University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An evaluation of probation supervision and its role in performance of students identified as living in poverty in Shasta County Court and Community Schools

(USC Thesis Other)

An evaluation of probation supervision and its role in performance of students identified as living in poverty in Shasta County Court and Community Schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content NOTE TO USERS
Page(s) not included in the original manuscript and are
unavailable from the author or university. The manuscript
was scanned as received.
ii
This reproduction is the best copy available.
®
UMI
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
AN EVALUATION OF PROBATION SUPERVISION AND ITS
ROLE IN PERFORMANCE OF STUDENTS IDENTIFIED
AS LIVING IN POVERTY IN SHASTA COUNTY COURT
AND COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
by
Michael D. Borgaard
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCTION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2005
Copyright 2005 Michael D. Borgaard
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3180437
Copyright 2005 by
Borgaard, Michael D.
All rights reserved.
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 3180437
Copyright 2005 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.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEDICATION
To my wife, Greta, without whose love, hard work, and
encouragement, this project would not have been possible.
To my daughter Kaitlyn, who I have loved from the moment I
first saw her. She was patient with her Daddy through it all.
To my parents, Dean and Lois Borgaard. Every day is a
reminder that their unconditional love and support is the founda
tion for all that I am and all that I am privileged to do.
To my Grandparents, Glenn and Mable Gibson. Their love,
hard work, devotion and sacrifice are still felt all of these years
later.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to acknowledge Dr. Carol M. Whitmer, Superintendent
of the Shasta County Office of Education. She has guided me
professionally and personally for many years. She has been my
friend, my mentor, my Professor, my Dean, and my Superin
tendent. Her impact has been immeasurable, and I am grateful for
the influence she has had in my life.
I wish to thank the staff at the Shasta County Court and
Community Schools. In particular, I would like to thank Dave
Lambert, the principal of Live Oak School. His encouragement and
support of this project has been invaluable.
Thanks to Carol Baggott, Lynn Lindsley, Vicki Shorey, and
Connie Starnes, who helped pull together the data included in this
document.
Thanks to those who agreed to be interviewed for this
project. Their insights were invaluable. Those interviewed were:
Donna Collins
Bill Dehart
Lynda Dehart
Mike Delgado
David Hawkins
Terryl Hayes
Charlie Hetzer
Rita McCue
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Karin Morgan
Marilyn Ogden
Janeen Seim
Carie Webb
Thanks to Dr. Dennis Hocevar, my dissertation chair, and
committee members Dr. Carl Cohn and Dr. Mike McLaughlin. Their
insight, patience and encouragement, have been tremendously
appreciated.
Thanks to my editor, Evelyn Gray, who guided me from the
initial draft to the finished document.
Finally, thanks to Larry Robins, colleague and friend in the
cohort. It was Larry who first said, "Mike, I think you have a great
topic of study at your school." He was right.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION.................................................................................. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................ viii
ABSTRACT...................................................................................... ix
Chapter Page
1. THE QUESTIONS OF PROBATION STATUS....................... 1
Overview........................................................................ 2
Problem Formulation..................................................... 5
Current Educational Practice at Shasta County
Court and Community Schools................................. 7
Description of Policy...................................................... 13
Students on Formal Probation (602)....................... 14
Students on Informal Probation (654)..................... 16
Student Supervision and Educational Practices 19
Poverty and Shasta County Court and Community
Schools Students...................................................... 22
2. LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................... 26
An Issue of Equity.......................................................... 52
3. METHODOLOGY OF THE COLLECTION OF DATA.............. 76
Data Analysis.................................................................. 76
Test Scores..................................................................... 77
Other Quantitative Data................................................ 78
Qualitative Research...................................................... 82
Dependent and Independent Variables........................ 83
Policy Evaluation............................................................ 83
4. COLLECTION OF DATA AND RESULTS.............................. 85
California Standards Test (CST)................................... 87
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)................ 90
Attendance Rate Data.................................................... 92
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vii
Chapter Page
Disciplinary Referrals..................................................... 93
Classroom Management Level Plan Survey................. 96
Teacher Interviews......................................................... 97
5. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 108
Social Performance of Students...................................... 110
Academic Performance of Students................................ 116
Recommendations for Shasta County Court and
Community Schools.................................................... 122
Conclusions...................................................................... 130
REFERENCES .................................................................................. 137
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. California Standards Test English Language A rts........... 89
2. California Standards Test Math......................................... 88
3. California Standards Test History...................................... 89
4. California High School Exist Exit Exam English
Language A rts................................................................ 90
5. California High School Exit Exam Math............................ 91
6. Attendance.......................................................................... 92
7. Disciplinary Referrals......................................................... 94
8. Classroom Management Level Plan.................................. 96
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ix
ABSTRACT
It is the mission of the Shasta County Court and Community
Schools to give each student another chance at success—
personally, academically, vocationally, and socially— so they can be
contributing, successful members of society. It is the belief that
these are unique educational settings, and in many cases,
represent the last chance students have to change their behaviors
before being further excluded from the traditional school system,
or becoming further involved in the criminal justice system. Nearly
all students are on formal or informal probation. Therefore,
Probation Supervision and its role in performance of students
identified as living in poverty in Shasta County Court and
Community Schools was the focus of this study.
Two questions were asked:
1. Is there a difference in the academic and social
performance of students due to their probation status?
2. If so, what are the implications for schools that serve
this population of students?
The quantitative data consisted of comparisons of California
Standards Test (CST) scores, California High School Exit Exam
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
X
(CAHSEE) scores, a semester-long comparison of the rate of
disciplinary referrals, and a semester-long survey of the Classroom
Management Level Plan, which consisted of weekly documentation
of student behavioral levels. There was a review of student
attendance. Qualitative data were collected through the use of
interviews that were conducted with teachers and staff.
In the English Language Arts, Math, and History sections of
the California Standards Test, and the California High School Exit
Exam Scores, there was not a statistically significant difference in
performance of students depending on probation status. In
Attendance Rates, Disciplinary Referrals, and the Classroom
Management Level Plan, there was a statistically significant
difference among students depending on probation status.
Regarding the Classroom Management Level Plan, the
teachers interviewed had varied responses to the questions that
were posed, but were unanimous in their support of the program
and saw it as beneficial to students and the school.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
CHAPTER 1
THE QUESTION OF PROBATION STATUS
This study focuses on one aspect of the Shasta County Court
and Community Schools. It is the mission of these schools to give
each student another chance at success— personally, academically,
vocationally, and socially— so they can be contributing, successful
members of society. It is the belief that these are unique educa
tional settings, and in many cases, represents the last chance
students have to change their behaviors before being further
excluded from the traditional school system, or becoming further
excluded from the traditional school system, or becoming further
involved in the criminal justice system. Nearly all students enrolled
in the SCOE Court and Community Schools are on formal or
informal probation. Therefore, the particular aspect of Probation
Supervision and its role in performance of students identified as
living in poverty in Shasta County Court and Community Schools,
will be the focus of this study. Specifically, two questions will be
asked:
1. Is there a difference in the academic and social
performance of students due to their probation status?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
2. I f so, what are the implications for schools that serve
this population of students?
Overview
The Shasta County Office of Education (SCOE) Court and
Community Schools operate a number of programs for at-risk
youth at various sites in Shasta County. The Mission Statement
notes, "The mission of the Shasta County Court and Community
Schools is to give each student another chance for success—
personally, academically, vocationally and socially, so they can
become contributing, successful members of the society." All
students who are wards of the court and are in group homes,
foster placement, and/or students who have been identified by
mainstream schools as neglected and/or delinquent children, are
served through these programs.
Live Oak Community School operates an education program
designed to serve students who, because of reasons related to
conduct or emotional status, are unable to be served in their
district of residence. Live Oak has a principal and assistant
principal, school psychologist, two probation officers, one assistant
probation officer, and an assigned vocational program specialist.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
There are approximately 300 students in Grades 7-12. There are
18 classrooms on site, which consist of the following: (a) 15
Community School classes, (b) two special day classes, and (c) one
class that serve students with either a history of nonpublic school
attendance or at risk of being moved to a nonpublic school. In
addition, there are two RSP teachers, one on-site and one
itinerant. Mental health counseling is available 4 days a week.
Qualifying students participate in ROP landscaping class on
campus, and ROP off-site classes. It is the intention of Live Oak to
assist all students in returning to their districts of residence at such
a time as their behavior and academic success allows reintegration.
