a "folk theory," in the case of African Americans being an inherited belief that working hard will not allow them to reap rewards equal to white Americans, or simply that African Americans value achievements other than the scholastic. A secondary reason why researchers are focusing on the black-white achievement gap is that there remains a problem of racial discrimination in the American workplace (Ludwig, 2003). Public policy has called for answers which will "reduce differences in skills between blacks and whites before they enter the workforce" (Ludwig, 2003, p. 2), in order to alleviate this problem. But "reducing the well-known gap between the test scores of black and white students" is also an important way to eradicate workplace discrimination. Thus, it is necessary as well, to study if "schools are Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 50 doing their part in narrowing the black-white test score gap" (Ludwig, 2003, p. 1). The literature has studied the success or failure of some programs to reduce the black-white achievement gap. The use of vouchers has shown mixed results in reducing the ethnic achievement gap. One study from five years ago found that ''African American students who had won privately-financed tuition vouchers in a 1997 lottery scored 5.5. national percentile points higher on standardized tests three years later than did black peers who had sought but did not receive vouchers" (Gewertz, 2003, p. 13). In another study, however, focusing on elementary school children, it was found that offering a voucher to African American students "had no statistically discernible impact on achievement scores" (Gewertz, 2003, p. 14). A later study in New York City, moreover, reinforced this finding, by determining that "African-American students who received vouchers to attend private schools in New York City derived no academic benefit from them" (Gewertz, 2003, p. 14). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 51 Getting teachers to change their attitudes and beliefs about minority students is another initiative undertaken by reformers seeking to redress the achievement gap. Such an effort is "at the heart of the standards-based reform movement" (EdSource, 2004, p. 3). From studies of aforementioned exemplary schools where African- American students achieved results on tests, one of the primary reasons cited for student success is that the students had "communally bonded" with the personnel, a circumstance reinforced by the fact that the achievement of the school resulted in the local community taking pride in it and supporting it in many positive ways (Morris, 2002). When such a "communal" school plan works, parents also become more involved in the school program, deepening the sense of belongingness for students, which has been proven to underlie most efforts to have African-American students close the achievement gap between them and white students. Gender and achievement Gender contributes to low-income and ethnicity- based achievement gaps with its unique dynamic as well Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000; Nowell, 1999; Wasonaga & Christman, et. al, 2003). The literature on gender differences in academic achievement "is extensive" (Nowell, 1998, p. 1). At present, however, researchers have reached a consensus on "only a handful of issues" regarding gender (Nowell, p. 1). While, in general, it is acknowledged that females generally do better than males in school, there are some breaks in the achievement profile based on income-level, ethnicity and subject matter of academic discussion. The finding that girls do better in verbal tests while boys do better in math has been confirmed so often that it has all but become common place. Moreover, the gender gap in math and science achievement is also well known, and true across class and ethnic lines. In tests, in science and math, "girls lag far behind boys" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000, p. 75). This is partly explained by "their lack of arithmetic achievement at the end of primary school" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., p. 75). Nonetheless, girls from disadvantaged families are found to begin to suffer the same sort of gaps that boys from similar backgrounds do (indicating that class Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. has more pronounced impact on achievement than gender) (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000). Some studies have related the special disadvantage of low-income girls to the "cumulative effects of gender, low socio-economic background and belonging to an ethnic minority group" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., p. 75). At the same time, when low-income girls are compared directly to low- income boys, "girls obtained considerably better results than boys" (McCallum & Demie, 2001, p. 157). Studies further confirm that the two-sided gender gap increases both ways once students reach high school. That is, girls begin to outperform boys by wider margins. At the same time, their self-esteem and confidence in math and science begins to drop, and thus the gap between them and boys in those subjects expands (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997). While in general there is a "paucity of studies examining the interactions among ethnicity, gender, mathematics achievement level and...attitudes toward math" (Signer & Beasley, et al., p. 379), generally, the gap opens wider in the high school years. The unequal representation of boys and girls in high school Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 54 science, moreover, is a permanent life-choice, as the same inequities persist in career choices once students graduate. Studies have found that "people who have careers in science and engineering are overwhelmingly more likely to have scored in the 90th percentile on math and science achievement tests in high school" (Nowell, 1998, p. 11). Other studies have found that girls are no less talented than boys in these subjects, but simply that they have chosen to "leave math and science majors at a higher rate than the men" (Nowell, p. 11). Studies also indicate that, while the size of the gender gap is, relatively speaking, small, "the rate of change is extremely slow and certainly not practically significant" in recent years (Nowell, 1998, p. 11). One researcher argues that the math gender gap may have received so much attention because the overall gap has indeed been reduced to a level so minor that it promises complete equity (Nowell, 1998). That same quality of the gender gap is found in studies of low-income girls and boys as well. Results of studies have shown that "gender and socio-economic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. differences in achievement remained consistent and generally increased throughout the senior years of education and mirrored patterns already evident at primary school" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000, p. 63). At the same time, the gender gap, if combined with ethnicity, does show a closing of the gap in the secondary education years (Sekkers & Bosker, et al., p. 63). Overall, however, while the gap between girls and boys "disappear during secondary education" (Deskker & Bosker, et al., p. 61), the gender math and science gap, as noted, continues to increase with girls of all socio-economic levels and ethnic profiles. Looking at the issue of the culture of girls as opposed to boys, the concept of attitude and self esteem, as well as future outlook, is also being studied, in an attempt to locate the source of the gender achievement gap. When looking at the aforementioned fact that African- American students have less future outlook and fewer goals for their education, high-achieving African-American girls were found to, on the contrary, "state more goals and exhibit a more long-term future outlook than all other Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 56 groups" (Honora, 2002, p. 9). These girls had higher goals than even high-achieving boys. This finding contradicts the more general literature on gender and goals, which find that "males tend to have more goals and expectations and set more distant goals than females" (Honora, 2002, p. 8). These beliefs are based on studies which have found that "females tend to set fewer goals, and be more pessimistic regarding their personal future" compared to their male counterparts (Honora, 2002, p. 2). Looking into why this should be, it was found that females set different kinds of goals than males, having more to do with family and "other interpersonal relationships" (Honora, 2002, p. 2). This is due to the fact that "in contrast to males, females often report a double load or a rapid pile-up of family and career transitions" (Honora, 2002, p. 2). While these findings generally cast females in a more difficult position with relation to their goals, other studies have found advantages in the female orientation. Gender is shown by studies to have a "substantial effect on the way in which children negotiate their personal positions and relationship, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 57 between academic achievement, school cultures and home and peer cultures" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 70). Females are better able to juggle and negotiate between role expectations. As a result, this becomes a strength as females move into high school and beyond. Findings have indicated that female high school students engage in activity which makes schools more supportive and enhances their sense of belonging to the school—both factors previously cited as leading to higher academic achievement. Specifically, "female high school students are more likely to report positive connections with their teachers than boys" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 70). By contrast, boys begin to experience greater "cognitive dissonance" and more often negatively influence classroom ambience (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 70). Boys "tend to receive more rebukes, and feel overwhelmingly that they are discriminated against because far more negative attention is unjustly focused on them" (Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 70). Girls, on the other hand, avoid most of these alienating problems. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 58 When it comes to resilience, studies of this factor for success in even low-income students have found that gender matters. Studies have shown that gender increases resilience in so far as girls engage in activities which fashion "protective factors" in enhancing their resilience {Wasonga & Christman, 2003, p. 69). Generally, white students demonstrate more protective factors than African- American, Hispanic or Asian students, but, along that profile, "female students had a wider variety of protective factors predicting academic achievement than male students" {Wasonga & Christman, 2003 p. 60). In a study of resilient students versus regular students, females scored a variance from norm of 20% while males only exhibited an 11% variance (Wasonga & Christman, 2003). The picture for gender achievement therefore remains mixed. Girls do better than boys in school, and develop many favorable factors that protect their achievement levels in many ways through high school. But these same advantages, primarily social and peer- based, also apparently weigh against girls succeeding in math and science, resulting in an actual increase in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the gender gap over the high school years. While math educators continue to strive to close the gap, other educators have encouraged classes that take a critical look at gender so that students become more aware of how gender impacts their decisions and goals. It is hoped that such awareness of the role gender plays in life choices will motivate girls and boys to alter their documented behaviors, which currently leave the gender gap in place. Factors contributing to the achievement gap between high- and low-income students While a survey of the literature on the role of income level, ethnicity and gender in the formation of an achievement gap between low-income and high-income students has revealed some awareness of those factors said to contribute to the gap, the literature also zeroes in directly on numerous discrete factors which must be briefly reviewed if the full picture of effort to eradicate the achievement gap is to be viewed (Esposito, 1999; Hoff, 2003; Lerman, 2003; Lynch, 2002 Okpala & Okpala, et al., 2001; Sachs, 2000). The factors discussed related to the structure of the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 60 schools where low-income students are taught will be pedagogy, teachers, school climate and class-size, all of which are individually and together blamed for achievement gaps. Factors relating to individual low- income students involve their self-esteem and internal locus of control, much of which is related to how they were parented, and, finally, how much they work outside of school. The achievement gap between high and low-income students remains a matter of serious concern, because it bears directly on the future labor force of the United States. Employers increasingly report that new workers in low-income jobs "demonstrate an amazing lack of basic skills such as critical reading and mathematics" (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 378). African-American low-income students continue to be over represented at low levels in math achievement, for example, necessary to obtain even minimally supportive jobs (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997). The fact that this gap exists has been sufficiently documented, why this gap exists is a more difficult issue for the literature. At present, in its search for factors Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. leading to the low-income student achievement gap, researchers have found "a myriad of scapegoats ranging from biological and family influences to unresponsive teaching methods and lack of motivation" (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 378). The literature in education seeks to find those factors that "are within the grasp of educators" and then do something about them however (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 378). Many researchers have thus come to make use of a systems model, which "precludes assigning blame to one entity for the educational outcomes of children," (Esposito, 1999, p. 366). A systems approach also allows one to understand that the "risks and protections contributing to children school performance" derive from numerous entities or factors (Esposito, 1999, p. 366). As a result of this perspective, it is acknowledged in advance that "the problems of chronically poor school districts are complex and intractable" (Esposito, 1999, p. 366), and that poverty impacts low-income students in multidirectional ways. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 62 That said, most of the literature divides up the factors relating to the low-income student achievement gap between "home and school-based factors" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). Some educators emphasize and acknowledge that the factors, which negatively impact low-income students, are in place "before students ever cross the school threshold as kindergartners" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2), while others look to schools as factors, as the problems never seem to go away. For example, the National Center for Education Statistics conducted a study that showed that low-income students entering kindergarten all had mothers who had not obtained high school graduation, whose families were on welfare or headed by a single parent, and "whose parents' primary language was not English" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2), and "were disproportionately represented among low- performers" (EdSource, 2004, p. 2). While preexisting social factors leading to lower achievement among low-income students have been touched upon above, how schools deal with these issues remain a secondary factor as well. Educators have been concerned about at-risk students and higher drop-outs among them Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. for decades, and have blanketed the educational system with evaluative instruments in order to trace their progress, or lack of it, in the system (Lych, 2002). Early screening and tracking, elements of the school system once believed to help such students, now are being criticized for contributing to the problem. Nonetheless, studies still often favor the idea of early screening for at-risk low-income children, in order to determine their risk status and do something about it immediately (Kamps, 2003). In a study of an early screening process of low socio-economic students from culturally diverse backgrounds, the children were screened upon entry to kindergarten and then tracked for three years (Kamps, 2003). Screening revealed that low-income children can exhibit either an academic or a behavioral problem. The study found that while the behavioral problems can be improved, and these students can make better progress after three years, the academic problems are more harder to alleviate (Kamps, 2003). The study found just how difficult it is to change the academic performance of a student screened early. Of those children that originally screened for Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 64 poor reading skills, 90% of them continued to have poor reading skills three years later (Kamps, 2003). Moreover, many of the children had begun to "actively dislike reading and actually read less both in and out of school" (Kamps, 2003, p. 1). Furthermore, studies show that children who exhibit reading problems in 3rd grade "are not likely to improve significantly by the end of eighth grade" (Kamps, 2003, p. 1). While this study showed how hard it is to change children's achievement, it also affirmed that early screening can help districts devise mandated curricula which have been proven to improve achievement rates (Kamps, 2003). One end result of early screening, however, and related also to mandated curricula, is tracking. Originally, tracking was meant to provide at-risk students with a remediation pathway to better achievement. However, over time researchers have found that tracking in fact segregates schools between high and low-achieving students, and has numerous negative impacts on the tracked students. One study found that "a student's socio-economic status, and not race, had more of an impact on his or her track assignment and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 65 academic achievement" (Reid, 2001, p. 14). This finding, while it questions the racial stigma often claimed to cling to tracking, nonetheless suggests that tracked classes have become dumping grounds for low- income students (Reid, 2001). While one study found that ''tracking had no direct effect on widening the achievement gap" (Reid, 2001, p. 15), nor do any studies indicate that tracking actually helps low- income low-achieving students catch up with other students. Thus, it could be argued, has a former solution to the achievement gap become part of the problem. A large contingent of researchers continues to believe that poor pedagogy is a major factor in the low-achievement of low-income children. The U.S. Department of Education has made a series of recommendations with regard to how at-risk low-income children could be taught in a more engaging manner, which may or may not improve their achievement. They argue that peer teaching, "with at-risk students as group leaders" might help, as well as recognizing the effort and achievement of these students (Signer & Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 389). They also argued that un-timed tests or other forms of assessments would be more likely to capture the nature of low-income student achievement, which possibly does not measure up well against standardized tests. Constructivist teaching techniques using open-ended activities "that emphasize thought process over a correct answer and un-graded activities that use errors as a source of learning rather than an occasion for punishment" are also recommended (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 389). While there is an excess of pedagogical approaches to remediation of low-income students, all premised on the concept that poor course structure and pedagogy are the major factor contributing to poor achievement, studies that prove the effectiveness of such programs are more limited (see below). One study indicated that African-American high school students enrolled in a compensatory math class were "three times more likely to anticipate attending college than their white counterparts" (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 386). Moreover, when compensatory math classes are given in low socio-economic high schools, these students are Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 67 "the most likely to desire enrollment in advanced math classes" (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 386). Certainly, both outcomes indicate promise, but, generally, most educators look beyond curriculum to find the most telling factors contributing to low- income students and poor achievement. One structural fault of the educational system that repeatedly receives attention by advocates for low-income students is the so-called funding gap (see above) between low-income and high-income schools. Studies have found that in 30 of 47 states studied "school districts with the fewest poor students get substantially more money than districts with higher concentrations of the poor" (Brooks, 2002, p. 2). In the study, The Funding Gap, it was shown that in New York City low-income students received less money per student for their education. That