The Educational Resource Center (ERC) serves approximately
50 students. There are three classrooms, two SCOE site admini
strators, and an itinerant resource teacher. The program
emphasizes the academic skills necessary for transition. The
classrooms are not self-contained, thus simulating a traditional
high school. ERC's primary objective is to return students to a
mainstream education location.
Juvenile Hall School serves 60 students in four classrooms.
All students at Juvenile Hall are served in a small group setting.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
Special Education students are provided the services of a resource
specialist teacher.
The Phoenix Program is a program for teenage substance
abusers; Phoenix has a single classroom, which serves 18
students. A mental health counselor meets with qualifying
students both individually and in groups. There is a parental
support group that meets regularly. Phoenix students participate
in Shasta County Drug Court, and the teacher is on the Shasta
County Drug Court for Juveniles advisory committee and is a Drug
Court team member.
Crystal Creek Boys' Camp is a residential facility serving 60
students in three classrooms. An itinerant resource specialist
teacher serves the students in this setting who have IEP's. Other
programs include ROP Foods, parenting classes, mental health
counseling, and drug and alcohol counseling. There is full support
of Probation Department staff as needed.
An Independent Study Program is housed at the Shasta
County Office of Education and serves approximately 20 students.
There are 1.25 staff members. The students in this voluntary
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
program are either working, new parents, or need a very different
learning program and situation.
SCOE court and Community Schools recently completed the
first year of a WASC self-study, and subsequently received a 6-
year accreditation in July 2004.
Problem Formulation
No Child Left Behind, federal legislation enacted and signed
into law in 2001 by President George W. Bush, states that all
students will become proficient learners within the structure of a
standards-based system. The profile of the students at SCOE
Court and Community Schools features students that are over
whelming from poverty, have not been successful in a traditional
school setting, and many have become wards of the court due to
criminal activity.
There are many problems that are faced by those who have
dedicated their professional lives to education these students. One
problem in particular has been the role of probation status of
students.
There has long been a debate in the Shasta County Court
and Community Schools concerning probation status. All students
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
are on probationary status. Students on informal probation (654
status) have been assigned to the Shasta County Court and
Community Schools through the SARB (School Attendance and
Review Board). Their probation status is primarily a funding
model, for students at Live Oak receive a higher revenue limit due
to smaller class sizes and increased services. Students on formal
probation (602 status) have been convicted of a crime and are now
wards of the court.
The debate rises from the role of supervision. Students on
informal probation receive no greater supervision than students in
a conventional school setting; again, their probation status is
derived from a funding model. Students on formal probation,
however, are rigorously supervised. Live Oak School and ERC have
two full-time probation officers who are located at the Live Oak and
ERC campuses. Other probation officers also have caseloads of
students who attend SCOE schools and have access to the campus.
Juvenile Hall and Crystal Creek Boy's Camp are schools where
students have been remanded by the courts to custody. Phoenix
School is located on the property of Juvenile Hall, but the students
are not in custody.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
7
There has been a long-held conviction that, due to greater
supervision and leverage in areas of behavior and attendance,
students with formal probation status perform at a higher level,
socially and academically, than those with informal probation
status. The role of leverage is crucial when aspect of students in
poverty is a constant in the equation. The reasons for this will be
highlighted in the discussion of the literature that addresses the
role of poverty in education.
Current Educational Practice at Shasta County
Court and Community Schools
The following statements characterize educational practice at
the Shasta County Court and Community Schools:
1. Regarding the alignment of curriculum, instruction and
materials to content and performance standards, the State
Standards were used to develop a curriculum blueprint, which
standardized material taught at all the sites within our Court and
Community system. The blueprint includes Math, Social Studies
and Writing, with emphasis on standards necessary to pass the
California High School Exit Exam. All sites are covering the specific
standards addressed by the blueprint schedule. All students are
exposed to the standard regardless of their academic profiles.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
2. In terms of the availability of standards-based
instructional materials appropriate to all student groups, textbooks
have been purchased which are aligned with the state standards in
Math, English, and Social Science at the high school level.
Materials have also been purchased for the 7th and 8th grade,
aligned with standards for Math and Language Arts. The textbook
committee will be selecting science texts for future purchase.
3. There is a strong commitment to the alignment of staff
development to standards, assessed student performance and
professional needs. Test data has been reviewed to develop areas
of critical academic needs. These needs have been analyzed to
develop Expected School-wide Learning Results. Other staff
development have included understanding developmental assets,
differentiated instruction and activities to address math standards,
poverty as a culture: (a) implications for classroom management
and core curriculum, and (b) conflict management and classroom
discipline.
4. There are a number of services provided by the regular
program to enable underperforming students to meet standards.
All classrooms have a ratio of one staff member to 9 students,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
which enables staff to provide differentiated instruction. Some
students, testing below the 6th grade reading level, are placed in a
remedial reading class at Live Oak School. Instructional delivery
continues to be aligned with data and restructured to more closely
meet the needs of the students. In addition to the computer lab,
every classroom has computers and data ports for high-speed
internet access. All students have access to standards-based
materials.
5. There are also services provided by categorical funds to
enable underperforming students to meet standards. A Computer
Lab Instructional Assistant monitors the students in GED prepar
ation: (a) math and social studies tutorials, and (b) other
instructional lessons as set up by teachers. Instructional Aides
provide full-time classroom assistance, thereby lowering the
student to adult ratio to 9:1 to provide differentiated instruction.
The library assistant serves all sites. TUPE and SDFS monies
provide drug and alcohol counseling. Eisenhower funds are used
for staff development. State and local assessments are used to
modify instruction and improve student achievement.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
6. There has been a strong emphasis on accessing and
appropriating data from STAR and CAHSEE, and have been
analyzed to develop critical academic needs. Critical needs have
been identified to modify instruction to enhance student learning.
7. Attention has been given to the number and percent
age of teachers in academic areas experiencing low student
performance. One hundred percent of 30 teachers teach academ
ically low performing and behaviorally challenged students.
8. Family, school, district, and community resources are
available to these students. There is counseling through Mental
Health, Student Study Teams, Child Protection Services, and Drug
Court for Juveniles, anger management, and substance abuse
counseling available as needed. There are three on-site probation
officers and assistants who regularly interact with students.
Community donations for newspapers are secured. There is a
business partnership with: (a) Red Lion, (b) involvement in
community NA/AA meetings, (c) SCOE partners with Redding Police
Gang Task Force, (d) EOPS (Shasta College employment opportun
ity program), (e) The Chemical People, (f) Coca Cola, (g) Shasta
County Planned Parenthood, and (h) Women's Refuge. Various
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
11
speakers for tea talk, the armed services recruiters, the California
Conservation Corps (CCC) and Job Corps are welcome services on
the campus. Also, Shasta County Office of Education provides the
following services: (a) speech pathologist, (b) adaptive P E
teachers, (c) a transition teacher, and (c) School-to-Career
information.
9. Efforts have been made to bridge the school, district
and community barriers to improvements in student achievement.
The culture of poverty within our student population has caused a
lack of emphasis on the importance of education. Families are
lacking education, are in the lower socio-economic group, have
high levels of unemployment, parental and sibling substance abuse
activity and parental incarceration. Students are transported from
locations all over Shasta County. The community has a poor
perception of both the school and students.
10. It is recognized that there are limitations of the current
program to enable the underperforming students to meet stand
ards. The greatest limitation is the length of the students' stay at
SCOE Court and Community Schools. Additionally, some teachers
are reluctant to change. There are (a) multi-graded/academic
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
classrooms, (b) overt behavior problems exhibited by students, (c)
a high population of diagnosed and undiagnosed learning disabili
ties, and (d) pervasive mental problems that also limit our
effectiveness. The inability to provide solutions to health care
problems is also a factor.
11. The Shasta County Court and Community Schools have
sought WASC accreditation for the first time. Until this under
taking, each self-contained classroom oversaw their own curricu
lum, which was based roughly on the grades served in those
classes (all of the classes at Live Oak, even now, are somewhat
multi-grade). Live Oak did not issue its own high school diplomas,
but issued them through a partnership with the Shasta Union High
School District, the largest high school district in Shasta County.
Now, in the era of No Child Left Behind, all of that has changed.
12. The first major change is that SCOE Court and
Community Schools must be responsible to make certain that
students enrolled there learn and meet the standards. The Court
and Community Schools will have an API (Academic Performance
Index), as well as meet the AYP (Annual Yearly Progress), although
this is done through the lens of ASAM (Alternative School
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
Accountability Measures). No longer will teachers in the Court and
Community Schools be allowed absolute autonomy. What schools
have been adjusting to for the past 5 or so years, so now are the
Court and Community Schools as well. This has required a great
deal of planning, training and articulation.
13. Shasta County Court and Community Schools often
share the educational responsibilities of many students. For
example, a student may progress academically and socially at Live
Oak School and be transferred to the Education Resource Center, a
transition program that ideally leads to students' return to the
school of their district. Conversely, a student may violate
probation and be moved from Live Oak School and into custody,
thus attending either Juvenile Hall School or Crystal Creek Camp
School. These are two examples of the student movement that is
common in Shasta County Court and Community Schools.
Description of Policy
The mission of Shasta County Court and Community Schools
is to give each student another chance at success—personally,
academically, vocationally, and socially— so they can be contribut
ing, successful members of society. It is the belief that these are
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
unique educational settings, and in many cases, represents the last
chance students have to change their behaviors before begin
further excluded from the traditional school system or becoming
further excluded from the traditional school system or becoming
further involved in the criminal justice system. Therefore,
probation supervision and classroom management are essential
ingredients for student success at SCOE Court and Community
Schools.
Nearly all students enrolled in the SCOE Court and
Community Schools are on formal or informal probation. There are
two exceptions to this. The first would be students whose informal
probation status has expired, and the district of the student's
residence are paying SCOE to continue educating the student
rather than have the pupil on their campus. The second exception
is students who are wards of the court due to child protective
action that has taken place. These students are typically served
through one of many local agencies.
Students on Formal Probation (602)
Students (juveniles) who are convicted of criminal offenses
are designated as wards of the court with formal probation
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
(California Penal Code 602) status. Although there are instances
when juveniles are tried as adults, the majority of crimes that
culminate in conviction of juveniles result in 602 status. These
juveniles residing in Shasta County may attend school at Live Oak
Community School or Education Resource Center if they are not in
custody; they attend Juvenile Hall School or Crystal Creek Camp
School while in custody. Students often move amongst the school
placements depending on their behavior in and out of school.
Students who attend the Community School portion of the SCOE
Schools may violate the terms and conditions of their probation,
resulting in placement in Juvenile Hall or Crystal Creek Camp, the
Court School portion of SCOE. These juveniles may also commit
new offenses, which bring the same result. Conversely, students
who are exited from custody in Juvenile Hall or Crystal Creek Camp
will return to the Community School portion of the program. Thus,
there is a great deal of interplay between the Court and Commun
ity Schools, and it is not an uncommon scenario for 602 status
students to be highly mobile between the SCOE Court and
Community Schools.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
Students on Informal Probation (654)
Students attending the SCOE Court and Community Schools
who are on informal probation (654) are referred to the community
portion of the school only. Students on formal probation (602) are
eligible to attend all SCOE Court and Community Schools (Live
Oak, Educational Resource Center, Juvenile Hall School, Crystal
Creek Boy's Camp), but those on informal probation may only
attend the community school campuses (Live Oak, Educational
Resource Center). Those on informal probation were referred by
the SARB process. They are enrolled with informal probation
status, which serves as a funding model for increased revenue
limits for Community Schools.
School Attendance Review Boards (SARBs) were created by
California state statute in 1974 and implemented in 1975. In
establishing SARB's, lawmakers were setting forth a method of
coordinating school, community, and home efforts to deal with
student attendance and behavior problems. SARB boards are
created at the county office of education or school district level,
and seek to maximize the use of all available resources and
services, avoid unnecessary duplication of resources to resolve
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
attendance and behavior problems, and divert from the juvenile
justice system students with school-related problems.
References to SARB are found in Education Code sections
48320 et. seq. Local SARB's are composed of school representa
tives, parents, and members of the community at large, including
law enforcement, probation, mental health, welfare, various service
agencies, and the district attorney's office (Education Code section
48321). The members meet regularly, typically monthly during the
school year, to combine their expertise and resources on behalf of
the students referred to them. Members work collaboratively to
recommend solutions to alleviate situations that contribute to
truancy, attendance, and behavior problems. It is often a combin
ation of two or more of these circumstances. Students are referred
to the local SARB if they have persistent attendance and behavior
problems in school and when the normal avenues of classroom,
school, or district intervention do not resolve the situation.
When the SARB meet with referred students and their
parents of guardians, the members' goal is to identify a solution or
appropriate resources for resolving the students' problems. School
districts have a number of options available, including school-based
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
solutions, directing students and families to counseling services,
home and hospital instruction, independent study, and school
transfers (often to county-administered court and Community
Schools).
There are instances when students, parents and/or guardians
are unresponsive to SARB intervention. In that instance, school
district officials gather documentation that states that the students,
parents and/or guardians have "failed to respond to directives of
the SARB or to services provided" (Education Code 48263). In the
event that the SARB makes this finding, the case comes within the
jurisdiction of the court. It is the goal of SARB to assist students
and their families in understanding that truancy, attendance, and
behavior issues are a mandate, and to further assist in compliance
with this mandate.
At the SARB meeting, members work to identify the problem,
assess the contributing factors, discuss the school's position, and
recommend strategies for alleviating the problem(s). The SARB
formalizes the proposed solutions in a contract with the student,
which is signed by the student, parents or guardians. The SARB
chairperson clarifies all of the contract agreements made, which
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
should include an agreement that the student will attend school or
improve school behavior, a statement of responsibilities of all
persons involved, specific referrals made to community services or
agencies, and follow-up dates by which the school must report to
the SARB the student's progress in meeting the contract terms.
When a student enrolls in the SCOE Court and Community
Schools as a result of 654 or 602 probation status, they are
advised that the student's eventual return to school in their district
of residence is dependent upon their performance at the SCOE
Court and Community Schools. Students on 654 status must
maintain a grade point average of 2.0 or better, attend 95% of all
school days (unless absences are excused due to medical or
personal reasons approved by school officials and probation
personnel), and maintain a high level as defined by the Classroom
Management Level Plan. Students on 602 status must meet the
same requirements as well as refraining from violation of probation
conditions or committing another crime or crimes.
Student Supervision and Educational Practice
In the Shasta County Court and Community Schools,
professional educative practice and probation supervision are
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
united in the mission of educating students. The specific roles and
duties of probation personnel, as well as probation status, are of
special interest when evaluating probation supervision and its role
in performance of students identified as living in poverty in SCOE
Court and Community Schools. The role of the Shasta County
Juvenile Probation Department is an integral part of a collaborative
approach between the school, parent, student, and community in
serving the needs of the students in SCOE Court and Community
Schools. Probation and school staff must work cooperatively in
solving problems and determining appropriate interventions for
students. Case management function is an integral portion of this
responsibility. Duty expectations include, but are not limited to:
1. Designating students for supervision under Section 654
of the Welfare and Institutions Code, working with parents and
student, answering and describing condition of probation, and
obtaining appropriate signatures.
2. Supervision of students designated as wards of the
court, or 602 Formal Probation status.
3. Transporting students when necessary.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
4. Counseling and advising students. Working with
teachers and students to develop behavior plans.
5. Sitting on School Attendance and Review Board (SARB)
as appropriate.
6. Doing follow-up visits to student's home regarding
attendance and behavior issues, drug or alcohol issues, and other
pertinent issues.
7. Consult with site administrators regarding in-school
suspension of students that are on probation.
8. Providing an updated monthly case list with
probationary status of students identified to SCOE program
administrators.
9. Sitting on Student Study Teams (SST) and
Individualized Education Plans (IEP) as appropriate.
10. Providing random searches of students when
appropriate (reasonable suspicion).
11. Providing follow-up on dispositional hearings for
students.
12. Keeping school registrars advised of incoming and
outgoing enrollments for all SCOE Court and Community Schools.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
13. Providing intervention, support services, caseload
management and supervision, and initiating legal action as
provided by the law.
14. Acting as a liaison between SCOE and other appropri
ate programs for probationary students in the programs.
15. Meeting regularly with appropriate school staff to
discuss concerns regarding individual students.
16. Maintaining linkages with the school to which to
probation staff is assigned.
17. Other duties as mutually agreed upon.
Poverty and Shasta County Court and
Community Schools Students
Shasta County Court and Community Schools are considered
100% free and reduced lunch schools, and the students are, in
many cases, from multi-generational poverty. Although the
discussion of the literature that addresses the role of poverty in
education will be featured in chapter 3 of this dissertation, it is
helpful to note some aspects of poverty as they relate to the
question.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
Ruby Payne (1998) has identified 10 features of poverty that
serve to underscore the role of poverty in the lives of these
students.
1. Poverty is relative (just as wealth is relative to middle
class). Poverty or wealth only exists in relationship to known
quantities or expectations.