is, "districts serving a higher concentration of poor students received $2, 152 less per student compared to school districts with fewer poor students" (Brooks, 2002, p. 1). New York leads the nation in such disparities. While some proclaim such results as a disgrace, where Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 68 "the students with the greatest needs are receiving the fewest resources" (Brooks, 2002, p. 2). It has been noted (see above) that efforts by New Jersey and California to equalize expenditures have yielded no positive results, thus apparently removing the funding gap as a viable factor for the achievement gap of low- income students. At present, this issue remains divisive, with some arguing that such inequities matter little when compared to the "effects of poverty and family background" all of which "overwhelm anything that schools can do" (Brooks, 2002, p. 2). Others look to studies, which "confirm that all children can achieve at high levels when the right combination of tools and strategies is employed," (Brooks, 2002, p. 2). This argument also plays out over the issue of vouchers, but, here too, studies have found mixed results for "students of various ethnicities in voucher programs" (Reid, 2001, p. 14). While some studies have found positive results, others find none. One study found that "after two years black students using privately-funded vouchers who attend private schools scored 8.3% higher on combined math and reading tests Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 69 that black students who remained in public schools" (Reid, 2001, p. 14). Consensus is emerging over another factor looked to in order to explain the low-income student achievement gap: teachers. While the research findings are mixed as to which specific teacher characteristics have the most impact on students—ranging from their credentials, college attended, years of experience and even personal characteristics—there is a general consensus that "the single most important school resource linked to academic success is the teacher" (EdSource, 2004, p. 6). Most specific studies of teacher quality, however, find only "modest gains in student performance" (EdSource, 2004, p. 6), which may or may not be enough for advocates of low-income students. The teacher issue also intersects in complicated ways with funding issues. Driving the emphasis on teacher quality are findings, like those discovered in statistics of California public schools, that "the state's lowest performing schools have a disproportionate share of inexperienced and under qualified teachers" (EdSource, 2004, p. 6). In fact, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the urban schools which low-income students are most likely to attend are "heavily staffed with new teachers who have not had enough experience to build up a repertoire of skills and strategies for addressing students' academic, psychological and social needs" (Morris, 2002, p. 233). An important finding of studies of how teachers teach in low-income schools is that their roles change, as teachers in such schools often "taken on aspects of the role of parents with their (especially) African-American students" (Morris, 2002, p. 233). This may be why, in a study of African- American students experiencing difficulties in the transition to ninth grade, "students had a lot to say about the central role of teachers" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 53). Achievement for low-income students drops when these students become disconnected from the school, and experience boredom, not liking classes, and cite "lack of motivation and difficulty staying awake as reasons why they did not do well in class" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 53). By contrast, high performers are continually challenged by their teachers, and also guided toward resources that will Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 71 "further their knowledge and interest in specific academic areas" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 53). Teacher quality also intersects with efforts to improve student outcomes by the introduction of rigorous, structured programs. In one study it was found that the introduction of such a program lead to high teacher turnover, as many teachers were unwilling to "teach in structured programs" and experienced difficulty learning the format, and protested the amount of time and effort that is demanded (Rosenshine, 2002, p. 280). This result may offer a strong caution to those who argue that structured programs are the only way to improve the performance of low-income students. By contrast, studies have found that schools which have experienced success in achieving results for students encourage their teachers to take risks, learn from errors, and share ideas with other teachers (Strahan, 2003). Interaction with colleagues is increasingly being found to be a strength. One study found that math reform initiatives were most successful and improved instruction the most when teachers Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. "engaged in ongoing deliberations with colleagues that helped them translate new ideas into practice" (Strahan, 2003, p. 129). When a school cultivates intergenerational bonds between old and new teachers, moreover, the school often experiences stability in its teaching force, shown to be a significant plus for students. In a study of one of those exceptional urban schools helping low-income African American children succeed, it was precisely the high expectations created by a collegial interaction between veteran and new teachers that created an atmosphere of success (Morris, 2002). Direct collaboration between teachers has also been shown to greatly improve the quality of instruction and outcome in schools (Strahan, 2003). In a school where more than three fourths of the students were of low-income minority background, this form of support for learning lead to increased student accomplishment (Strahan, 2003). Finally, teachers working together create a shared belief that permeates a school in a positive way. In a study of successful schools participating in the Child Development Project, the teachers' ability to create a warm, supportive, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73 stable and challenging classroom resulted in higher achievement (Strahan, 2003). Teachers, therefore, are important, but the literature appears to be leaning toward the idea that they are most important for low- income students to the degree to which they provide support and stability for these students. An additional factor, which is often cited as contributing to improved achievement of low-income and all students, is school climate. Researchers have argued for some time, "school organization, climate and leadership...play an important role in raising student achievement" (EdSource, 2004, p. 7). This is particularly true in "schools that serve predominately disadvantaged students" (EdSource, 2004, p. 7). In the context of effective schools research, school climate is ultimately created by the principal who acts as a leader who "instills in the staff a shared understanding and belief that the mission of the school is learning for all" (EdSource, 2004, p. 7). In California, much reform is premised on the ideas of the effective schools movement, and thus the Principal Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 74 Training Act is a reform element designed to seek out and train leader principals (EdSource, 2004). While it is almost obvious in the literature that "school climate is an important determinant of a child's school success" (Esposito, 1999, p. 367), what school climate is, and what its impact on academic achievement might be, is less agreed upon. One definition of school climate includes both the physical and psychological school environment "including relationships among and between administration, teachers, parents and students and the community at large" (Esposito, 1999, p. 366). That said, there remains a "dearth of research about the influence of an overall measure of school climate on children's social and academic outcomes" (Esposito, 1999, p. 367). Some studies, however, "indicate that certain aspects of school climate affect children's school achievement" (Esposito, 1999, p. 367). In a study that made use of parental ratings of school climate and then examined the effect of the measured school climate on children, the findings indicated that first grade achievement scores did go up as a result of the climate. In the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 75 study, the school climate was primarily identified by the quality of the teacher-student relationship, and the results indicated that positive relationships "can indeed influence school achievement as measured by direct assessments" (Esposito, 1999, p. 373). These results were crosschecked against teacher ratings of student social skills and academic competence, confirming that parents, students and teachers all found increased performance (Esposito, 1999). School climate is so important to advocates for low-income students because problems in school climate are so prevalent in urban, low-income schools (Esposito, 1999). The children who attend urban school in low-income areas "consistently show the lowest academic achievement and the poorest social skills development" (Esposito, 1999, p. 365), a finding often- blamed on poor school climate. Studies have shown that in family and school life, risks and lack of protection, a feeling of fear and alienation, inhibits achievement (Esposito, 1999). This fact is confirmed in reverse in a study of three urban, low-income schools in North Carolina that "beat the odds" and improved Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 76 low-income and minority student achievement. In these schools, "more than two-thirds of students qualify for free and reduced-price lunch" indicating low-income status (Strahan, 2003) . Though located in low-income neighborhoods, and serving low-income minority children, the schools found a way to improve their scores on state tests from 1997 to 2002 from less than 50% proficient to more than 75% proficient (Strahan, 2000). After looking at all the factors that created a better school climate, including a supportive and caring teaching staff, the primary result of the study was that the school turned toward success simply by switching its focus from the children's behavior, to their academics. In the school, the administrators and teachers simply "turned our attention away from the things that the students were doing wrong and turned (their) attention to those things that will cause us to make progress" (Strahan, 2003, p. 127). Another study found that by constantly focusing on negatives, teachers inadvertently instill a sense of learned helplessness into low-income and African American children (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997). By using Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 77 portfolios and other means of assessments, teachers must find ways to accentuate the positive aspects of the student's work, and this effort "can make a difference in the student's grade" (Signer & Beasley, et al., 1997, p. 389). Finally, school reform on behalf of improving outcomes for low-income students often gives into the temptation to seek a silver bullet. Class-size reduction has undergone a round of reform, as the easy solution of the moment (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003). The SAGE program in Wisconsin and a class-size reduction program in California have produced mixed results however. In the SAGE program, first graders placed in smaller classes immediately showed significant gains in their math tests scores (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003). In later grades, SAGE students in small classes "showed a 35% higher level of academic achievement than that of their counterparts in larger classes" (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003, p. 73). By the end of third grade, SAGE students from smaller classes were "achieving at a level of one-third to one-half a year ahead of students in larger classes" (Smith & Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 78 Molnar, et al., 2003, p. 73). While these results are important, other researchers have pointed out the great cost of the program and wonder if the degree of improvement is, in fact, worth the cost of the program (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003). Class-size reduction appears to be especially important for advocates of low-income children because studies of these programs show that the improvements they bring come to low income and African American students in statistically significant rates (Hoff & Olson, et al., 2002). In one study of low-income students in the third grade it was found that their average scores in math increased 14% while they improved 9% in reading scores—these gains from students in schools "with high concentrations of students living in poverty" (Hoff & Olson, et al., 2002, p. 12). While such studies indicate the strong effect of smaller class sizes, "the effects are especially powerful for African American students entering small 1st grade classes" (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003, p. 765). For a group of African-American students entering first grade with scores lower in reading and math than other Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. students, by the end of the first grade the students in the smaller classes "were significantly higher than those of the African American students in larger classes" (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003, p. 75). More importantly, the gains they made were sustained, as in 2nd and 3rd grades these students "kept pace with that of their white peers" (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003, p. 75). African Americans do better in smaller classes in high school as well, as one study found that students in small classes "are more likely to take college entrance exams" (Reid, 2001, p. 4). In one study, 41.3% of African American student assigned to small classes "later took college entrance exams, compared with 31.8% of black students in classes of regular size" (Reid, 2001, p. 4). These gains are all the more remarkable when one compares them to findings that smaller class sizes make little difference to the outcome of white or high-achieving students (Reid, 2001). The contradictory results seem to point to the fact that smaller class size create classroom climate changes that have been found to, contribute to achievement improvements in African American students (Reid, 2001). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. California implemented a $2 billion class-size reduction program in its public schools, following on the reported success of the Tennessee Star Project. But the structure of the California program was quite different than the one implemented in Tennessee, and "a recent evaluation found that the effects on achievement were marginal" (EdSource, 2004, p. 6). Other studies have reported that test scores did rise because of class size reduction in California, but not all schools enjoyed positive results. Indeed, some students in the poorest schools in Los Angeles saw their test scores fall as a result of being in smaller classes. But this occurred however, as a result of the class size reform. Thus, "the most experienced teachers in the lowest performing schools left for more affluent schools, and the least qualified teachers were sent to the schools with the most impoverished students" (Hoff & Olson, et al., 2002, p. 12) - indicating again the synergy of factors contributing to low achievement among low-income students. A final area of concern to some educators is how personal factors related to life and personality impact Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 81 the success or not of low-income students. The fact that most low-income students have to work for a living was once considered to be one of their strengths. But recently some educators have argued that students who work more than 20 years a week, will perform poorly at school. In a study of working low-income youth however only "at most a weak connection between long hours and negative school behaviors" was found (Lerman, 2000, p. 4). Another study however found that the longer the students worked, the less homework they did, and the more they risked suspension. Long working hours has often been associated with higher rates of expulsion, but a new study found only modest or no incidence of suspension or expulsion in a body of working low-income students (Lerman, 2000). There is a gender factor in these findings however as boys "were almost twice as likely as girls to work 20 hours or more" per week (Lerman, 2000, p. 4) . Moreover, this gap opens wider when ethnicity and race is factored in, as "21% of black males but only 4% of black females work 20 hours or more" per week (Lerman, 2000, p. 4). While there continues to be a belief that long hours leads to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 82 disassociation from school, findings of current studies "find little if any negative association between schooling-related outcomes and work, even work involving 20 or more hours per week" (Lerman, 2000, p. 6) . Two unexpected twists characterize the findings about student work and outcomes. First, youth in moderate and high-income families tend to work more and more often than students from low-income families. Of teens from needy families, "less than one in three worked, in contrast, nearly half of teens in families with incomes at least twice that of the poverty level held jobs" (Lerman, 2000, p. 2). This may reflect factors of qualification, or that jobs become part of a mindset in which high-income students are preparing themselves for their eventual working life. This statistic may indicate then that high-income students are still motivated to work in order to obtain the discipline, abilities, and skills that may assist them in their future careers, while low-incomes students are not. Second, while much has been heard about how welfare negatively impacts families and children, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 83 children of families that go off welfare actually find they have to give up their jobs to look after younger children and their families often experience much more stress than when on welfare (Lerman, 2000). Thus, programs of public assistance, like the CalWORKs program, instituted in California in 1996 as that state's version of the federal Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) legislation, offer cash assistance, education programs and childcare services to poor families, and may exhibit unexpected negative effects as well (EdSource, 2004, p. 4). Though CalWORKs strives to eradicate the barrier to funding which inhibits progress of low-income students in school, it may also inadvertently create stresses that throw up still other barriers before student achievement. The final factor discussed, then, with regard to the achievement of low-income students is family support. Family support has been shown "to be positively related to the commitment of African American students to academic achievement" (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000, p. 54). Mothers who support academics were found to be especially important for Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 84 these students; if they are working, or if these children must work then these connections can be severed. If parents are warm and nurturing, set clear limits on behavior, and encourage academic achievement, then African-American students especially will thrive (Newman & Myers, et al., 2000). Sound parenting is also believed to instill in students an internal sense of locus of control, so that students feel that have control over their destiny, and improve their learning because they have the ability to do so (Lynch, 2002). Moreover, children from these families turn out to be more resilient, and drop out less than non-resilient students (Lynch, 2002). If the self-confidence instilled in students by their parents are carried over into school, and encouraged by programs in school, then a student is more likely to achieve success in school (Alfassi, 2003). According to this viewpoint, then, fostering self-efficacy in school "increases achievement scores over and beyond that gained through teaching academic skills" (Alfassi, 2003, p. 10). Any program instituted to provide funding or other services to low-income students, then, must make certain that Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 85 they do not inadvertently break the parental-child bonds that instill values, self-efficacy, confidence and goals in low-income students, as these internal traits, to some educators, may be the ultimate key to improving the achievement of this body of students. Effective programs for improving the outcomes of low-income K-12 students This final section briefly reviews several existing programs that improve the achievement of low- income students. These programs vary in their intent and means, and include school-based reforms of teaching practice, various pedagogical approaches, specific structured program for improvement, school funding- based reforms of school elements, and even direct cash assistance to low-income families, such as in CalWORKs, to help students of these families level the playing field compared with other students (Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; Brock & Groth, 2003; Calserve, 2004; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Klein, 2004; Rand, 2004; Strahan, 2003) . Several alternative approaches to school reform have been suggested by the effective schools Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 86 orientation of the literature (see above). The theme within the literature