2. Poverty occurs in all races and in all countries.
3. Economic class is a continuous line, not a clear-cut
distinction. Individuals are stationed all along the continuum of
income; they sometimes move on the continuum as well.
4. Generational poverty and situational poverty are
different. Generational poverty is defined as being in poverty for
two generations or longer. Situational poverty is for a shorter time
and is caused by circumstances.
5. Poverty research is based on patterns. All patterns
have exceptions.
6. An individual brings with him/her the hidden rules of
the class in which he/she was raised. Even though the income of
the individual may increase significantly, many of the patterns of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
24
thought, social interaction, cognitive strategies etc. remain with the
individual.
7. Schools and businesses operate from middle-class
norms and use the hidden rules of middle class. These norms and
hidden rules are not directly taught in schools or in businesses.
8. For students to be successful, we must understand
their hidden rules and teach them the rules that will make them
successful at school and at work.
9. We can neither excuse students nor scold them for not
knowing; as educators we must teach them and provide support,
insistence, and expectations.
10. To move from poverty to middle class or middle class
to wealth, an individual must exchange relationships for
achievement (pp. 10-11).
Throughout this study, probation supervision, students
identified as living in poverty, and the relationships between the
two will be carefully examined through the specific lens of
experience in Shasta County Court and Community Schools. It is
hoped that this study will benefit the ongoing mission of Shasta
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
County Court and Community Schools, as well as all schools that
serve this population of students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
There has been significant research available concerning
educating and supervising students identified as at-risk. Greg
Druian and Jocelyn Butler (1987) reviewed the research concerning
at-risk students, and identified the key characteristics of effective
schools. These can be organized into three key points. The first is
that of leadership. The role of the leadership team is to focus the
entire school on learning. The priorities are established; every
action is consistent with the goals set forth. The second point
focuses on climate. All staff and students share the expectation
that all students can learn. Students come to school with the
expectation that they are safe and that they will learn. The third
and final point, underscores classroom instruction and
management. Effective teachers use a variety of instructional
methods and techniques. Activities are tied to clear instructional
objectives. There is frequent monitoring and evaluation of student
progress toward these objectives.
Druian and Butler (1987) found commonalities among the
research. The primary characteristic of successful programs for at-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
risk youth seems to be a strong, even intense, level of commitment
on the part of the instructional staff. A clear belief that the student
will succeed permeates the campus. Strong leadership is another
contributing factor. Peer teaching and cooperative learning are two
approaches that seem to work particularly well with at-risk
students. Finally, successful programs are characterized as having
fair, though strict, programs of discipline that clarify offenses and
consequences administered in a consistent manner. All support
staff, such as Probation Staff, are integral in this scenario.
Ronald Edmonds (1979) has asserted that "all children are
eminently educable and that the behavior of the school is critical in
determining the quality of that education" (Druian & Butler, 1987,
p. 8). Edmonds found the following characteristics to be commonly
held in effective schools.
1. Strong administrative leadership;
2. A climate of expectations in which "no children are
permitted to fall below minimum but efficacious levels of
achievement;
3. An orderly, but not rigid, atmosphere;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
4. An attitude that student learning takes precedence
over all other school activities; and
5. Frequent monitoring of pupil progress in relationship to
instructional objectives.
It is essential to recognize, among all points, the role of super
vision in successful school settings.
Successful programs have also adopted strategies that have
been adapted to the uniqueness of the setting, the characteristics
of the students, and the transitory nature of at-risk populations
(Guerin, 1999). Phillips (1999) describes strategies and content
areas found to be practical with low-achieving students. One was
an alternative assessment tool, involving the use of brief criteria to
quickly determine a student's academic skill and level. The use of
thematic units of curriculum was highlighted for skill-building and
presentation activities. These feature many short units and
subunits providing multiple opportunities for success and closure.
Student information and projects collected in portfolios provided a
history of the student's work and achievement in school. Topics of
interest to students, such as culture, holidays, products and
controversy help keep each learner interested and motivated. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
use of technology was successful with many students who had not
been reached by traditional instruction. Transition activities
including service learning and social skills were seen as essential
for students as they planned to re-enter the mainstream
community.
A study of 32 alternative high schools in Virginia (Title 1,
1999) disclosed that although all programs focused on teaching
core academic subjects, 10% or more of the schools included
career awareness and employment skills, anger management skills,
life skills, group counseling, peer mediation, and conflict resolution
skills as supplementary subjects. The Virginia report recom
mended that all teachers working in alternative schools should be
trained in reading remediation, behavior management strategies,
and counseling techniques. It also suggested that alternative
schools returning students to conventional, comprehensive high
schools should employ a "transition specialist." The report also
highlighted four competency areas for those who teach in an
alternative setting.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
1. Instructional strategies. Reading and literacy
improvement, trust, goal setting and motivation strategies,
adapted integrated curriculum, portfolios and high interest topics;
2. Behavior/responsibility. Social responsibility (a caring,
disciplines community that honors civility, service and diversity,
and fosters moral and ethical attitudes and behavior), restorative
justice (a process which addresses both the needs of the victim
and offender, seeing incidents as "teachable moments") and
personal change, positive classroom and social behavior manage
ment, curriculum-linked social skills, coping skills, gang awareness,
conflict resolution and self-esteem building;
3. Community/language. Cultural variations, celebra
tions, and learning styles, family involvement and school liaison,
service learning, and second language acquisition;
4. Institutions/cu\ture. Correctional and isolated environ
ments and systems, transitional support.
Examples from traditional school sites are helpful as well.
Roberto Zarate, (1997) principal of a high poverty school in Texas,
writes of a changed focus in his school from a model of remediation
to one of academic excellence. He writes that the first step was to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
change expectations for everyone in the school culture, especially
the students. The overall school experience, states Zarate, should
be summed up in the word quality. He admonishes that we must
cease making excuses for the students, and focus instead on
quality in the school. This should be reflected in teaching stra
tegies, expectations, and resources. It is essential that the school
have a high expectation of student performance, both behaviorally
and academically. The research clearly indicates that high poverty
and high academic and behavioral performance are not mutually
exclusive. When there is a commitment to high quality throughout
the school organization, measurable changes emerge in student
performance.
Zarate (1997) also notes that increasing expectations for
student learning is another important ingredient necessary for
school improvement. Blaming the students' home situations or
socioeconomic status is common among teachers, administrators,
and school boards of low-performing schools. There is a general
conviction that low performance goes hand-in-hand with challeng
ing home situations and/or low socioeconomic status. In the high
performing schools that serve a low socioeconomic clientele,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
students are given challenging curricula, and are expected to
succeed. Not only that, but each child is regarded as an asset.
Schools experiencing high poverty and high performance
have a clearly stated vision of their students' success, and invest
their energy and resources in the fulfillment of this vision. Every
stakeholder participates in an expectation of quality.
Peter McDermott (1999) conducted a study of 36 highly
effective teachers working in low socioeconomic schools in New
York. They sought to learn why these teachers did not (a) use
their seniority to transfer to middle or upper class schools,
(b) what makes teachers effective in high poverty schools, (c) the
qualities and skills needed in that particular environment, and
(d) the students' perspective concerning the qualities of effective
teachers.
While all of these teachers extolled the ideal of parental
involvement, all spoke of the less than ideal parental involvement
experienced in these schools. Parent conferences, Back to School
Night, and Open House were cited as being poorly attended.
Understanding that a lack of parental involvement was the norm,
these teachers shifted the responsibility for learning to the teachers
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
themselves. They adopted an attitude of recognizing a less than
ideal reality, and sought to extend themselves to the parental role
when it came to schoolwork. The support supplied by the proba
tion office also serves to ameliorate the lack of positive parental
involvement.
These teachers also sought to integrate rich cultural issues
into the classroom, using food, music, literature, dance, and guest
speakers. Because these students came from diverse cultural
backgrounds, they tended to view their teachers as caring and
kind, taking time to make personal connections with them. The
students also highly valued teachers who were able to communi
cate without yelling and who kept their sense of humor.
Statistics reveal that a disproportional number of students in
alternative education come from poverty, are bilingual, and come
from minority groups. Characteristics of these students include:
(a) poor literacy and academic skills, (b) inadequate social,
(c) emotional and behavioral skills, (d) alienation from school,
(e) low self-esteem, (f) limited language proficiency, (g) ethnic
or racial discriminations, (h) impulsivity and poor judgment,
(i) limited or unavailable family support, (j) antisocial peer
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
influence, and (k) lack of positive role models (Payne, 1998,
p. 46).
A term that proves helpful in considering the education of at-
risk students has been termed by Margaret C. Wang (Wang,
Haertel, & Walberg, 1998), "Educational resilience describes how
children, whose lifestyle, cultural and economic background are
marginalized, rise above these circumstances through education.
Research points to the fact that teachers can foster educational
resiliency by using some specific, identified strategies" (p. 1).
Teachers' caring attitudes and high expectations can have a
positive impact on students. Teachers promoting resilience
frequently display their caring by showing interest and concern for
students, expressing respect, and holding their students to a
higher level of expectation. Further, teachers' assumption about
their students' capabilities affect how they conduct their classes.
Believing that all children can learn and contribute to society, holds
them to higher academic and citizenship standards. Instead of
assuming disruptive students cannot learn, teachers must learn to
develop different and varied strategies for reaching them (p. 13).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
However, high expectations and positive attitudes along are
not enough to promote resilience. Powerful, research-based
instructional practices that facilitate learning for students at risk of
school failure must be combined with caring and belief in the
students. Effective classroom teachers function more as facilitators
of learning than transmitters of knowledge (Wang et al., 1998).
Facilitating student learning gives the learner a greater autonomy
and encourages students to take responsibility for their personal
learning. In learner-centered classrooms, teachers observe
individuals and groups as they interact, intervening to assist
students by modeling appropriate behaviors and problem-solving
strategies. Teachers ask higher order questions and identify
resources. Students learn to direct their own learning, and are
increasingly responsible, organizing their time and demonstrating
what they have learned. In effective classrooms, asserts Wang,
teachers connect students' existing knowledge and interests to new
subject matter, providing resources and guidance.
At-risk students must be taught strategies for learning.
Setting specific learning goals, underlining key information,
mapping out content to be learned, organizing new material by
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
conceptual categories, and sharing strategies for knowing when to
ask for assistance are necessary. The at-risk student does not
inherently bring this ability to the classroom (nor does the non at-
risk student, for that matter). The development of learning
strategies and help-seeking behaviors result in students becoming
more independent in their learning. This rich, learner-centered
curriculum forms the essential foundation of educational resilience
(Wang et al., 1998). In the learner-centered classroom, the
curriculum is more often advanced than remedial, and is inter
disciplinary. Meaningful content must interconnect with real-world
issues, introducing as many perspectives as possible. The higher
level thinking skills of problem solving, decision making, and
application of knowledge do not advance with emphasis on drill and
practice, worksheet oriented curriculum that so often typifies the
educational experience of the at-risk student.
Wang et al. (1998) concludes by saying that a set of
activities and strategies are not enough to create educational
resilience in students. Teachers must adopt a vision of students as
people who make choices, acquire knowledge, and develop skills
for achieving their unique potential in life. Ultimately, this vision is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
empowered by high expectations, implementing research-based
educational practices, and a rigorous curriculum. It should also be
noted, as many have said, that students do not care how much the
teacher knows until they know how much the teacher cares.
Bonnie Benard (1997) describes how educators and schools
can foster resiliency in students who find themselves at-risk due to
family economics brought on by drug abuse, child abuse, teen
pregnancy, violence, and school failure. Benard writes that this
categorizing of students by the economic conditions of their
parents, although many times succeeding in procuring necessary
services to the families, has many times resulted in obscuring
recognition of their strengths and capabilities. Further, she states
that the starting point for building on students capabilities is the
"adults' belief that the children have an innate resilience." Benard
then outlines resilience skills as the ability to form relationships, to
problem solve, to form a sense of identity, and to plan with the
future in mind. Of special note is Benard's research, which
indicates that developing these skills is not the cause of resiliency,
but rather the outcome of resiliency. In her research, Benard
found that between 50% and 70% of all children born into high-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
risk environments grow up to be successful as measured by
societal indicators. Certainly, probation supervision may be seen
as playing a positive role, in concert with education professionals,
in building resilience.
Teachers, schools, and probation supervisors have the power
to trans-form lives by providing and modeling the factors that
enable positive development. Benard has identified the "turn
around teacher," one who helps students to recognize their
strengths and understand that they have personal power. This is
accomplished in three ways:
1. The student learns that adversity in life must not be
taken personally.
2. The student grows to understand that adversity in life
need not be permanent.
3. The student becomes aware that setbacks are not all-
encompassing.
"Turnaround teachers" use the students' strengths, interests,
goals and dreams as the beginning point of learning (Benard,
1997, p. 2). There must be the belief and expectation at the
school site, shared by students, teachers, administrators, staff and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
parents, that resilience can be developed. Not only can resilience
be developed in students, but administrators can foster it in
teachers by creating an environment that promotes caring
relationships among colleagues, positive beliefs, expectations and
trust, and providing opportunities and time to reflect, dialogue and
make decisions together. Benard notes that the first step in
creating a school that fosters resilience is to share the belief among
staff that resilience can be developed from an innate foundation.
The research supports the necessity for the teacher to
establish a foundation of trust for the at-risk student to begin to
succeed in school. In the Shasta County Court and Community
Schools, educators work with probation officials to the process of
building trust. At-risk students come to school having learned that
that the world is an unpredictable, chaotic and often unfair place.
Many of these students see little hope for the future. They have
difficulty understanding that school often asks of them different
skills and behavior patterns than are expected of them at home, or
that have been modeled for them there. A supportive environment
is essential for at-risk students to begin to grasp a sense of hope
as well as exhibiting desired behavior.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
Research has also shown that academic support to at-risk
students is often remedial. There is a joining of low-level curri
culum along with low expectations. With that in mind, when
students come to school behind in foundational skills, the amount
and quality of instruction they receive should be increased, not
decreased. The reality for at-risk education has too often been
"drill and kill" combined with punitive class structures. That must
be replaced by powerful, research-based instructional strategies
that facilitate learning for at-risk students coupled with a culture of
caring and belief will build resiliency in students.
How will this affect SCOE students? More to the point, are
these students up to the task? The thought, for a great many
years, was that Alternative Education students are not capable of
such academic rigor. However, the research says that the opposite
is true. Knapp, Shields and Turnbull (1992) and their study,
Academic Challenge for the Children of Poverty, dispels the idea
that students from poverty are best taught "the basics," and
instead find that higher level learning works best with this
population of students. Examples of this type of instruction
includes emphasizing meaning and understanding, embedding
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
skills in the context of other academic disciplines, and helping
students to make the connections to experiences outside of school.
In this study, higher-level learning was proven to work well with
both high poverty, as well as higher socioeconomic levels.
Conversely, the "basics" approach was not helpful to either group.
The first major change is that SCOE Court and Community
Schools must be responsible to make certain that students enroll
there learn and meet the standards. The schools will have an API
(Academic Performance Index), as well as meet the AYP (Annual
Yearly Progress), although this is done through the lens of ASAM
(Alternative School Accountability Measures). No longer will
teachers in the Court and Community Schools be allowed auton
omy. What schools have been adjusting to for the past 5 or so
years, so now are the Court and Community Schools as well. This
has required a great deal of planning, training and articulation.
Anne Lewis (2001) cites Linda Darling-Hammond, who has written
these insightful words in The Right to Learn: A Blueprint for
Creating Schools That Work:
The assumption has been that students who persist in failure
are students who cannot learn. Conversely, the education
that we more and more require for fulfilling lives and a
peaceful and productive society demands that children learn
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
42
to understand concepts as well as facts, in classrooms where
they link and apply ideas, produce their own work, and learn
to cooperate productively with diverse peers. This requires,
in turn, that teachers take account of children's abilities and
needs in order to engage them in active in-depth learning
and create a classroom setting that stimulates in-depth
learning and create a classroom setting that stimulates in-
depth understanding; that the results be inspected by
demonstrations of authentic performance; and that learning
problems be met with thoughtful analysis and fresh
approaches to helping individual children succeed. The
assumption here is that all children can learn. The need is
for teaching strategies and school organizations that make
that possible, (p. 51)
Lewis (2001) adds these words:
If a school in a poor community in San Antonio, Chicago, or
Atlanta can bring almost all of its students to high levels of
academic success, then why not the school in my commun
ity? Perhaps, the answer to 'why not' is that many of us
assumed that this level of achievement could not be attained
or at least could not be attained at 'my school.' Perhaps the
answer is that many simply did not know where to begin,
what to do, or how to proceed to move from current levels of
performance to a much higher level of academic expectation,
(p. xi)
At SCOE Court and Community Schools, administrators, teachers
and staff are working hard to identify ways to raise the academic
bar. Probation officials serve as a necessary support in this effort.