not only examines which means of reform a school adopts, but how well organized the school is and how effectively it adopts the reform (Brock & Groth, 2003). Well-organized school-based reforms for low-income schools are characterized by several factors, including ongoing professional development, high degree of staff involvement in the reform, a strong focus on improving student learning and continuous monitoring of student achievement (Brock & Groth, 2003). Most importantly, any school-based reform must be instilled by the belief of the teachers that improving student learning is possible. In one study the implementation of a school-wide reform failed because "the faculty perceived little hope for increasing student learning" (Brock & Groth, 2003, p. 184). It is because the school reform process is so difficult, that so many schools have failed to carry through on their reform. This may account for the fact that "despite continued efforts at school reform, no dramatic changes in the educational system have taken place" (Brock & Groth, 2003, p. 167). Of the various Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 87 approaches to reform in the literature, a focus on improving school climate has already been mentioned above (Alfassi, 2003). But it may be underscored here that school reform fails because it is unable to create a synergy of relationships and dedication to academics that derives, apparently, from first focusing on school climate (Alfassi, 2003). One more particular reform methodology for teaching is service learning. Carried out in numerous California schools, it was found that low-income students in particular benefit from rooting their education in service learning contexts in the real world (CalServe, 2004). California has launched service learning projects in language arts, social science and mathematics, and early results indicate some success in increasing low-income student engagement in school. How many service hours are needed to instill in a student the sense that his or her education is meaningful is as yet open to question, however (Calserve, 2004). Following from the above comments that tracking has negative influences on low-income students, some school reform begins and ends at de-tracking of the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 88 school. In one case study, however, it was found that the simple act of de-tracking touched off a myriad of other changes, most of them beneficial to students. These included the fact that teachers began to discuss lessons with each other, and students from all ethnic groups began to work better together to solve various problems (Boaler, 2003). As a result of de-tracking, the low-income school under study witnessed test scores gains that resulted in students at the school "significantly outperforming students at the other schools" (Boaler, 2003, p. 503) . Following from the idea that tracking stigmatizes low-income students, more and more educators are finding that "students at risk who participate in conventional remedial instruction programs score a failing grade on achievement tests" (Alfassi, 2003, p. 10). By contrast, structured academic programs helped the same body of students sore an average of 7 0% on achievement tests, "a score which is equal to a score of all high school students" (Alfassi, 2003, p. 10). Structured programs, therefore, are increasingly becoming preferred over traditional remedial programs. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 89 In addition to improving grades, structured courses have been shown to increase student confidence and competence (Alfassi, 2003). An example in the literature of a school where only 3% of low-income students were performing at grade level, and was reformed by the implementation of a structured program is typical of the trend toward favoring such programs (Tournani, 2004). The school had a student population of minorities, 80% of which qualified for free or reduced price lunch, indicating low-income status (Tournani, 2004) . By introducing the highly structured Open Court Reading program into the school, a program, which featured self-pacing, collaboration and constant assessment, resulted in significant gains (Tournani, 2004). This affirmed findings elsewhere in the literature that Open Court leads failing students back to grade-level reading (Rosenshine, 2002) . Moreover, findings indicate that students who stay in Open Court direct instruction through fourth grade, will continue to score well on achievement tests (Rosenshine, 2002). Because Open Court includes phonics, and is taught so rigidly that Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 90 teachers all but read from daily scripts, it remains controversial. Moreover, all "classes in every grade cover the same material at the same time" (Tournani, 2004, p. 2). But proponents argue that such structure ensures steady progress, and as a result the program has become "quite popular, especially among schools with high percentages of low-income students" (Tournani, 2004, p. 2). Indeed, one in eight public schools in California now use Open Court, "where only 100 schools used it five years ago" (Tournani, 2004, p. 2). Like other programs on the market, such structured programs as Open Court have therefore gained considerable support primarily based on its positive results for low-income students. Other such programs on the market include the Academic Learning Time model, which measures the time allocated for instruction, the time students are engaged in learning, and the success rate of students, in a structured learning environment (Ysseldyke & Spicuzza, et al., 2003). The purpose of the program is to counteract the observed fact that most students spend too little actual time "actively engaged in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 91 classrooms across the U.S." (Ysseldyke & Spicuzza, et al., 2003, p. 251). Accelerated Math and Accelerated Reader, developed by Renaissance learning, are curriculum management systems infused with the idea of measuring engagement time, and have been shown to produce results. In one study of the use of a curriculum management system of this kind, ''students showed an average gain of 5.75 norm curve equivalent units on the achievement tests" (Ysseldyke & Spicuzza, 2003, et al., p. 53). Another program designed to assist ethnic students to succeed in school is a program developed in Hawaii that focuses on contextualizing instruction "within the student's home and school backgrounds" (Yamauchi, 2003, p. 380). The program succeeded because it was based on an understanding of ethnic student communication patterns, and structured the classroom discussion accordingly. The educators who established the program believe it can be used as a model for "students who are at risk for academic failure" everywhere (Yamauchi, 2003. p. 379). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 92 The Wisconsin Student Achievement Guarantee in Education program (SAGE), as mentioned above, focused on class-size reform as the way to improve the low achievement of low-income students in the state. The program reduced class size for K-3 classes to 15 students, kept schools open longer, and also developed more rigorous curricula and professional development along with the program (Smith & Molnar, et al., 2003). The results of the full implementation of SAGE, with all of its components, appear to indicate success. African-American students in the SAGE program who "had a pretest score that averaged 9 points below that of the comparison group, by the end of the 1st grade, outscored the comparison students by 10 points, a 19 point gain which represents two thirds of a year's growth" (Smith & Molnar, 2003, et. al, p. 75). Related but focusing on a different mechanism of reform is the Reaching Each Students Capacity Utilizing Education (RESCUE) program which consists of a mentoring program making use of local firefighters to create student relationships with supportive adults and "help improve student academic and career motivation" Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. as a result (de Andra, 2001, p. 99). Results indicate that the students did develop strong bonds with the mentors, "which enabled them to make major positive developmental changes both emotionally and socially" (de Andra, 2001, p. 113). Related to mentoring program are school-wide counseling program reforms, which have been shown to have impact on student attitudes, but at present provide "little direct evidence that academic achievement is improving in schools with a well- established counseling program" (Sink, 2003, p. 3). The overall design of schools moving toward smaller size have also been suggested in the literature to show success with low income students. These effective design schools, as they are called, meet the goals currently in place for "teaching our very diverse student population for higher order thinking and deep understanding" (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 1). There are ten design features associated with the effective design school model. These features include, personalization of student-teacher relationships associated with learning, continuous student-teacher relationships such as looping, maintain high and clear Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 94 expectations and performance-based assessment, include authentic curriculum with active and real-world connections, adaptive pedagogy where teaching methods account for individual differences, rid the schools of anti-racist teaching embracing diversity and that all students can learn, maintain only qualified teachers, include opportunities for teachers to collaborate and build on their expertise, build strong family and community connections to support student learning, and create the opportunity for shared decision making between all stakeholders (Darling-Hammond, 2005). It is suggested that schools that incorporate one or all of the ten effective small school design features produce powerful learning opportunities for their students and "create the kind of education many of us want for all our children" (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 1) • Also, the reform move toward student learning based on results driven principles and practices have proven to be effective (Schmoker, 1999). The foundation for achieving the results is based on three concepts: informed and meaningful teamwork practices; goals that Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 95 are clear, and can be measured; and performance data that is collected on a regular basis and analyzed continuously (Schmoker, p. 2). "Only 11 percent of all districts nationwide disaggregate student data to determine how to raise the achievement of the lowest- achieving populations" (Schomoker, p. 62). It is suggested that concentrating on results that are tangible and have measurable achievement goals increase student achievement and the success of schools. Thus, educational practices that are out-come based, data driven and are rooted in assessment accountability make a difference in school achievement. (Schmoker, 1999). Further research by Robert Marzano indicates that "schools can have a tremendous impact on student achievement if they follow the direction provided by the research". (Marzano, 2003, p.4). Synthesizing over three decades of research, Marzano concludes that there are twelve key factors that have an impact on student achievement. Those factors are broken down into three categories. First, is the School-level category which consists of five factors. These factors include a guaranteed and viable curriculum that is designed to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. meet the needs of all students; using challenging goals and feedback which utilizes assessment as a guiding tool for learning; participation and involvement of parents and community members; a learning environment which is safe and orderly and includes school wide rules and procedures that enhance the school environment while including specific interventions for at risk students; professionalism and collegiality among all staff members. Second, are the Teacher-level factors. These three factors include: instructional strategies that are research based and have been proven to advance student achievement; classroom management where teachers use procedures rather than rules and maintain objectivity void of emotional decisions; curriculum design that is controlled primarily by each classroom teacher and consist of content that exposes students to a wide range of learning experiences. Third, are Student-level factors. These three factors, for the most part, pertain solely to a student's overall background. Associated with the student level factors are a students home environment where parental interest in the education of their child, supervision Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and attitude toward student behavior, and parental expectations and parenting style have a tremendous effect on student achievement. A second factor is learned intelligence and background knowledge, both of which can be strengthened through offering a wide range of experiences to students and enhancing wide reading and vocabulary instruction. A final factor is motivation. Indeed, different students are motivated in different ways - drive for success and failure avoidance, need for self worth, emotional dynamics, and student attributes are all dynamics that drive motivation. However, it is noted that all students can be successful if the competitive nature of classroom success, engaging students in long-term projects that are of interest to them, and informing students about and using techniques related to motivation are presented to them in the classroom environment (Marzano, 2003). Leadership, is also considered critical in maintaining a positive school environment and necessary for overall student achievement (Marzano, 2003). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Research and theory on student-level factors "accounts for the lion's share of variance in student achievement" (Marzano, 2003, p. 125). In fact, some studies indicate that "student background characteristics are the most important determinants of student achievement" and "that background characteristics, particularly intelligence, are genetically based and can be changed little by schooling" (Marzano, 2003). Marzano believes, however, that "the research clearly shows that even some of the most negative aspects of a student's background can be mediated by school-based interventions" (Marzano, 2003, p. 123). While it is noted that schools cannot take it upon themselves to intervene completely in a students home environment, it is very reasonable for a school to provide to parents "information and training on establishing a home environment conducive to academic success" (Marzano, 2003, p. 131. Marzano recommends one intervention or, Action Step, to help alter a student's home environment. This incorporates training and support to parents that enhances their communication with the child's school, their Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 99 supervision of their children and their effective parenting skills (Marzano, 2003, p. 131). There remain those reform programs that attempt to target factors leading to low achievement of low- incomes students that preexist outside of school. By this school of thought, it is argued that if you provide a student or his or her family with some funding to buy books or engage more in school life, the low-income student's achievement will rise. Pell grants are aimed directly at bright, low-income high school students. The grants are issued to help these students "attend classes at community colleges or state universities" in the hope that they will then want to continue into college, or gain enough advanced placement credits to do so (Johnson, 2004, p. 1). Up to now, more than 18,500 low income students have been given up to 1200 Pell grants, "enabling them to take one class in both the fall and spring semesters" at nearby colleges (Johnson, 2004, p. 5). Finally, some research digs deeper than the barriers to achievement which low-income students face, due to psychological or school factors, but zeroes in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 100 on the fact that lack of money is root of their problem (Hofferth, 2000). Studies indicate that "to the extent that low-income welfare parents simply have less money to invest in books, educational activities, healthcare, housing and other advantages that require financial resources, children's cognitive skills will be lower, leading to lower levels of completed schooling" (Hofferth, 2000, p. 2). As a result of such findings, welfare programs provide low-income families with cash, precisely to better provide their children with educational aids. Generally, findings indicate that children in families on welfare suffer more problems, and achieve less in school, than children in families not on welfare (Hofferth, 2000). Studies have found that welfare families are often in worse health, and the parents often monitor and discipline their children less effectively. Some families do better or worse, based on variables such as low parental IQ, poor mental or physical health in the family, or "low levels of initiative" (Hofferth, 2000). Female headship in a family, and large families, "also create disadvantages affecting both resources available (for education) and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 101 child outcomes" (Hofferth, 2000, p. 2). Overall, however, in studies that compare children whose families are on welfare to those not on welfare, no differences in school achievement were noted (Hofferth, 2000). In recent years, though common sense would indicate that welfare would improve family life, welfare has come under attack for creating negative mindsets in families, counter to low-income student achievement. Some states have mandated, as California has, that families must come off welfare. It is expected, in these reform efforts, that once a family comes off welfare and the parents begin working again, student performance will also increase. A recent study however has found that when families come off welfare they often go through a contentious transition phase that can be quite harmful to low-income students (Hofferth, 2000). Just as if people who receive cash assistance respond to that assistance by taking the money and failing to improve their well-being, likewise families who suddenly no longer have a parent at home, or where pay actually amounts to less than offered in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. welfare, new stresses can occur. Studies of how children of welfare families do in school found that students whose parents were on welfare short-term did better than those whose parents had been on welfare long-term (Hofferth, 2000). This would seem to point to a solution, that working is better for families. Yet a follow-up study after welfare reform found that loss of jobs, strain and anxiety, and a failure to increase total family resources as a result of returning to work, more or less cancelled out the expected gains of a working versus a welfare family (Hofferth, 2000). Childcare and other problems can also make the transition back to work difficult (Reardon & Demartini, et al., 2004). Moreover, children respond to the stresses of their parents' return to work in complex ways, with both positive and negative outcomes. A child's emotional well being "may suffer during the parental transition from cash assistance to self- sufficiency" (Hofferth, 2000, p. 13). Finally, however, one study found that "children whose mothers were able to leave and remain off welfare scored consistently better on cognitive tests of their development" Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 103 (Hofferth, 2000, p. 1), continues to encourage, in spite of difficult transition periods, welfare reform. The California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program was California's response to the federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) legislation of 1996. The program was framed within the mandates of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, and was designed to "provide support services to help recipients move from welfare to work" (Rand, 2004, p. ix). The CalWORKs welfare reform programs sole purpose is help individuals prepare for work, find a job and thus, leave the welfare ranks. In theory, this enables welfare recipients to become self-supporting through employment, thus, providing overall family benefits such as monetary security, a positive home environment for children, and building self-confidence. Most of the recipients of CalWORKs understand that the program is time-limited, and appreciate the assistance it provides their families (Reardon & Demartini, et al., 2004). These recipients also think that such temporary welfare to assist people otherwise looking Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 104 for work is on the right track. Most of the caseworkers in the CalWORKs program report having received proper training, have a basic knowledge of the program, have positive attitudes, and "do provide clients with the necessary policy information at the various stages of the CalWORKs process" (Rand, 2004, xi). Thus far, those involved with CalWORKs report that they are making an important difference in their clients' lives, even though a number of problems related to the transition to work remain. Presumably, the CalWORKs welfare program model would have the same impact with regards to children's success in school similar to those previously mentioned. To what degree CalWORKs assistance has helped to turn around the achievement of low-income students in families receiving the assistance is not currently known and could be a matter of further research. Conclusion This literature review has encompassed a survey of the literature regarding the continued achievement gap between high- and low-income K-12 students in American Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 105 public schools (Brooks, 2002; Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000; Edsource, 2004; Hofferth, 2000, Maruyama, 2003). The character of the achievement gap based on low- income status, ethnicity and race, and gender has been studied (Gewerta, 2000; Honora, 2002; McCallum & Demie, 2001; Newman & Myers, et al., 2000; Nowell, 1998; Wasonga & Christman, et al., 2003). Those factors which the literature believes contribute to the persistence of the gap, ranging from theories regarding the environment low-income children live in, to school deficiencies, to factors related to pedagogy and teaching, were reviewed. Parental involvement, teacher quality, school climate, class size, student motivation and future outlook, were also reviewed (Esposito, 1999; Hoff, 2003; Lerman, 2003, Sachs, 2000). A number of programs of considerable variety, derived from different researchers' analysis of which factors appear to be more critical in causing the low-income student achievement gap, were also reviewed (Boaler, 2003; Brock & Groth, 2003; Calserve, 2004; Strahan, 2003). These range from school-wide reform efforts, more targeted reforms based on class-size reduction or Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. mentoring, to structured pedagogical programs and counseling. Also included were programs that seek to redress inequities outside of school, and offer cash assistance to low-income families so that they may participate more effectively in preparing students for school. The success or not of these programs has been reviewed. The effectiveness of the CalWORKs cash assistance program to low-income families in California was also addressed, with implications for low-income students as well (Calserve, 2004). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 107 Chapter 3: Methodology Design Overview In this study the time frame of 2001-2002, 2002- 2003 and 2003-2004 inclusive was used to compare the test scores of socio-economically disadvantaged students with those of the general student population in a Northern California public school district. The test scores were used to determine if low socio economic status (SES) students in this school district were achieving academic success comparable to students considered non socio-economically disadvantaged. California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) students were used as the representative group for low socio-economic students. The test results from the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) program for the three year study period were used to determine academic success of the low SES students compared with the non economically disadvantaged (NED) students. The API and AYP of the study school district were also analyzed for each of the three consecutive years to determine the school districts progress in closing the achieving gap. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 108 Student achievement relative to ethnicity, gender and parent education level was also analyzed. In addition, programs and strategies that have been deemed successful (either in the literature or through first hand observation) in increasing achievement levels of disadvantaged students were examined and compared to those currently used in the study school district. Participants Students from families on welfare in California were used as the representative sample for low socio economic students. California's welfare program is called California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs). The CalWORKs program consists of a block grant funding stream provided by the federal government to implement the federal welfare program entitled Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). CalWORKs provides families with minor children temporary financial assistance and services focused on employment. In order to qualify for assistance, these families must have verifiable income and property below State maximum limits for their family size. CalWORKs Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 109 provides money for children and the relatives caring for them. The purpose of CalWORKs is to help families become self-sufficient and leave the welfare roles as quickly as possible (there is a maximum 5 year time limit). In order to do that, work and training are required for most adults; thus, it is considered a work first model. Resources such as welfare-to-work activities, childcare assistance, family planning, and counseling, food stamps, medi-cal, housing assistance are provided to support welfare recipients as they move through the system (State of California, Department of Social Services, 2003). Setting The study school district serves some 14,000 students in a suburban community of 91,000 as well as a significant rural area north of the city. In 1998, this school district embarked on a strategic planning process to achieve the mission of graduating all students with knowledge and ability to make good choices, act responsibly, earn a living and continue learning throughout life. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 110 In this district there are ten elementary schools, two middle schools, two comprehensive high schools, one charter school, one alternative education center and one adult education center. There are approximately 695 full time equivalent (fte) teachers in the district with a pupil teacher ratio of about 20 to one. For the most part, teachers here are fully credentialed (91%). Numbers for grade level enrollment rest between 900 and 1,500 with the lowest being grade 12 and the highest grade 9. Average class size in this school district is roughly 27 students. The ethnic breakdown in the district consists approximately of 59% white, 22% hispanic, 9% African American, 3% Asian, 2% Filipino, 1 percent each Pacific Islander and American Indian and 3% multiple or no response. The student enrollment in special programs in the district include English Language Learners (11%), Free/Reduced Price Meals (26%), CalWORKs (5%), compensatory education (18%). In addition, over five different languages other than English are spoken in this district with Spanish speakers making up the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ill highest number of students (Education Data Partnership, 2005) . Program Description AERIES Student Information System was used in this study to retrieve student testing data records. It is a student data management system that uses Microsoft Windows and Excel to maintain student records and other related data for school districts. From AERIES, this study accessed the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) test scores and student ethnicity, gender and parent education level for CalWORKs students. Once the data were extracted from AERIES, Microsoft Excel was used to aggregate the data. Microsoft Excel is a spreadsheet application used to enter text and numbers to be organized, calculated and analyzed. Formulas can be entered and data may be formatted in a number of different ways (Eagle Software, 2005; Microsoft Office, 2005). Sample For the purpose of this study, the sample consisted of standardized test scores of CalWORKs students and students from the general student population in a K-12 Northern California school Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 112 district. CalWORKs students were used as the representative group for socio-economically disadvantaged students. The sample included 433 CalWORKs students as provided in the AERIES database. These students took at least one standardized test from the STAR program in the three year study period. In addition, socio-economic data consisting of ethnicity, gender and parent education level was also extracted from the data base for CalWORKs students only. This was utilized to compare test scores with socio-economic factors. For comparison purposes of student achievement between socio-economic groups, test data from the general student population from this same school district was utilized. The sample ranged from a high of 9759 to a low of 4598 students that took the STAR test during the three year study period. Only students STAR test scores and student data information in grades three through eleven were utilized. Students in grades one, two and twelve were not required to take the STAR tests; thus, test scores for these grades levels were erratic and incomplete. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 113 Instrumentation Standardized tests and student socio-economic data from a Northern California School District student database AERIES, were utilized. An analysis of test scores of CalWORKs students versus the general student population in the district was made. Student data were further utilized to determine if specific socio economic variables made a difference in the test scores and achievement levels of the students. The following research questions were used to guide the study's data analysis. 1. Are CalWORKs students performing at a different achievement level compared to other students in the targeted school district within their respective grade levels? 2. How are CalWORKs students test achievement levels related to ethnicity, gender, and parents level of education? 3. Is the gap between CalWORKs students and the general student population in the targeted school district decreasing? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 114 4. How effectively is this school district responding to the needs of its lower socio economic students? In this study a variety of student data from a Northern California school district database - AERIES - were utilized. This included STAR testing and socio economic data for three consecutive years from 2001- 2002, 2002-2003, and 2003-2004. The STAR tests included: • California Standards Test. The CST is based on the state curriculum standards. The test measures what students are supposed to know and what they should be able to do in different subjects at each grade level. Students are not compared with other students. It is a standards-referenced test (variation of a criterion-referenced test). The CST uses performance standards to measure competency. The performance standards define how much students should know of the content standards to be considered at a certain level in each subject area. There is a mean scaled score for the CST; Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 115 which is the average of all students who took the grade-level test without modifications or detected irregularities in testing. The scale score range for each grade and subject area is between 150 (low) to 600 (high). It does not change from year to year. The number or percent of questions students are required to answer may change yearly due to the changes in difficulty level or differences in the test in order to score within a particular performance level. In order to accommodate those changes, the CST uses scaled scores and compares the CST scores each year to make adjustments and equalize the tests between years. The CST maintains five performance levels related to the content standards tests: advanced, proficient, basic, below basic, and far below basic. The State Board of Education (SBE) set 350 as the minimum scaled score to be considered proficient for all California students taking the CST for all subject areas and grades. Otherwise, the range Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 116 of scaled scores for the CST performance levels varies between grades and subject areas. • The Stanford 9, 9th edition - SAT9. This was the first norm-referenced test (NRT) used in the STAR testing program. It was a nationally normed, standardized, multiple choice test. A nationally normed test uses scores from a sample group of test takers. The raw scores from the sample test takers are normed according to a bell shaped curve with the mean and the median measuring at the 50th percentile. A percentile ranking was assigned each time the test was given and a ranking was measured against the original testers for the normed group. The 50th percentile is considered the national average. A NRT compares test takers to each other. Scores are reported as percentile ranks and are designed to sort and rank students on a curve. They do not measure if a student has met a standard. The SAT 9 was replaced after the 2001-2002 school year by the CAT 6. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 117 • The California Achievement Test, 6th edition - CAT6. This is a norm-referenced test. As with the SAT 9, this test also measures basic skills. It is a national test and not designed to align with the state standards. It includes multiple- choice questions in reading, math and language arts for grades 2-11 and includes spelling in grades 2-8. Science is included for high school students. The survey test is used in California. It is a shorter version than the full test. Students scoring at the 50th percentile or above are considered to have demonstrated proficiency at or above grade level on a specific test. This test was normed during the spring of 2000. In addition to testing data, personal data including ethnicity, gender, and parent education levels were identified for each CalWORKs student with a matching test score. This data was used to compare achievement levels with socio-economic variables. Students' names were unknown, and not available for this study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 118 Further data analysis using the Academic Performance Index (API) and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) indicators for the three year study were used. • The API measures the academic performance and growth of schools. It is a scaled score ranging from 200 (low) to 1000 (high). The schools performance level is based on its API score. The State Board of Education (SBE) has set its performance target score at 800 for all schools. Each school, each year, uses this target to measure how well it is doing. API reflects the progress that a school has made. In order to determine progress, a school's base year API is subtracted form its growth API. The API score is a summary of various indicators including the STAR test results and the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). The indicator weights have changed over the years for the API with the CST receiving more weight in determining the API in the 2003- 2004 school year. In addition, school districts must meet both school-wide and API growth targets Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 119 for all ethnic, racial, and socio-economically disadvantaged subgroups. Under the current state requirements, the API growth target is different from the federal AYP. A school's target number is five percent of the distance between the performance target of 8 00 and the schools API base or if a school is already at 800, it must maintain that number or above. • The AYP is the federal progress measurement under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act. Schools and local education agencies (LEAs) are required to meet or exceed criteria in four areas annually in order to make the AYP requirements. Those include participation rate, percent proficient (annual measurable objectives - AMOs), additional indicator (API), and graduation rate. All criteria must be met in order for a school or LEA to make their AYP. AYP measures how well a school meets common minimum performance targets and academic levels. • AYP requires a minimum participation rate of 95%. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 120 • A percentage of its students at proficient or above in English language arts and math. • Attain a minimum API of 560 or API growth of one point. • Meet high school graduation requirements if applicable. Procedure/Data Collection Data were collected in the following manner. First, a thorough review of the literature was conducted creating a solid framework relative to the re-emerging themes associated with student achievement gaps in American schools and between high and low socio-economic status students. Next, the school district, with school board approval, provided access to its student database AERIES. Tabulated county school district information from the County Office of Education was evaluated, and random numbers, replacing student names were assigned for anonymity; creating a blind sample. Finally, using a series of Microsoft Excel programming commands, CalWORKs student test and personal information was extracted from the county tabulated printout for study Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 121 years 2001-2002, 2002-2003, and 2003-2004, and formatted into Excel spreadsheets. Data Analysis Data analysis consisted of a review and statistical analysis of the STAR test scores (CST, SAT- 9, and CAT/6) for all students for each of the three test years (2002-2004). Comparisons between CalWORKs student test scores and those of the general student population were made. CalWORKs student personal information such as ethnicity, gender and parent education level were also correlated with achievement test scores. Similarities and differences between groups of students were analyzed and measured. Both descriptive (mean) statistics and inferential ("p" value) statistical analysis was used for this study. Summary The literature indicates that there are serious achievement gaps in U.S. public schools. Specific causes are speculative, however, there is a general consensus that numerous discrete factors in the home and at school are to blame. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 122 NCLB mandates closing the achievement gap between all socio-economic groups. In fact, the target date of 2014 has been set for 100% proficiency of all students in both English language arts and math. Given the lack luster success rate of achieving student equality in education in the past, it is hoped that the NCLB legislation will make a difference. The methodology used in this study involved descriptive and inferential statistics to determine the extent of student achievement among low socio-economic students and other students in the study school district. The data analysis, in turn, determined if other variables such as ethnicity, gender, and parent education level are correlated, significant or otherwise, to student achievement in the study school district's CalWORKs students. In addition, API and AYP indicators were used to determine if the study school district was successfully making headway toward closing the achievement gap as mandated in NCLB. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Chapter 4: Findings Background In this study of academic achievement of CalWORKs students in a K-12 public school system, the following research questions were posed: 1. Are CalWORKs students performing at a different achievement level compared to other students in the targeted school district within their respective grade levels? 2. How are CalWORKs students test scores related to ethnicity, gender, and parents level of education? 3. Is the gap between CalWORKs students and the general student population in the targeted school district decreasing? 4. How effectively is this school district responding to the needs of its lower socio-economic students? The fact that there is a continuous achievement gap between low and high socio-economic status students is an ongoing concern. For over a generation, efforts have been made and programs established to help low- income students close the gap both in school and on Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 124 standardized tests. The efforts to change this pattern have, for the most part, been unsuccessful. CalWORKs students represent a special class of economically disadvantaged students in that they come from families currently on welfare, and are thus the focus of the following analysis. Data Analysis In order to perform this study, I was provided raw test scores for students in a Northern California school district as provided by special permission from the their Board of Education. Under the appropriate privacy conditions, I was given access to the entire database of student test scores from which those students officially designated as CalWORKs students were extracted into a separate database. The test data from years 2002-2004 was analyzed in Microsoft Excel spreadsheet format. All statistical analysis was done with the StatPro plug-in (June 2002 version) for Microsoft Excel. As will be summarized below, the overall results of this study indicated that low socio-economic students, as represented by this specific school Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 125 district CalWORKs student population, performed lower on standardized tests than students of higher socio economic status. To address the first research question "(1) Are CalWORKs students performing at a different achievement level compared to other students in their respective grades?" the following, analysis was done. Test scores were comprehensively analyzed for twelve (12) standardized tests taken between 2002-2004 in the study school district for Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED"), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and CalWORKs students. The data include all CalWORKs students (433 as of July 2004), which represent 3,297 individual CalWORKs test scores taken from the school district database. NED and ED scores for this school district study were taken from the California STAR database (http://star.cde.ca.gov/star2004/index.asp) and represent 97,097 individual scores by these students during 2002-2004. Table 1 is a summary overview of the number of individual tests and test scores analyzed across grades 3-11. For the purposes of this analysis, grades 3-11 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. were used for comparison because the corresponding test scores are available in the California STAR database. Shown on the following page is the number of test scores analyzed for twelve tests for Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED"), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and CalWORKs ("CW") students. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 1 Grade Level CAT/6 Math 04 NED ED CW CAT/6 Math 03 NED ED CW SAT/9 Math 02 NED ED CW CST ELA 04 NED ED CW CST ELA 03 NED ED CW CST ELA 02 NED ED CW 3 713 311 45 724 311 45 4 699 281 43 732 314 40 700 282 43 740 325 39 5 759 319 43 805 337 37 765 270 26 767 321 43 815 343 37 766 269 26 6 853 293 47 837. 296 37 811 277 31 858 296 48 848 313 42 809 286 30 r 865 212 57 835 263 48 914 200 40 904 224 56 855 273 48 874 181 36 8 881 207 37 929 187 37 922 162 30 894 214 42 955 200 39 907 181 29 9 1054 208 52 1110 170 48 1104 146 31 1096 219 58 1137 180 48 1004 121 28 10 885 130 23 952 104 26 893 83 20 935 140 26 1033 113 27 816 70 19 11 741 79 23 705 63 19 788 54 11 788 86 22 786 88 20 693 44 9 Total 7450 2040 370 6908 1734 292 6197 1192 189 7666 2093 381 7169 1816 300 5869 1132 177 Grade CAT/e Read 04 CAT/6 Read 03 SAT/9 Read 02 CST Math 04 CST Math 03 CST Math 02 Level NED ED CW NED ED CW NED ED CW NED ED CW NED ED CW NED ED CW 3 717 310 45 728 313 45 4 700 280 43 733 317 40 701 282 43 738 326 39 S 759 320 43 805 337 37 782 264 26 762 320 43 814 344 37 772 276 26 6 853 294 47 842 296 38 807 277 31 857 294 48 843 312 39 814 283 28 7 870 209 56 838 264 48 923 205 40 897 224 56 853 270 52 888 190 42 8 882 206 39 938 191 38 927 166 29 875 192 40 718 185 40 728 152 31 9 1055 209 53 1103 163 48 1083 141 30 403 119 52 459 112 45 405 90 31 10 882 130 23 951 103 26 882 84 20 11 748 76 23 707 65 18 770 54 10 Total 7466 2034 372 6917 1736 293 6184 1191 186 5023 1744 327 4423 1649 262 3607 991 168 h o t The average (mean) test score for each test was calculated for the 12 standardized tests taken between 2002-2004. On the following page in graphical format (Figures 1-12) are the bar graphs representing each test across grades 3 through 11. As can be seen from the data, the CalWORKs students consistently perform at a lower level than the NED students. For comparison purposes, the Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") students test scores are plotted as well. Note that the CalWORKs ("CW") students test scores are also represented in this dataset designated "ED" from the California STAR database. The ED designation includes CalWORKs students AND those students on the "free and reduced lunch" program. The ED group is thus a much larger overall group of students from which CalWORKs students represent a subset thereof. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 129 Figures 1-2. Year 2004 CAT/6 Math and CAT/6 Reading test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non- Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students in district. Figure 1 CAT/6 Math 2004 Figure 2 CAT/6 Reading 2004 □ NB3Q ED BCW □ NED BED BCW 11th 10th 3rd ] 727.6 660.5 711.4 649.1 667.2 698.6 639.5 660.8 652.1 646.6 676.4 615.4 607.1 620.3 603.2 607 0 638.9 569.1 595.2 621.8 500 550 600 650 700 750 Mean Score 11th 10th 3rd 659.3 664.0 698.2 684.2 619.1 646.1 674.6 625.6 638.8 666.3 632.2 629.9 663.4 634.0 637.2 1 665.0 610.3 630.2 661.9 612.7 08.1 604.3 601.5 630.5 500 550 600 650 700 Mean Score Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 750 130 Figures 3-4. Year 2004 CST ELA and CST Math test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students in district. Figure 3 CST ELA 2004 Figure 4 CST Math 2004 □ NBDQEDM CW □ N ED O ED B C W 11th 10th 3003 292.2 327.5 317.2 303.9 333.5 284.2 299.9 300.4 302 3 334.0 312.9 1 303.8 315.0 3134 1 348.8 312.5 315.1 304.4 316.9 294.6 335.4 3rd 296.7 309.7 330.0 314.3 349.5 325.1 307.4 343.4 342.6 360.0 200 250 300 350 Mean Score 400 200 250 300 350 Mean Score 400 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 131 Figures 5-6. Year 2003 CAT/6 Math and CAT/6 Reading test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non- Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students in district. Figure 5 CAT/6 Math 2003 Figure 6 CAT/6 Reading 2003 □ NED H B ) BCW □ NED Q ED ■ CW 11th 10th 654.5 703.4 678.6 666.5 702.3 693.7 636.7 664.6 649.7 663.9 688.6 647.3 674.7 603.4 649.9 673.0 600.0 625.0 576.9 640.5 11th 10th 672.7 693.1 652.2 639.3 1 672.7 629.0 632.5 603.9 ] 643.3 661.8 609.7 629.7 661.5 599.6 612.9 643.8 500 550 600 650 700 Mean Score 750 500 550 600 650 700 Mean Score 750 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 132 Figures 7-8. Year 2003 CST ELA and CST Math test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW}t Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students in district. Hgure 7 CST ELA 2003 Hgure 8 CST Math 2003 □ NED Q S3 ■ CW □ NED SI ED ■ CW 11th 10th 298.0 293.7 3 2 4 . 1 303.8 293.2 322 7 273.0 308.8 301.9 1330.0 1296.9 3 1 3 . 4 307.S 293.4 ]319.9 309.2 316.7 3196 318 2 200 250 300 350 400 Mean Score 9th 8 t h 285.7 289.6 297.6 3 0 3 . 1 283.8 2969 330.7 295.2 312.2 345.0 300.5 300 4 341.8 338.6 305.9 200 250 300 350 Mean Score Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 400 133 Figures 9-10. Year 2002 SAT/6 Math and SAT/6 Reading test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non- Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students in district. Figure 9 SAT/9 Math 2002 Figure 10 SAT/9 Reading 2002 □ NED BED MCW □ NED BED MCW 11th | ^ m ^ A 7 0 . 2 1685.3 11th 680.0 1678.9 707.5 704.9 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 665.8 - 669.9 10th 1686.0 10th 1673.5 1701.8 697.9 - ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 645.8 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 650.9 9th 674.2 9th 1 670.0 69&0 692.7 - H H B H H I I 646.8 - 645.5 8th | 567.1 8th 1671.1 687.1 690.7 - ■ ■ H H H H I 024.6 P B B p l H p B 625.7 7th 660.2 7th 657.7 684.2 1 683.5 - 614.7 - ■ H H H H H 014.3 6th 662.6 6th 655.4 1684.9 677.8 - ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1 5 9 1 . 6 5th 1642.7 5th 1640.3 668.1 667.7 j . ....... 500 550 600 650 700 Mean Score 750 500 550 600 650 700 Mean Score 750 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 134 Figures 11-12. Year 2002 CST ELA and CST Math test scores for each grade level plotted for CalWORKs (CW), Economically Disadvantaged ("ED") and Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students from the school district. Hgure 11 CST ELA 2002 Hgure 12 CST Math 2002 □ NED HED MCW □ NEDQEDM CW 11th 10th 317.0 285.8 306.5 293.8 330.3 299.7 283.4 325.3 315.7 299.6 326.7 305.0 298.4 333.5 317 7 311 6 344.2 294.8 312.9 347.5 277.3 289.0 311.5 308.1 295.3 343.7 320.0 299.9 342.7 200 250 300 350 400 Mean Score 200 250 300 350 Mean Score Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 400 135 For performance evaluation purposes, the overall CalWORKs students mean test scores have been normalized to the Non-Economically Disadvantaged ("NED") students mean test scores for the twelve standardized tests taken between 2002-2004. The CalWORKs test scores are represented as a percent (%) of the NED raw scores. As can be seen in Table 2, the overall average for CW relative to NED students is lower for each individual test (range; 89.2 low to 95.6% high). In two isolated cases (both math tests), the CalWORKs students outperformed the NED students. The overall average for CalWORKs relative to NED students is 92.4% for all twelve (12) tests combined. Statistical analyses indicate that the normalized test scores of CalWORKs students are significantly lower than those of the NED students (p <0.05, Student's T-test). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 136 Table 2a 3rade CAT/6 CAT/6 SAT/9 CAT/6 CAT/6 SAT/9 Level M ath 04 M ath 03 M ath 02 Read 04 Read 03 Read 02 3 91.5 95.8 4 94.4 90.1 94.9 93.1 5 92.4 91.9 87.1 92.2 92.2 85.3 6 90.8 89.7 89.7 95.3 91.3 90.6 7 96.4 92.2 91.3 95.3 95.3 91.5 8 92.6 94.4 94.1 93.9 94.7 93.5 9 92.9 91.8 93.2 91.8 91.2 94.0 10 100.2 96.6 94.9 97.8 97.0 96.0 11 90.8 89.5 94.7 94.4 92.5 96.5 Mean 93.6 92.0 92.1 94.6 93.4 92.5 Table 2b Grade Level CST Math 04 CST M ath 03 CST Math 02 CST ELA 04 CST ELA 03 CST ELA 02 3 95.2 98.3 4 94.7 97.7 86.2 90.3 5 84.3 90.4 93.4 88.3 86.2 84.8 6 81.1 85.6 92.7 90.3 83.2 92.3 7 94.2 89.2 94.4 92.4 92.2 94.1 8 91.0 91.7 96.2 89.9 93.6 96.6 9 94.1 96.0 102.8 84.9 82.0 92.1 10 95.1 94.1 92.8 11 91.9 91.9 96.3 Mean 90.6 91.8 95.9 90.8 89.2 92.7 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. To address the second research question "(2) How are CalWORKs students test achievement levels related to ethnicity, gender, and parents level of education?" the following analysis was done. Test scores were comprehensively analyzed by segmenting the CalWORKs students according to three ethnicity classifications (Hispanic, black, or white) , gender, and four ''parents level of education" (''PEL") classes. The PEL classes analyzed were non-high school graduate (NHSG), high school graduate (HSG), some college (SC), and declined to state (DTS). The school district dataset also included a small set of students whose PEL was listed as college graduate and/or postgraduate education. However, these groups represented less than 10 students each and were thus ignored for statistical purposes. Shown in Table 3 are the summary statistics for a three-year longitudinal analysis of the California Standards Test (''CST") for English Language Arts (''ELA") for three consecutive years (2002-2004). The data indicate the raw scaled score ("SS") and performance level ("PL") for the three year period. Note that the SSs and PLs are relative unchanged over Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. the three-year period for the CalWORKs students. Female CalWORKs students, however, scored higher than males (measured as SS and PL) in each of the three years. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. T a b le 3 CalWORKS (Total) SS2002 PL2002 SS2003 PL2003 SS2004 PL2004 Count 194 194 314 314 399 399 Mean 310.27 2.62 306.52 2.55 308.35 2.58 Median 312.50 3.00 302.50 3.00 303.00 3.00 Standard deviation 44.03 1.03 45.76 1.07 47.63 1.07 CaiWORKS (Male) SS2002 P L2002 SS2003 PL2003 SS2004 PL2004 Count 93 93 148 148 191 191 Mean 303.39 2.45 298.03 2.36 301.39 2.44 Median 293.00 2.00 291.00 2.00 295.00 2.00 Standard deviation 42.47 0.99 43.16 1.07 48.24 1.12 raCaiWORKS (Female)' SS2002 PL2GG2 SS2003 PL20G3 SS2004 PL2004 Count 83 83 142 142 183 183 Mean 313.72 2.72 311.54 2.66 312.40 2.65 Median 323.00 3.00 309.00 3.00 304.00 3.00 Standard deviation 46.51 1.09 48.23 1.08 47.09 1.02 140 The same CST ELA scores of these students were sorted based on the three most common ethnic classifications in the school district. Under these criteria, Table 4, there was a clear trend of increasingly higher test scores in Whites versus Hispanics and Blacks. Statistical analyses indicate that the CST ELA test scores of White CalWORKs students were significantly higher than those of either Hispanic or Black students (p <0.05). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 4 ..C a i W O R K S (H is p a n ic)_ C ^ n T “ — — * - SS2002 55 ; ;..2002 55 SS2003 97 PL2O03 97 SS2004 132 PL2004 132" Mean 294.56 2.31 291.14 2.22 301.48 2.42 Median 289.00 2.00 290.00 2.00 293.50 2.00 Standard deviation 40.08 1.02 35.51 0.89 44.29 1.02 CalWORKS (Black} 8S2002 PL2O02 SS2003 PL2QQ3 SS2Q04 PL2004“ Count 42 42 64 64 84 84 Mean 300.48 2.40 300.08 2.42 300.31 2.38 Median 293.50 2.00 284.50 2.00 287.00 2.00 Standard deviation 41.41 0.96 49.73 1.14 49.88 1.06 CalWORKS (White) Count SS2002 79 PL2002 79 SS2O03 129 PL2CJ03 129 3 S2004 158 PL2004" t rd 158 Mean 321.94 2.86 317.05 2.78 314.64 2.73 Median 334.00 3.00 322.00 3.00 313.50 3.00 Standard deviation 45.76 1.05 48.35 1.13 48.98 1.10 142 Ethnic data for the entire school district under study is available from the California STAR database for the CST ELA tests (years 2003 and 2004 only). Consistent with the trend among CalWORKs students shown above, Table 5 (following page) shows a clear trend of increasingly higher test scores in Whites versus Hispanics and Blacks for the 2003 and 2004 test years. The CST ELA scores were further sorted based on the four most common PEL classifications in the school district (Table 6 following page). The PEL classes analyzed were non-high school graduate (NHSG), high school graduate (HSG), some college (SC), and declined to state (DTS). As might be expected, the trend suggests increasingly better student performance as the parents' education level increases (i.e., SC > HSG > NHSC). Interesting, students of parents who declined to state (DTS) their education level did the poorest of all. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 143 m 9 H •9 H COCOCD i° a> 00O o T*00a> iCM CM 10 jZ M i s .CO © © ■0CD -© CM CM«o T* v* x* to COCOCO CO CO T" © CO0>CO © o 00CM i ; t MCM CO z © o> <0CO © X* CM © CMCD00 w T*CO CO COCOCO to CM © © < < < CM z z z z CM © s : < < < z Z z m m a c m a o 0 ** m 0 X f f l5 iS * © - ■ < a a, X f © © CM CO m © © © C M co 0 o « 0 o C M C O CM o 0 > o c\i O o CO C O 'M* o M o CM C M 0 > o CO to T “ C O o a > CO CM CM o CO to CM CM 0 > O CO o © C O O G> CO CM c e 0 <0 7 3 0 0 £ £ t o I <ol o > XT1 >i C D i •Di C D I 731 c| C D S * ■ * 8 c o l © . o C M a. o © CO C O *© CM ~ l ,a. C O © © CO • ' # C M o © C M .J £L C M O' © CM CO C O . C V S ’ , 13 - - tJ 0 ( ! ) ' i O i ; o £ a CO '£: : D) CO C M o xt*S xj- is* 1 0 o © 1 , M 1 0 o T “ O O ) o p T ~ CM CM © CM CM C O T " , . ] a , CO CM O 0 0 ^ Is - is. o r ^ x r x r t o CD O t’C S l 1 0 o C M ^ CO CD © 1 1 0 CO c b o o > t o CM J ? T - T - M CO CM € 0 1 CO © ’ W l CO T - O 1 0 C O o © o C M CD O O © K CD p CM CO T ~ O C M CM to T ~ I - i 1 0l j CO CD O T “ c o ? o © o o CM O O © ■ © ^ is. o o ^ 0 0 CO t o ; _ © f T “ a > 0 0 o x— X T CM f t o x f CO C O :co i © © t o |s- CD o f ^ C M N * I s o CM I h - tO o a > © M * 0 0 o X*** I CM CO o © C M * C M c b x “ j - J 1 a 1 o T - s r o o f h - r o t n O ’9- a o © 1 N CM o O ‘ 0 0 C M r - O T“ x r C M V * C M lO CO CO C O © © t o c c O J o "col 0 0 > s D ) * > 0 1 0 0 7 3 1 X 7 3 T » I © ■ o U rn 1 o • c 0 8 c 0 c C 0 T ? i . fl> ^ c e 0 •a 3 0 7 3 c i r £ - £ © 0 * a c o • 0 m J O lO 0 0 0 » o £ £ col] p | Q £ £ © ^ ▼ - © XT © CM a* © m- o CM to CO co CO © C M © CM 0. © 00 © C M © C M CO C O CM O © CM © C M -J €L £ :<M $ 0 © s C M © CM C O CO 8 ( 8 0 3 a “ 0 c o o o„o f O CM C M t n <D CD d N 00 C M C M CM O O x f C M O C M C M cvi T** o O a> © 4 0 a> M CD o © 00 m CM C M Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 144 To further analyze the progress of CalWORKs students during 2002 through 2004, a subset of the 433 CalWORKs students were identified who each took the CST ELA tests in the consecutive three years. This subset of students numbered 160 and their scores were evaluated based on performance level ("PL"). Note, raw scores cannot be accurately compared from year to year, thus analysis of the students progress based on PL is the most accurate method for measuring progress. Furthermore, the NCLB legislation requires that students must progress sequentially in PL on the California Standards Test (CST) for which this analysis is based. Figure 13 shows the result of analyzing 160 individual students and monitoring their progression (based on PL) for the CST ELA test during 2002, 2003, and 2004. The general trend indicates that students failed to improve their performance level significantly during the three-year period. Fifty percent of the students (80 students) showed no change in PL in 2002/03 whereas 53% (83 students) were unchanged in 2003/04. Indeed, from 2002 to 2004, 50.6% of students Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. were unchanged whereas 27.5% increased one to two performance levels while 21.9% of students decreased one to three levels. The lack of progress in CalWORKs performance levels was generally unrelated to the students' race, gender, or parents' level of education (data not shown). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 146 C O M - p O CM C O O O O O CM CM H □ m r? f I •H fa s Cl i Cl Cl HI I — €0 O ,co f o p oo C O OJ ■ M - Tt o 00 ( £ > «> c m | o C M + to o oo to OI c o C M C O o o C O C O C M C D co CM o o o o o o o o o o m o O h - C D l O M ' C O C M T - S|U0p»nS MO JO JoqtunN g i CM 13 s CO o o CM □ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. P erfo rm an ce Level Change Figure 14 shows the result of analyzing 120 individual students and monitoring their progression (based on PL) for the CST MATH test during 2002, 2003, and 2004. As is consistent with the CST ELA scores, the general trend indicates that students failed to improve their CST MATH performance level significantly during the three-year period. Forty eight percent of the students (57 students) showed no change in PL in 2002/03 whereas 50% (60 students) were unchanged in 2003/04. From 2002 to 2004, 4 3.3% of students were unchanged whereas 22.5% increased one to two performance levels while 34.2% of students decreased one to three levels. The lack of progress in CalWORKs CST MATH performance levels was generally unrelated to the students' race, gender, or parents' level of education (data not shown). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Figure 14: 148 8 S C M CO O O O O CM C M B O t o 8 C M CO C O C M CO C M » ____________ C M C l O CO h - IO O CO O I ' S ' U l ' . J ' i l i W J U I f ' U ' U J » I I ^ « J I w i l l ' U 1 I I P W I I ^ . I J U J U P W I -- : ■■■HP h BHBHI IO CM C O C M in C M CD O * C O o o C O o s o C M CO o o C M o in o " M * O C O o C O o C M O O O I " - s)uapn)§ MO io jaqwnN Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 149 To address the third research question; "(3) Is the average achievement gap between CalWORKs students and the average non-economically-disadvantaged (NED) student in the school district changing?" To answer this question, I calculated the raw scaled score in each grade level for the CST ELA and CST MATH tests taken in 2002 through 2004 for both NED and CalWORKs students. The average CalWORKs score was subtracted from the NED scores to obtain an average difference score, or for the purposes of this analysis, an average "achievement gap" score. As shown in Table 7, the achievement gap is essentially unchanged in the CST ELA scores from 2002 through 2004 (p > 0.05 for all pair-wise comparisons). In contrast, the achievement gap in CST MATH appears to have increased from 2002 through 2004 (p < 0.05 for 2002 versus 2003 or 2004). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 150 r t C M <r* r«- 0 > C O T - C M C O o T f C O h - coC M C M t 1 T “ o f » 0 0 toC O o>N ■ 1 T o X C M T “ T “ I O C O T “ C M T “ C O C M t— < C O t o to0 0 0 0 C M 'Sfo> 5 O ■ 1 o o> 0 0 to'St CT> ■ i ■ 1 C O I O t - O C M 0 0 3 2 4 9 3 5 2 7 1 1 2 7 1 5 m a C M o o C O O ) 'St O i O 1 1 N . C M C M T T i 1 o>C O o 1 1 C M I O 0 0 r " 0 0 i 1 C O C O C M C M C M T “ 1 T !< o o C M C O to to C O N 0 0 - c f C O C O V 'St 0 0 C O C O 2 5.69 3 3.64 5 0.44 N . C M C O T“ 2 6.68 3 1.36 14.69 | C O T " C M C M 0 0 C O oo>I O C O UJ o « C M O C O MtT “o>0 0 T “r -I * - I t ™ o i Mt0 0 o>C O T ” 0 > o o C O coC 0 m C M C O I O C M C M to T “ C M C O T “ o C M C O C O V 0 0 C M C O o O ■ i s I O 0 0 O J C O 0 0 r - I O o> O t i C M C O o>o I O C O C M ^t C O C M I O C M T “ T “ C M C M T " C M *“ © c xs re C O "tr I O C O N 0 0 GO o T - e a Q W . T “T “ <n o S Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 151 To address the last research question; "(4) How effectively is this school district responding to the needs of lower socio-economic students? The Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) and Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) were analyzed for the three-year study period. Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) targets measuring the percent of students in each group that are at or above proficient were analyzed for the three most common ethnic classifications (black, Hispanic, white) in the CalWORKs data. In addition, socio-economically disadvantaged (SED) AYP scores were analyzed and compared for the three study years. Annual Measurable Objectives for the three study years were used to compare AYP percentages. The AYP showed that the minority students continually have lower percent proficiency than whites. The AYP indicates that in 2002, scores were the highest for all three years in both ELA and math for all groups. However, the proficiency scores had a general leveling off and in some cases a downward trend from 2003 to 2004. Specifically, in ELA the only group to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 152 make gains was the white students (and not particularly strong gains) while the SED group remained constant. Both black and Hispanic students lost ground. In addition, the math scores for 2003-2004 remained relatively stagnant with only very slight increases in white and SED students. This data is significant with respect to the lack of increases in proficiency for these students over a three-year time period. The AMOs will increase substantially in 2004-2005 (see table 8) and will continue to increase incrementally until 2014. Given that AMOs are a percentage measure of proficiency, the trend for these students seems to be status quo, lending itself to the reality that the achievement gap is not closing for these students in this study school district. It is difficult to determine the effectiveness of programs offered in this school district. However, it can certainly be assumed that the lack luster proficiency rating of the students scores in this study over a three year period of time would indicate that the particular programs currently Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. in place may not be sufficient to increase academic performance for these students. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 8 Black Hispanic White SED 2002 ELA 23.0 21.4 43.4 17.9 2002 Math 22.4 24.6 42.5 21.5 2003 ELA 27.4 25.0 48.9 20.9 2003 Math 24.4 27.6 48.2 24.0 2004 ELA 26.5 24.6 49.7 20.9 2004 Math 24.8 27.3 48.9 25.0 Annual Measurable Objective for 2002, 2003, 2004* High Schools Elementary /Middle Schools ELA - 11.2% ELA - 13.6% Math - 9.6% Math- 16.0% Annual Measurable Objective for 2005* High Schools Elementary /Middle Schools ELA - 22.3% ELA - 24.4% Math - 20.9% Math- 26.5% (*) Source: California Department of Education, August 2004 Chapter V Summary 155 There are several ways to measure the achievement gap among students; the most direct way is through a comparison of academic performance. This study represents a comprehensive analysis of test performance levels of economically disadvantaged students represented by California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) students in a K-12 public school system as compared to non-economically disadvantaged (NED) students in this same school district and in their respective grade levels. The school district under study is in Northern California and serves some 14,000 students coming from a suburban city of 91,000 as well as a significant rural community outside of the city limits. Results of Study This study analyzed the academic achievement of a specific group of economically disadvantaged students as represented by the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) student population in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 156 a K-12 public school system over three years. Using testing and socio-economic data from the study school district data base this study attempted to determine if socio-economically disadvantaged students in the study school district were making similar achievement gains relative to the non economically disadvantaged students in the targeted school district's K-12 student population. The following research questions were posed: 1. Are CalWORKs students performing at a different achievement level compared to other students in the targeted school district within their respective grade levels? 2. How are CalWORKs students test scores related to ethnicity, gender, and parent's level of education? 3. Is the gap between CalWORKs students and the general student population in the targeted school district decreasing? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 157 4. How effectively is the taargeted school district responding to the needs of its lower socio economic students? As can be seen from the data, the CalWORKs students in the school district consistently perform at a lower level than their NED student counterparts. The lower test scores were seen consistently across nearly all of the standardized tests (only two exceptions) throughout grade levels 3 to 11 during years 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. For performance evaluation purposes, the overall CalWORKs students mean test scores have been normalized to the Non-Economically Disadvantaged (NED) students mean test scores for the twelve standardized tests taken between 2002-2004. These normalized CalWORKs test scores are represented as a percent (%) of the NED raw scores. As can be seen in Table 2, the overall average for CalWORKs relative to NED students is lower for each individual test. The overall average for CalWORKs relative to NED students is 92.4% for all twelve (12) tests combined. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 158 A longitudinal analysis of the California Standards Test (CST) for English language arts (ELA) for three consecutive years (2002-2004) showed that female CalWORKs students consistently outscored males by approximately 3%. The test scores among the three most common ethnic classifications showed White > Black > Hispanic in years 2002 and 2003, whereas the trend was White > Hispanic > Black in year 2004. A similar trend with respect to ethnicity was seen in CST ELA test scores for the entire school district as a whole (years 2003-2004 only, Table 5). The CST ELA scores were further sorted based on the four most common Parents Education Level (PEL) classifications in the school district. The PEL classes analyzed were non-high school graduate (NHSG), high school graduate (HSG), some college (SC), and declined to state (DTS). The trend showed increasingly better student performance as the parents' education level increases (SC > HSG > NHSC > DTS). In addition, Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) targets were analyzed for the three most common ethnic classifications (black, Hispanic, white) in the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 159 CalWORKs data. Also, socio-economically-disadvantaged AYP scores were analyzed. Comparisons were made for the three study years. The AYP showed that the minority students and socio-economically disadvantaged students continually had lower percent proficiency than whites. It also indicated that the AYP in 2002, scores were higher than in 2003 and 2004 in both ELA and math for all groups. The proficiency scores had a general leveling off and in some cases a downward trend from 2003 to 2004. Specifically, in ELA the only group that made gains was the whites (and not particularly strong gains) while the SED group remained constant. Both black and Hispanic students lost ground in 2003-2004. In addition, the math scores for 2003-2004 remained relatively stagnant with only very slight increases in white and SED students. Finally, 160 CalWORKs students who took the CST ELA test for each study year were individually tracked from year to year. The general trend indicates that these students failed to improve their CST ELA performance level significantly during the three-year Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 160 period. In addition, there were 120 students who took the CST math test during 2002, 2003, and 2004. As is consistent with the CST ELA scores, the general trend indicates that students failed to improve their CST MATH performance level significantly during the three- year period. The results described in this study for socio economically-disadvantaged students mirror those depicted in the literature. Trends toward flat or minimal student achievement level improvement for this student population were evident across the board in all tests and all years tested. These trends should be of concern to all educators and administrators alike. CalWORKs students are among the most highly socio economically disadvantaged, and their needs should be of special concern, especially given NCLB legislative goals and guidelines. Discussion Education is arguably the key societal component that prepares its youth for the future. Educational Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 161 improvement efforts have been ongoing for decades in the U.S. as a response to societal changes. Historically, the American public education system during the late 1950's, for example was designed, in part, with a commitment to quality educational institutions driven by the fear of the Soviet Union surpassing the United States in the sciences and mathematics. There was a sense of urgency to correct any weakness that may exist in school systems based solely on academics (Koret Task Force, 2003). During the following decade that fear was deemed unrealistic and the focus of education in American schools turned toward social interventions and focused less on academic performance. "Well-intended efforts to address racial segregation, meet the needs of handicapped youngsters, compensate for disadvantage, and provide bilingual schooling for immigrants eclipsed concern about student achievement" (Koret Task Force, 2003, p.l). The commitment to quality education for all students fizzled out by the mid 1960's and remained in the shadow of other priorities. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The A Nation at Risk report of 1983 rekindled the commitment and focus on student achievement making it once again a top priority. This doctrine caused a great stir in education outlining poor academic performance records in elementary and secondary American schools across all subjects and grade levels. More than twenty years later, the report that publicized the academic inadequacies in U.S. public schools remains the basis for the current wave of change in the educational system. "The commission has effectively recast many people's thinking about education from a focus on resources, services, and mindless innovation that absorbed us during the 1960's and 1970's to an emphasis on achievement that remains central today" (Koret Task Force, 2003, p.l). For years researchers have expressed concerns regarding educational outcomes and standards with the noted achievement gap between high and low socio economic status children for years (Brooks, 2002; Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000; Hofferth, 2000; Maruyama, 2003; Reid, 2001; Rosenshine, 2002; Tournani, 2004). For over a generation, efforts have been made Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 163 and programs established to help low-income children close the gap both in school and on standardized tests. The K-12 student population in California continues to challenge schools and districts. Not only is the population enormous but it is also quite diverse. The majority of students California public schools are minorities, with Hispanics populations making up the largest group, a group which also is continuing to grow at the fastest pace (EdSource, 2004). An additional challenge for all stems from the fact that "more than one in five children in California live in poverty and nearly 50% of all K-12 students participate in the federal free and reduced price meal programs offered in schools to students from low-income families" (EdSource, 2004, p. 1). Given the complex make up of the student population in the public schools in California educators are scrambling to find ways to meet the needs of their students while satisfying the requirements of the No Child Left Behind legislation, and closing the achievement gap between socio-economic groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 164 Research findings suggest that a combination of factors have an effect of student achievement of low socio-economic students. Funding, family background, parental involvement as well as parental level of education, neighborhood environment, school climate, class size, and even student goal-setting, future outlook and locus of control are all named as partly responsible for the persistence of the achievement gap between high and low-income students. These factors also are studied in the context of ethnicity and gender, in order to determine any confluence of factors that may jointly relate to failure to achieve in school (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000). In addition, the importance of socialization, and how different ethnicities, as well as genders, are socialized in the school situation, is also studied in order to determine why there remain apparent differences in ability levels has also been discussed in the literature (Nowell, 1998). Furthermore, other research studies look at the inadvertently negative signals sent to students by bureaucracy practices such as tracking. In fact, one study found that how a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 165 student was tracked in school had a "long-term effort on the social position the student attained in society" (Dekkers & Bosker, et al., 2000, p. 59). As a result of such studies, numerous researchers state that the only way to close the achievement gap is through concerted programmatic efforts to help low- income students Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Strahan, 2003). Forcing students to measure up to a standard is self-defeating unless every researched source of inequity is revealed and a program is developed to counteract it. Furthermore, it is stated in the literature that low-income students must be taught differently, and the importance of quality teachers for these students in particular is crucial (Edsource, 2004; Strahan 2003). One kind of pedagogy over another, such as interactive, humanistic and constructivist has been suggested to be effective for engaging diverse socio-economic, multi-ethnic classrooms where students can apply their own knowledge and experiences and feel empowered (Carey, 2003, p. 1). Others argue for a complete overhaul of school design; preferably toward effective small schools in order to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 166 meet the goals currently in place for "teaching our very diverse student population for higher order thinking and deep understanding" (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p. 1). It is further stated that the fact that our world has changed and our school system has not poses a problem. The current educational system in American Schools was not designed to meet the needs of all learners and to teach students at the high standards currently in place. Further support for small schools indicate that they are effective and generally benefit poor or low income students with respect to school performance (Howley, et al., 2000). Additional research supports the effective schools movement and believes that only research-based and theory-grounded effective schools will help low-income students (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001). Effective schools must have "strong leadership, clear emphasis on learning, positive school climate, regular and appropriate monitoring of student progress and high expectations for students and staff" (Thomas & Bainbridge, 2001, p. 660). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 167 In addition to scholarly research studies, numerous commissions, panels, study groups, reports and legislation, have vigorously put forth an effort to tackle the issues surrounding achievement gaps between low and high socio-economic students. Sparked by A Nation at Risk emphasis on rigorous curriculum, problem solving skills and proficiency issues continued to surface as key components to fixing the educational system in the U.S. For example, in 1994, Goals 2000: Educate America Act called for a complete reform of the entire educational system emphasizing funding to states that implemented the federal reform through their own state and local school district goals (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Further legislation such as the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) of 1994 was designed to unify efforts with Goals 2000. IASA supported a variety of programs such as those designed for limited English proficient (LEP) students. In addition, state legislation measures like California's Public School Accountability Act (PSAA) of 1999 included performance- based accountability policies rooted in standards-based Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 168 reform. The PSAA was designed to align student achievement with systematic goals and school accountability. States have since been further challenged by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001. The emphasis of NCLB is on accountability demands through standards based reform. The expectations of the NCLB legislation are that by the year 2014, all students will be considered academically proficient with relation to their states standard of proficiency, thus closing the achievement gap between low and high socio-economic student populations (Edsource, 2003) . The achievement gap is identified as a persistent gap that separates disadvantaged and minority students from their white counterparts with respect to academic achievement. Race and class are considered two key measurable components of this gap (National Governors' Association, 2005) . NCLB legislation is clear in its expectations of states to narrow the achievement gap by setting the same performance goals for all students regardless of differences in ethnicity, race, socio economic background, language or disability. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 169 Efforts by schools to ensure all student subgroups make gains are imperative. If a student subgroup in a school continuously declines to achieve the required performance targets, that school has failed to close the achievement gap, even if the overall performance of the school is positive (National Governors' Association, 2005). Given the timeline imposed by NCLB for closing the achievement gap, schools and school districts do not have time to spare. The results and findings shown herein for CalWORKs students are particularly revealing, and should be of special concern to educators and other stakeholders. Firstly, small performance gains were seen in some CalWORKs students (math only), but in general this special group of economically disadvantaged students performed poorly relative to their peer group (who are themselves doing poorly). Although CalWORKs students make up only a small percentage of the economically disadvantaged students in the school district under study (less than one- fifth) , and presumably make up a similar, small percentage in other Northern California school Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 170 districts, these students are nevertheless especially attractive to study because their economic status is accurate and verifiable (as opposed to "free or reduced lunch" students). CalWORKs students when tracked individually showed little improvement over the test years studied (2002 through 2004). As pointed out in A Nation at Risk, and numerous other studies, schools that serve disadvantaged children have not successfully addressed the wide achievement gap. Minority and disadvantaged youngsters are less apt to complete high school and college, and their average academic performance is substantially lower than their peer, largely white, non-economically disadvantaged group. Indeed, the minority achievement gap was consistent across the CalWORKs student population in this study, and their test performance lagged that of their respective minority groups as a whole (as shown in Tables 4 and 5). The findings further reflect that standards-based reforms have not achieved their full potential with respect to CalWORKs disadvantaged students. No special CalWORKs "accountability" programs are in place in any Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. school district (to date), and if such an accountability program could be implemented persistently and with carefully monitoring, such programs might boost achievement, especially among minority and disadvantaged youngsters. However, California especially is finding it difficult to gain consensus on a coherent set of substantial and ambitious academic standards for the overall student population, and CalWORKs disadvantaged students are not a focus of special individualized programs to align their tests with those standards. The use of standards and tests are essential to identify faltering schools and gauge the effectiveness of different programs, but they do not themselves solve any of the problems that they uncover. Further, the steps taken so far in the name of accountability for disadvantaged students fall mostly on the children and not on the adults in the system. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) may help in mobilizing federal efforts to encourage states and districts to drive achievement levels the right direction. However, the federal government has little Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. leverage over states and financially distressed school districts (especially California). NCLB has excruciatingly long timelines and little ability to impose sanctions when states and school districts do not meet performance improvement goals. NCLB imposes few consequences on educators when schools fail and test scores deteriorate. Recommendations Support from all bureaucratic levels should be realized from the state department to the local school district office. All stakeholders need to step up and take responsibility to ensure that all students receive an excellent education that will prepare them for success through out their lives. The following are recommendations for closing the achievement gap based on the results from the three- year study. These recommendations have been noted as successful in the literature and many of them are currently being used in the study school district. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 173 Legislators and Policy Makers • Continue to review and update legislative measures, as research becomes available on better ways to educate our students. • Do not shortchange our students due to budgetary problems. Maintain a commitment to students by providing adequate funding for their education. They are the future and the leaders of tomorrow. • Commit to helping low income families and those on welfare by providing the means by which they may improve their economic status through welfare reform and other programs specializing in assistance to low income families such as child care assistance. California Department of Education • Continue supporting successful teaching programs such as Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA). • Maintain and support strong content and performance standards as the basis of curriculum development and instructional best practices. • Support data driven improvement programs that help principals and school leaders understand how to use data to make informed school improvement decisions. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. • Work with Local Education Agencies (LEA's) in developing educational strategies and goals that reflect the needs and values of each unique community with respect to its schools, parents and community members. • Support programs that use research based approaches to educational excellence. • Develop and implement strategies to attract and maintain qualified teachers in public schools given the budget crisis. Revisit the credentialing process. Schools and School Districts • Provide a safety net for students that are unsuccessful in any one particular environment. • Maintain safe schools and environments that are free from influences that either hamper or are destructive to learning. • Embrace diversity and ensure that all students are allowed to maintain their own cultural identity. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. • Build stronger relationships with universities and colleges to assist in student learning through partnerships. • Maintain expectations from teachers, administrators and staff that all students can learn. • Empower students and demand that they succeed. Classroom environments should be designed as sanctuaries for learning. • Provide appropriate intervention programs for all levels, including differentiated learning. • Ensure that all pertinent data related to student achievement is publicized for parents and the community. • Provide professional development for teachers and administrators rooted in content standards and data analysis. • Incorporate formative assessments to improve instruction and increase student feedback. • Use support programs that allow an additional means to assess student learning such as Accelerated Reader/Math. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 176 • Use of alternative programs for students outside of the school day such as tutoring and peer support groups. Community • Ensure parent, community and business involvement as stakeholders in student achievement. Development partnerships within the community for support. • Encourage parent participation in the classroom. • Encourage businesses to support schools, either through monetary commitments or by providing expert knowledge and guidance. Conclusions Results of this study parallel those described in the literature. There is indeed an achievement gap between the socio-economic disadvantaged students represented by (CalWORKs) students in this study school district and those of the general student population. Efforts to close the achievement gap have been relatively unsuccessful. However, the NCLB legislation has created a sense of urgency for states and school Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 177 districts to implement changes to meet the needs of all students in their charge. There is no doubt that there is a relationship between education and economic and social success in this country and our educational institutions must take the lead in providing instruction and learning opportunities so that all students have the same chances to succeed. Furthermore, there is a strong relationship between family, communities and schools that should be utilized to build bridges between students and their environment. Long term commitments to educational best practices must begin within our schools and communities at an early age and continue throughout the academic life of the student. There should be no down time with respect to learning. This study analyzed the STAR testing data for three consecutive years. Although many of the recommendations mentioned above are used by the study school district, there still remains an achievement gap between low and high socio-economic students in this district. Additional time spent using the current strategies may prove beneficial however, given the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 178 imposed deadlines of NCLB, it would not be wise to wait. To stay with the status quo is not accomplishing what needs to be done as confirmed by the persistently low-test scores of the economically disadvantaged and minority students in this district. The literature describes several existing programs that improve the achievement of low-income students. These programs vary in their intent and means, and include school-based reforms of teaching practice, various pedagogical approaches, specific structured program for improvement, school funding-based reforms of school elements, and even direct cash assistance to low-income families, such as in CalWORKs, to help students of these families level the playing field compared with other students (Alfassi, 2003; Boaler, 2003; Brock & Groth, 2003; Calserve, 2004; De Andra, 2001; Kamps, 2003; Klein, 2004; Rand, 2004; Strahan, 2003). Several alternative approaches to school reform have been suggested by the effective schools orientation of the literature (see above). The theme within the literature not only examines which means of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. reform a school adopts, but how well organized the school is and how effectively it adopts the reform (Brock & Groth, 2003). Well-organized school-based reforms for low-income schools are characterized by several factors, including ongoing professional development, high degree of staff involvement in the reform, a strong focus on improving student learning and continuous monitoring of student achievement (Brock & Groth, 2003) . Closing the achievement gap and creating top notch schools is not impossible, in fact, there are many success stories in the literature (Schmoker, 1999). Thus, it may be useful for this school district to take next steps and explore new strategies and incorporate those in its school district plan to increase student achievement. For example, Investigate how other schools and districts (inside and outside the state) have initiated successful programs and are making headway in closing the achievement gap. Successful schools and school districts set goals to achieve results. They focus on specific targets and use teamwork, measurement and feedback to further redefine their goals to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 180 continue success (Schmoker, 1999). A school in a neighboring county, for example, increased its CST score last year by 93 points by implementing a program that includes school wide professional development strategies for low performing schools. Programs of this type are rich in research and standards based strategies for improving student achievement that include a complete commitment by all stakeholders, including children, in achieving academic success. In addition, this program further included differentiated instruction and focused on researched based instruction that paralleled the cultural and linguistic needs of subgroups such as those with Afro-American and Latino backgrounds that continuously score lower than other student groups. Another successful strategy could include incorporating curriculum structure methods such as curriculum alignment that improve student achievement through interpretation of the content standards and development of learning objectives that target the standards. All learning objectives in all classrooms are designed to meet those standards, thus creating a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. greater opportunity to increase test scores. A variety of curriculum structures (such as curriculum pacing and mapping) could be utilized in the classrooms of this school district to examine what is being taught and how to make modifications for the following year. This would certainly help support teachers and give them a sense of direction, consistency and organization and would allow instructional adjustments and improvements to be made accordingly. Furthermore, this school district could consider using a process such as Curriculum Calibration. It uses actual student class work to measures what is being taught in each grade level classroom and the degree to which the class assignments are aligned with the state standards. Samples of one weeks classroom assignments for a particular grade (or course) from a school are evaluated to show what students have done that week. This process provides valuable information to school faculties in the form of data analysis such as percentage of assignments aligned to grade-level standards and whether the class work was adequately Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 182 covered and if the types of assignments were appropriate. Also, classroom assessments such as formative assessments could be utilized. These assessments stress instructional strategies based on students' needs. They are ongoing and repetitive thus assessing small segments of the course work a little at a time. Formative assessments provide teachers with information regarding student learning, direction to improve student understanding and the information needed to analyze students strengths and weaknesses. In turn, students are able to provide feedback to the teacher on the instruction that is taking place in the classroom and they can monitor their own progress by means of performance tasks or other methods. Overall, these assessments provide information needed to the teacher to either modify or sustain a particular mode of instruction. Implementing a standards based (criterion referenced) grading system to replace the current norm referenced grading system is necessary. An appropriate grading system should measure content-specific learning goals Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 183 that indicate what all students should know and be able to do as they move through each grade level of the educational system In addition, using value-added assessment as a means to measure the improvement a student has between the two latest standardized test scores taken is an excellent way of evaluating academic growth. Also, it has been suggested that value-added assessment may help identify teachers in the district who provide the greatest opportunity to increase student learning as students in their charge increase test scores, however, this is not completely agreed upon. Further research by Robert Marzano indicates that "schools can have a tremendous impact on student achievement if they follow the direction provided by the research". (Marzano, 2003, p.4). Marzano has synthesized over three decades of research and has concluded that there are twelve key factors that have an impact on student achievement. Those factors are broken down into three categories; School-level; Teacher-level and Student-level (Marzano, 2003). Each of those categories house the factors that are the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. make-up of our overall school community. Even though those twelve factors have a direct impact on student achievement, they can be altered and thus, maintained to positively impact our students. Thus, Marzano contends, there is no reason why our students cannot succeed, and "if we follow the guidance offered from 35 years of research, we can enter an era of unprecedented effectiveness for the public practice of education - one in which the vast majority of schools can be highly effective in promoting student learning" (Marzano, 2003, p. 1). Our educational system is the cornerstone for which our society builds its future. It is critical that all students have an equal opportunity to learn and are able to succeed. All students need to be provided with an education complete with all the academic tools and strategies they will need to prepare for the demands and challenges of the future. The achievement gap must narrow and opportunities for all must expand. There is an extraordinary amount of work to be done. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 185 Future Research It may be interesting to broadly track individual test scores in students whose parents have successfully transitioned from welfare (CalWORKs) to full-time gainful employment. Does an increase in economic status affect a student’s perception of self worth, and hence influence achievement levels? Furthermore, it would be especially interesting to study academic performance as a function of grade point average and correlate this with achievement test scores. Are CalWORKs students that are on the high end of test score range the same students who achieve academic success in middle and high school? Finally, are CalWORKs students likely to experience significant success once in a college environment? Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 8 6 Bibliography Alfassi, M. (2003). Promoting the will and skill of students at academic risk: an evaluation of an instructional design geared to foster achievement, self-efficacy and motivation. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 2003, p. 1-14. American Institutes for Research. (2004). California's Public Schools Act (PSAA): Evaluation Findings and Implications. Available at: Edsource Online: www.edsource.ora. p. 1-12. Boaler, J. (2003). When learning no longer matters: Standardized testing and the creation of inequality. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, p. 502-507. Broad Foundation. (2003). California district earns top urban prize. District Administration, November, p. 16. Brock, K.J. & Groth, C. (2003). "Becoming" effective": lessons from one state's reform initiative in schools serving low-income students. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8, p. 167-190. Brooks, C. (2002). Study: Poor and minority districts get thousands less per student. New York Amsterdam News, 93, p. 1-3. California Department of Social Services. (2005). California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) highlights. Available online :www.dss.cahwnet.gov/cdssweb/california 169.htm. Calserve. (2004). Profile of Service-Learning Participation and Activities. Available online, p. 2-8-2-15. Carey, E. (2003). Speaking about power: gender, history, and the urban classroom. Radical Teacher, Summer, p. 1-7. Coeryman, M. (2003). Twenty years after 'A Nation at Risk'. The Christian Science Monitor, p. 1-4. Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Redesigning Schools for a Changing World. Available at: School Resign Network at Stanford University, www.schoolredesign.net.. p. 1-2. De Andra, D. (2001). A qualitative evaluation of a mentor program for at-risk youth: the participants' perspective. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 18, p. 97-117. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 187 Dekkers, H.P.J.M., Bosker, R.J. & Driessen, G.W.J.M. (2000). Complex inequalities of educational opportunities. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6, p. 59-82. Eagle Software. (2005). AERIES software information. Available at: AERIES, www.aeries.com. Education Data Partnership. (2005). School Profile Data. Available at: Ed-Data Online, www.ed-data.kl2.ca.us. Edsource. (2004). California's School Accountability System Under the Federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Available at: Edsource www.edsource.ora.. p. 1-8. Edsource. (2004). Overview of student issues. Available at: EdSource www.edsourCe.org/edu stu.cfm, p. 1-10. Edsource. (2003). California's Student Testing Program: STAR. Available at: Edsource www.edsomroc.org. p. 1-2. Edsource. (2003). About the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. Available at: Edsource www.edsource.org.. p. 1-4. The Education Trust. (1999). Reports show high-level instruction improves performance of low-income students. Black Issues in Higher Education, June 10, p. 1. Esposito, C. (1999). Learning in urban blight: school climate and its effect on the school performance of urban, minority, low-income children. School Psychology Review, 28, p. 365-379. Gewertz, C. (2003). Study: No academic gains from vouchers for black students. Education Week, 22, p. 13-15. Hoff, D.J., Olson, L. & Sack, J.L. (2002). Some California test scores fall along with class size. Education Week, 21, p. 12-16. Hofferth, S.L. (2000). Achievement and behavior among children of welfare recipients, welfare leavers and low-income single mothers. Journal of Social Issues, Winter, p. 1-30. Holmes, D. (1995). An Idea Book 1994 Federal Legislation: Forming New Partnerships for Educating all Students to High Standards. Funded by the U. S. Department of Education Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. Available at: George Washington University, www.ncela.ewu.edu. . p. 1-17. Honora, D.T. (2002). The relationship of gender and achievement to future outlook among African-American adolescents. Adolescence, 2002, p. 1-13. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 188 Howley, C., Strange, M., Bickel, R. (2000). Research about School Size and School Performance in Impoverished Communities. ERIC Digest, p. 1-5. Johnson, K.A. (2004). Expanding opportunity for low-income high school students: Pell grants vs. advanced placement classes. The Heritage Foundation, available at: www.heritage.org/Research/Education/bgl742.cfm, p. 1-9. Kamps, D. M. (2003). Curriculum influences on growth in early reading fluency for students with academic and behavioral risks: a descriptive study. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, Winter, p. 1-22. Klein, J. (2004). Successful CT academy plans charter schools in New York City. New York Amsterdam News, 95, p. 33-35. Koret Task Force. (2003). Are We Still At Risk. Available at: www.educationnext.org. Leman, R.I. (2000). Are teens in low-income and welfare families working too much? Drban Institute, available online: www.urban.org/urlprint.cfm?/ID=7042, p. 1-8. Ludwig, J. (2003). The great unknown: does the black-white test score gap narrow or widen through the school years? It depends on how you measure. Education Next, Summer, p. 1-6. Lynch, S. (2002). Parental enabling attitudes and locus of control of at-risk and honors students. Adolescence, Fall, p. 1-19. McCallum, I. & Demie, F. (2001). Social class, ethnicity and educational performance. Educational Research, 43, p. 147-159. Maruyama, G. (2003). Disparities in educational opportunities and outcomes: what do we know and what can we do? Journal of Social Issues, 59, p. 653-676. Marzano, Robert. (2003). What Works In Schools: Translating Research into Action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Microsoft Office. (2005) Excel information. Available online: www.microsoft.com. Morris, J.E. (2002). A 'communally bonded' school for African American students, families and a community. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, p. 230- 235. National Governors' Association. (2005). Closing the Achievement Gap, p. 1-3. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 189 Newman, B.M., Myers, M.C., Newman, P.R., Lohman, B.J. & Smith, V.L. (2000). The transition to high school for academically promising urban, low-income African American youth. Adolescence, 35, p. 45- 67. Nowell, A. (1998). Trends in gender differences in academic achievement from 1960 to 1994: an analysis of differences in mean, variance and extreme scores. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, July, p. 1-15. Okpala, C.O., Okpala, A.O. & Smith, F.E. (2001). Parental involvement, instructional expenditures, family socioeconomic attributes and student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 95, p. 110- 116. Rand. (2004). The role of caseworkers in implementing CalWORKs: ARand's CalWORKs staff survey. Available online, www.rand.org, p. ix-xii. Reardon, E., Demartini, C. & Klerman, J. (2004). Results from the First California Health and Social Services Survey. Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation. Available online, www.rand.org. Reid, K.S. (2001). Researchers probe achievement gap. Education Week, 20, p. 13-18. Rosenshine, B. (2002). Helping students from low-income homes read at grade level. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 7, p. 273-283. Sachs, J. (2000). Inequities in early care and education: What is America buying? Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, bj_ p. 384-397. Schomoker, Mike. (1999). Results, The Key to Continuous School Improvement (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Seligman, D. (2004). Children will be left behind. Forbes, 173, p. 86- 88. Signer, B., Beasley, T.M. & Bauer, E. (1997). Interaction of ethnicity, mathematics achievement level, socioeconomic status and gender among high school students' mathematics self-concepts. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 2, p. 377-393. Sink, C.A. (2003). Raising achievement test scores of early elementary schools students through comprehensive counseling programs. Professional School Counseling, June, p. 1-23. Smith, P., Molnar, A. & Zahorik, J. (2003). Class-size reduction: a fresh look at the data. Educational Leadership, 61, p. 72-75. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 190 Strahan, D. (2003). Promoting a collaborative professional culture in three elementary schools that have beaten the odds. The Elementary School Journal, 104, p. 127-146. Thomas, M.D. & Bainbridge, W.L. (2001). All children can learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, p. 660-663. Tournani, M. (2004). A low-income, high-potential school. Available www.greatschools.net/cgi-bin/showarticle/ca/39/gn, p. 1-5. Tyson, L.D. (2003). Needed: Affirmative action for the poor. Business Week, 3840, p. 24-25. United States Department of Education. (1983). A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform. Van Laar, C. (2000). The paradox of low academic achievement but high self-esteem in African American students: an attributional account. Educational Psychology Review, 12, p. 33-61. Wasonaga, T., Christman, D.E. & Kilmer, L. (2003). Ethnicity, gender and age: predicting resilience and academic achievement among urban high school students. American Secondary Education, 32, p. 62-74. Yamauchi, L.A. (2003). Making school relevant for at-risk students: The Wai-anae high school Hawaiian studies program. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8, p. 379-390. Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., Teelucksingh, E., Boys, C. & Lemkuil, A. (2003). Using a curriculum-based instructional management system to enhance math achievement in urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8, p. 247-265. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An analysis of the implementation of content standards in selected unified school districts of California