Federal, state and district accountability demands that low-
performing schools and districts must find ways for their students
to succeed academically. For a multiplicity of reasons, children in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
poverty are at the greatest risk of being left behind in school. For
example, children in high poverty schools are more likely to be
taught by noncertificated teachers than children in middle and
upper socioeconomic status schools. Further, teachers in high
poverty schools are more likely to be teaching in areas out of their
major and state certification than are teachers in higher
socioeconomic schools (Lewis, 2001).
This can be remedied by strong leadership. A Dana Center
study found that surveyed high poverty, high achieving elementary
schools share the common factor of strong school leadership:
"Their sense of mission was articulated in every aspect of their
planning, organization, and use of resources" (Lewis, 2001, p. 8)
This focus drove the key decisions made by the school leadership
team, including instructional materials and strategies, use of
financial resources, teacher assignment, and the use of classroom
and building space. The 26 schools in the Dana Center study had a
70% passing rate in reading and math.
This kind of success requires purposeful design in building
site-based leadership. According to Lein, Johnson, and Ragland
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
(1997), there are several steps that can be taken to build the
school leadership team:
1. Providing opportunities for leaders to visit and learn
from other schools with similar demographics that achieved higher
levels of success;
2. Assisting leaders in accessing, understanding, and
using achievement data to guide decision-making processes;
3. Ensuring that leaders have adequate time to engage in
instructional support efforts on a daily basis;
4. Giving leaders easy and regular access to central office
personnel who can help principals overcome barriers or respond
constructively to problems;
5. Giving leaders time for their own professional
development around promising instructional practices;
6. Mentoring principals through processes for identifying,
supporting, and, if necessary, firing personnel performing below
expectations (p. 5).
Lein et al. (1997) also identify six common themes of high
poverty, high achieving schools. It begins with no excuses.
"Educators at these schools tended to believe that they could
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
45
succeed with any student, regardless of the nature of the home
situation, the student's previous performance, resource difficulties,
or whatever other constraints might confront the school" (p. 5).
Overcoming the obstacles facing many of these students required
homework completed after school, morning wake-up calls to the
home, calls home for positive as well as negative reports, and
other over-and-beyond types of measures on the part of the
teacher. Again, probation supervision has the potential to be an
active part in this process.
Others have pointed to the need for schools to take a high-
touch approach with students and their families from poverty. At
Logan Elementary in West Virginia, 76% of the students live in
identified poverty. Teachers are required to do home visits, with a
goal beyond communication in mind. There is a belief, based on
the research of poverty education expert Ruby Payne, that class
room discipline problems can be cut significantly by the teachers'
having first-hand knowledge of students' home situation. This also
allows parents to get to know teachers in a nonthreatening setting.
"I called one father and asked him if we could make a scheduled
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
46
home visit and he said, Tm on home confinement, I'm not going
anywhere. You can come anytime'" (Barker, 2002, p. 5).
It is essential to keep the purpose of the school before all
stakeholders.
There exists, in successful schools, a strong culture and clear
sense of purpose that defines the general thrust and nature
of life for their inhabitants. At the same time, a great deal of
freedom is given to teachers and others as to how these
essential core values are to be honored and realized. This
combination of tight structure around clear and explicit
themes representing the core of the school's culture . . . may
well be the key reason why these schools are so successful.
(Lewis, 2001, p. 8)
Significantly, teachers began to "define their jobs based on
what needed to be done and not on traditional notions of work
days" (Lein et al., 1997, p. 6); the school experimented carefully
with new ways to improve teaching and learning. Experimentation
has been multifaceted, featuring pilot tests of materials, organiza
tion of the school day, use of technology, use of interventions, and
the assignment of support staff; everyone is part of the solution.
The study asserts,
Teachers at all grade levels in both regular and special
programs, professional support personnel such as nurses,
counselors, bus drivers, campus administrators, custodians,
school office staff, cafeteria workers, instructional aides,
librarians, parent volunteers, part-time personnel, commun
ity leaders and students were often enlisted to be a part of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
the team that would lead a student to success at school
(sense of family). (Lein et al., 1997, p. 7)
Not only were all at school viewed as part of a team, but also
part of a school family. The goal in all that was said, done or
conveyed at school created "a powerful sense of belonging" (Lein
et al., 1997, p. 11) among everyone involved with the school;
collaboration and trust. In the schools studied, "openness,
honesty, and trust characterized most of the interactions among
school personnel . . . they openly shared concerns and successes
with each other. They provided assistance to each other and
learned from one another" (p. 11); passion for ongoing learning
and growing. Celebrating success was an important aspect in
these schools, but there was no resting on past victories. "There
was almost an immediate redefinition of higher goals" (p. 12), and
planning for improvement was part of a continuing process.
The heart of student achievement remains the quality of the
teaching delivered to the students. Regardless of the innovation
within the school, a good teacher will ultimately be the foundation
for student success. Linda Darling-Hammond and Deborah
Loewenberg Bell (1998) note that teacher expertise accounts for
approximately 40% of the variation in student achievement
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
48
(expertise was identified as education, certification, and experi
ence). Researcher William Sanders found that,
Elementary students taught by ineffective teachers three
years in a row, scored significantly lower than students
taught by highly effective teachers. In fact, three years in a
row with poor teaching almost wiped out a student's chances
of keeping up in school. (Lewis, 2001, p. 20)
With an assertion such as this, the question arises concerning
what separates highly effective from ineffective teachers. Lewis
(2001) cites the Center on Organization and Restructuring of
Schools at the University of Wisconsin/ Madison, which identified
three characteristics of "intellectual work" found in effective
classrooms:
1. These teachers facilitated the students' constructing
new knowledge based on what they had previously learned through
organizing, synthesizing, and explaining and evaluating
information.
2. The students participated in inquiry, using higher-level
thinking and communication to express their ideas and conclusions.
3. Students were shown through a variety of means how
to use this knowledge outside of the confines of school, and
demonstrated their ability to do so.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
The role of professional development cannot be under
estimated. Tucker and Codding (1998) write, "The way educators
think about professional development is intimately related to the
question as to what is required to turn teaching into a true
profession" (p. 122). SCOE Court and Community School leader
ship speaks of the need to see instructional improvements in the
classrooms, and has dedicated much in-service training with this
goal in mind. Fred Newman and Gary Wehlage (1995) suggest six
"structural conditions" in schools that will enhance these classroom
environments. In large measure, these are now evidenced at
SCOE Court and Community Schools:
1. Shared governance that increases teachers' influence
over school policy and practice;
2. Interdependent work structures, such as teaching
teams that encourage collaboration;
3. Staff development that enhances technical skills
consistent with school missions for high-quality learning;
4. Deregulation that provides autonomy for schools to
pursue a vision of high intellectual standards;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
5. Small school size, which increases opportunities for
communication and trust; and
6. Parent involvement in a broad range of school affairs.
Newmann and Wehlage (1995) also advocate the use of
"authentic pedagogy," which includes higher order thinking, deep
knowledge, substantive conversation, and connections that go
beyond the classroom.
In this same vein, Knapp et al. (1992) and his study,
Academic Challenge for the Children of Poverty, dispel the idea that
students from poverty are best taught "the basics," and instead
find that higher-level learning works best with this population of
students. Examples of this type of instruction includes empha
sizing meaning and understanding, embedding skills in the context
of other academic disciplines, and helping students to make the
connections to experiences outside of school. In this study,
higher-level learning was proven to work well with both high
poverty as well as higher socio-economic levels. Conversely, the
"basics" approach was not helpful to either group.
There are some essential emphases that are necessary to
consider in the context of court and Community Schools. A study
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
51
of 32 alternative high schools in Virginia (USDE, 1999) disclosed
that although all programs focused on teaching core academic
subjects, 10% or more of the schools included (a) career aware
ness and employment skills, (b) anger management skills, (c) life
skills, (d) group counseling, (e) peer mediation, and (f) conflict
resolution skills as supplementary subjects. The Virginia report
recommended that all teachers working in alternative schools
should be trained in reading remediation, behavior management
strategies, and counseling techniques. It also suggested that
alternative schools returning students to conventional, compre
hensive high schools should employ a "transition specialist." The
report also highlighted four competency areas for those who teach
in an alternative setting.
1. Instructional strategies. Reading and literacy improve
ment, trust, goal setting and motivation strategies, adapted
integrated curriculum, portfolios and high interest topics;
2. Behavior/responsibility. Social responsibility (a caring,
disciplines community that honors civility, service and diversity,
and fosters moral and ethical attitudes and behavior); restorative
justice (a process which addresses both the needs of the victim
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
and offender, seeing incidents as "teachable moments"); and
personal change, positive classroom and social behavior manage
ment, curriculum-linked social skills, coping skills, gang awareness,
conflict resolution and self-esteem building;
3. Community/language. Cultural variations, celebra
tions, and learning styles, family involvement and school liaison,
service learning, and second language acquisition;
4. Institutions/culture. Correctional and isolated environ
ments and systems, transitional support.
An Issue of Equity
The "why not" spoken of by Anne Lewis, when pointing to
turnaround schools in San Antonio, Chicago and Atlanta, speaks to
the education of all students. In America, this has historically been
an ongoing discussion in the halls of schools as well as the court
rooms throughout the nation. In Brown v. Board of Education,
Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote, "It is doubtful that any child may
reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the
opportunity of an education" (Buzuvis, 2001, p. 2). It is under
stood that Brown spoke to the issue of racial segregation and
desegregation in public schools, yet this landmark decision also
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
speaks to the great economic divide that exists in American public
education today.
For the last 30 years, state Supreme Courts have interpreted
state constitutions to require state education systems to
meet basic requirements of adequacy, equity, or both . . .
(and) have been as controversial and as essential to the
American ideals of democracy and equality as the reform that
Brown mandated, (p. 2)
The courts have in the past, and will continue to have, an
enormous impact on the future of students and schools in America.
Frederick Wirt and Michael Kirst (1997) write, "Courts as policy
makers, law as reflection of politically dominant values, and judges
as agents transmitting views of what that law looks like . . . in
recent decades, courts have greatly affected school policymaking"
(p. 334).
Federal, state and district accountability demands that low-
performing schools and districts must find ways for their students
to succeed academically. It is the law, but it is also more than
that. Those who have chosen leadership in schools that serve
students in poverty understand that education is the pathway for
these students to overcome these circumstances in their own lives.
Failing schools and districts will ultimately play a large role in
continuation of the cycle of poverty, and no one entered the field of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
education to be a part of such an outcome. The most basic reason
that people have chosen education as their field is be a part of the
success, not failure, of students.
For a multiplicity of reasons, children in poverty are at the
greatest risk of being left behind in school. For example, children
in high-poverty schools are more likely to be taught by non
certificated teachers than children in middle and upper socio
economic status schools. Further, teachers in high-poverty schools
are more likely to be teaching in areas out of their major and state
certification than are teachers in higher socioeconomic schools
(Lewis, 2001).
There has also been progress to close the gap that exists in
the amount of money spent in high and low socioeconomic schools.
The California state Supreme Court declared in Serrano v Priest
that the "quality of public education may not be the function of the
wealth of . . . a pupil's parents and neighbors" (Wirt & Kirst, 1997,
p. 272). This type of decision was adjudicated in other states as
well.
The pioneering cases in Texas and Kentucky offer insights
into the effect of litigation have had in overhauling state
finance systems in those states. In Texas . . . the state now
spends three times as much on poor school districts as it
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
does on wealthy ones, following years of litigation.
(Washburn, 2001, p. 9)
In Kentucky, the state Supreme Court decided in the 1989
decision Rose v. Council for Better Education that the state's
educational system was unconstitutional. The legislature then
made comprehensive changes in the state educational system. By
1992, just 3 years after the Rose decision, the gap between the
richest 20% of the state's school districts and the poorest districts
shrunk by 52% (Washburn, 2001).
In Levittown v. Nyquist, 27 school districts, four urban school
boards challenged the state's school finance system in an argu
ment concerning equity. The plaintiffs claimed that per-pupil
spending discrepancies violated state and federal guarantees. The
trial court agreed with the plaintiff's case, and even expanded the
finding, saying that not only was there a violation of state and
federal education law, but also state and federal equal protection
clauses. The appellate court concurred regarding the state and
federal guarantees, but did not uphold the finding concerning the
protection clauses. Then the New York State Supreme Court
reversed the lower courts and declared the state school finance
system constitutional. The court recognized that there were per-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
pupil spending discrepancies, but ruled that this did not constitute
a violation. The court did keep the door open, however. They
ruled that there may have been a constitutional violation if "gross
and glaring" inadequacy could be shown. This resulted in a
subsequent lawsuit. Reform Educational Financing Inequities
Today (REFIT) v. Cuomo was similar to Levittown but focused on
interdistrict per-pupil spending, which was demonstrably wide.
Even though REFIT believed that they had proven that "gross and
glaring" spending discrepancies existed, the New York court again
rejected the challenge (Dyson, 2002).
The move toward standard objectives of learning has also
emerged as an issue of equity. Anne Lewis (2001) asserts that
"schools serving high numbers of poor and/or racial minorities
cannot make improvements based merely on what they "feel"
is the right thing to do. They need standards as benchmarks"
(p. 26). Equity consultant Phyllis McClure recommends disaggre
gating the test score data in many ways, such as race, gender,
limited English proficiency, disability, free and reduced lunch
eligibility, and Title I status. Analyzing the data, according to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
McClure (1996), will allow schools to discover how best to target
change and allocate resources.
A key portion of No Child Left Behind is the mandate that
there be annual testing in Grades 3 through 8 in Reading and
Math, in Science by 2007, and for high school students to test in
core areas at least once. It ties federal assistance and sanctions to
student test scores (Cambron-McCabe, McCarthy, & Thomas,
2004).
Maurice Dyson (2002) writes,
Assuming that we have the test data assembled and
collected, what do we do with it? How are we to avoid the
conclusion that our current implementation of high stakes
testing has the practical effect of further punishing students
for the failures of an under-resourced public school system?
(P- 5)
Victoria Bernhardt (2000) advocates moving beyond the
above noted data, but also collecting what she terms "perception
data." These include surveys concerning what students, parents,
teachers and others think about the school, demographic data,
attendance, ethnicity, and gender. This added data, according the
Bernhardt, allows the school to gain an understanding concerning
how specific groups are being served, enabling the school to adjust
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
their strategy accordingly. Recent development in Title I legislation
may bring Bernhardt's ideas to legal fruition.
The largest federal program in K-12 education is Title I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). ESEA was
passed in 1965 riding the wave of ground-breaking civil rights
legislation. As stated in the original document,
Title I provides financial assistance . . . to local educational
agencies serving areas with concentrations of children from
low-income families to expand and improve their educational
programs . . . which contribute particularly to meeting the
special educational needs of educationally deprived children.
(Wong, 2002, p. 2)
There have been revisions through the years, but Title I
continues to fund learning deficient children from low socio
economic families. These revisions, though, have potential strong
impacts. Beginning with a small number of states in the 1970s,
the states have assigned a weighting system in order to identify
students who fall below poverty in their funding models. Beginning
with five states in the 1970s, the majority of states had moved to
this method by the 1990s. The 1994 Improving America's Schools
Act focused on academic accountability in Title I schools. In the No
Child Left Behind Act of 2001, an even stronger focus was imple
mented concerning school performance. Title I of No Child Left
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
Behind features a section entitled, "Improving the Academic
Achievement of the Disadvantaged." There have been some
predictable challenges when it comes to implementation (Wong,
2002).
As No Child Left Behind inspired reforms have swept high-
poverty schools, coordination between Title I and regular curri
culum has been an ongoing challenge. In Minneapolis, a study was
done that makes comparisons between the schools with Title I
school-wide programs and the entire district as a whole. High-
poverty schools were given greater latitude in site-based decisions,
with these sites being empowered in areas of finance and curricu
lum. Local taxes were increased in order to pay for class size
reduction. There was also the development of a "collaborative
services model that encourages coordination of services between
regular program staff and other special needs program staff."
(Wong, 2002, p. 10). School-wide reform has also increased by
additional federal resources provided by Public Law 105-78.
Nicknamed the Obey-Porter legislation, $145 million was
appropriated to support the Comprehensive School Reform
Demonstration Program (CSRD) in Title I nationwide programs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
60
This law provides a set of expectations that are expected of a high-
functioning Title I school. These include four major components.
1. A comprehensive assessment of student performance
in relation to state/district subject area content and assessment
standards, where measurable goals and benchmarks for meeting
the goals must be developed.
2. An instructional program that is grounded in effective,
research-based methods and strategies.
3. The development of a high-quality professional
program for teachers, aides, and other support personnel that
enable all students to meet the state/district performance
standards.
4. The development and implementation of strategies that
increase parental and community involvement (Wong, 2002).
The result of these legislative changes has the potential to
change the face of Title I. Once a categorical program only, now
Title I has emerged center piece of education reform. Now, Title I
has decreed that high-poverty schools are now standards-based.
The Committee on Title I Testing and Assessments makes the
following recommendations:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
61
1. Standards for student performance should be at the
heart of the education improvement system. They set the expec
tations for student learning and signal that all students, regardless
of background or where they happen to attend school, are
expected to demonstrate high levels of knowledge and skill;
content standards, which spell out what students should know and
be able to do in core subjects, should be clear and vigorous;
2. Assessments in standards-based systems should serve
a number of purposes, and no single instrument can serve all
purposes well. Assessment should involve a range of strategies
relevant to individual students, classrooms, schools, districts, and
states;
3. Most of the assessments used should detect the effects
of high-quality teaching. Assessment should allow teachers to use
the results to revise their practices in order to help students
improve;
4. Districts need to measure the performance of young
children. Title I does not require states to establish assessments
before Grade 3, yet 49% of children served by Title I are in Grades
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
3 and below. Districts must take it upon themselves to sample
these students in an authentic and meaningful way;
5. Students should have clear guidelines for including
students with disabilities and English language learners in assess
ment systems, including the extent and type of accommodations
for the students; and
6. Assessment results should be reported so that they
indicate how students perform related to standards. They should
be disaggregated to show which groups of students are in the
greatest need of instructional improvement; and schools need to
link assessment and instruction, strongly and explicitly. One way
to do this is to use analyses of student work as a means of helping
teachers understand the quality of assignments (Elmore &
Rothman, 1999).
It appears that Obey-Porter provides the opportunity for
high-poverty schools to raise student achievement in a strategic,
visible and measurable way. The early findings are encouraging.
Wang, Wong and Kim studied nine urban and three countywide
districts in the 1997-1998 school year, and found that implement-
tation of student performance goals, academic standards and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
assessments, enriched curriculum, student-centered instruction,
and evaluation of student performance were directly related to
legislated academic accountability (Wong, 2002).
There is, of course, controversy that surrounds these
innovations with Title I. In 1995 the Republican leadership in the
United States House of Representatives sought to cut Title I
funding by 19%, as well as cut bilingual education by over 50%,
and special education by 7% (Wong, 2002). This, in part, lead to
the infamous budget shutdown later that year, which proved to be
unpopular with the constituency at large. By 1997, full funding of
Title I (as well as the other above-mentioned categories) had again
regained favor. One of the reasons for this is that, by the late
1990s, education, and a vowed improvement in public educational
services, was on the front-burner of nearly every politician in
America. This was a bi-partisan trend. Nearly all campaigns for
political office, at least at the state level, featured candidates from
both major parties targeting education as their number one
priority. Because of this political milieu, Title I has survived.
However, that does not mean that there will not be significant
changes.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
64
Kenneth Wong (2002) has noted that there are four possible
directions that Title I will take in the future. First, Title I schools
will be encouraged, or perhaps directed, to adopt the models that
have been proven to be effective elsewhere. CSRD calls for there
to be research-driven reforms that aim at improving school
practices. The law identifies six types of research design and
procedures, which include multiple observations and measure
ments on program effects.
Second, Title I schools will be subject to support as well as
sanctions in order to assure high academic standards. CSRD
grants each state authority in taking action against schools, which
are deemed to be failing. The Rand Corporation has suggested
several steps that schools and districts need to implement in order
to insure school reform. These include (a) appropriate matches
between design teams and schools, (b) providing proper funding
for design-based assistance, (c) providing a conductive regulatory
system, and (d) enlisting school personnel toward school improve
ment. Chicago schools are cited as an example where this
approach has been successful. In 1996, the school board
authorized an educational accountability agenda that focused on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
65
raising standards and improving student achievement. Low
performing schools were placed on probation and some were
reconstituted. Social promotion was ended and failing students
were required to attend mandatory summer school. These
measures have lead to improvements in Title I schools and is now
seen as a model for others to follow. Title I has become an
integral part of school reform.
Third, No Child Left Behind mandates that educational
performance will be high for all students. A centerpiece of this
legislation says that achievement gaps will be closed between
income subgroups as well as racial and ethnic subgroups. Not
everyone is enamored with the idea of using testing as a means of
assuring the closing of these gaps. The National Conference of
State Legislatures voiced their opinion to the United States
Congress. "The testing requirement. . . is an egregious example
of a top-down, one-size-fits-all federal reform. There is no
compelling or convincing argument that an effective accountability
system must include an annual testing in multiple subjects" (Wong,
2002, p. 16). Educators from the world of Higher Education,
teachers' unions, administrators, and advocates for various people
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
66
groups have expressed their concerns about high-stakes testing on
social promotion and dropout rates. Federal intervention is also
seen as deleterious to state and local control over education.
"While the final agreement allows for state flexibility in testing
design, the notion that there ought to be system-wide assessment
is now institutionalized in the account-ability framework in Title I
policy" (Wong, 2002, p. 16).
Proponents believe that the implementation of testing and
accountability in schools will improve quality in classrooms
throughout the nation. They assert that tests "can illuminate
problems that otherwise go undetected, allowing teachers to tweak
their lesson plans or add hands-on projects" (Kucerik, 2002, p. 3).
Opponents of the testing movement, however, believe that tests
encourage a "general, one-size fits all" approach, which limits
individual attention and instruction. This will lead to a situation
where individualized, differentiated instruction will be minimized,
claim the foes of testing.
However, the proponents of testing take the opposite
approach. They claim the poor and minority students may well
benefit the most from testing, for a strong accountability system
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
67
will make it impossible to avoid conclusions concerning achieve
ment gaps. "Because states must report results by race, gender,
English fluency, and income, poor and minority kids are less likely
to fall through the cracks or advance to the next grade without the
necessary skills" (Kucerik, 2002, p. 5). There is a sense that the
achievement gaps will not only be recognized and then closed.
Jay P . Heubert writes to these concerns, specifically the
proper attribution of cause. "Use of a test is appropriate only if
educators and others draw proper inferences from a student's test
scores; what requires validation is not the test itself, but rather the
inferences derived from the test scores and the actions that follow"
(as cited in Chidester, 2003, p. 402). Heubert notes that poor test
scores may certainly be attributable to poor instruction and school
conditions, but that there are other factors as well. Poor health on
test day, for example, and student motivation also may contribute
to low performance.
Under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA), states are required to report disaggregated scores on state
assessments to schools. All students must be included in these
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
68
assessments. There are rigorous adaptations for disabled or
limited English proficient students
"[Testing] will even the playing field between sectors of the
population who receive adequate levels of education and those who
have no such guarantee" (Kucerik, 2002, p. 6). The research is
beginning to show that low-income and minority students are
appearing to excel where testing systems are now being used.
Opponents voice the belief that test scores only appear to be
rising, because special education students are being excluded from
results, and the pressure of high stakes testing and test
preparation is causing this population to drop out of school.
Fourth, according to Wong (2002), Title I schools, particu
larly, but not exclusively low performing, inner city schools, have
been the target of voucher initiatives. Those in favor of vouchers
believe that the Title I dollars spent have not been effective. In
many of these initiatives, parents would be allowed to decide
whether local schools are meeting their expectations of academic
and social excellence. Converting Title I grants into vouchers is
nothing new. On three separate occasions in the 1980s, this was
attempted. The best remembered effort was the Equity and Choice
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
69
Act (HR 3821), proposed in 1985. Known as TEACH, this bill would
have allowed Title I students to allow any school in their district, at
the parents' discretion. Although not ultimately passed into law,
this set the stage for the proposals finding their way into the
educational debate of the early 21s t century.
During the presidential campaign of George W. Bush,
vouchers were often mentioned as a viable and even attractive
educational alternative. Upon taking office, President Bush used
vouchers as a bargaining chip to obtain support for annual testing.
However, the specter of vouchers or a voucher-like system has not
gone by the wayside. As an option to turn around schools that are
failing for three consecutive years, the district is required to set
aside 5% of the Title I funds for supplemental services.
Ronald Ferguson (2000) has discussed a chronology of how
achievement gaps emerge, and then evolve, from kindergarten
through high school: Children start kindergarten at different
levels. It is important to understand that children from poverty
have been exposed to a much more limited vocabulary than
children from higher socioeconomic conditions. There is often a
ten-fold difference between low and high socioeconomic children.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
This is also supported by recent legislation. In West Virginia,
legislation passed in 2002 "recommends that all four-year-olds be
enrolled in early childhood education programs within 10 years"
(Barker, 2002, p. 4). State Senate Education Chairman Lloyd
Jackson commented, "We're giving away too much in West Virginia
in those early years" (p. 5).
1. Teachers and parents have limited repertoires to
address gaps. The problem