PDF

An analysis of perceptions and implementation of California's teacher evaluation process in a K--5 public school and its impact on teacher practice

PDF

A case study of the California teacher evaluation system and its impact upon teacher practice in an alternative education high -performing urban high school

PDF

A case study: An analysis of the adequacy of one school district's model of data use to raise student achievement

PDF

Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and learning: A case study of district efforts in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement

PDF

An elementary school's perceptions of the effectiveness of teacher evaluation to enhance teacher practice

PDF

Elementary administrators and teachers' perceptions of the teacher evaluation process in California's public schools

PDF

Current and future managerial competency requirements for manufacturing, assembly, and /or material processing functions

PDF

An analysis of the use of data to increase student achievement in public schools

PDF

A study of student retentiveness, achievement, and program completion in a school -to -career program

PDF

A case study of teacher evaluation and supervision at a high performing urban elementary school

PDF

Evaluation of the effects of longitudinal tracking of student achievement to assess school quality

PDF

Emerging from the shadows of inner-city barriers: A California urban middle school that has outperformed its expectations

PDF

A comparative case study: Tutoring in reading in two settings

PDF

A longitudinal look at what's important in comprehensive reform: A case study

PDF

Achievement and retention of first-semester nursing students: The effects of a study skills course

PDF

Evaluation of the effects of a continuous improvement program on special education student achievement

PDF

A case study of a successful urban school: Climate, culture and leadership factors that impact student achievement

PDF

California teacher evaluation and improved teacher practice

Asset Metadata

Creator Molen, Taffy Antoinette (author)

Core Title A comparative analysis of academic achievement for CalWORKs students in a K--12 public school system

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, administration,education, curriculum and instruction,education, tests and measurements,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Hocevar, Dennis (committee chair), Gothold, Stuart (committee member), Hitchcock, Maurice (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-450003

Unique identifier UC11340789

Identifier 3196861.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-450003 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3196861.pdf

Dmrecord 450003

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Molen, Taffy Antoinette

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA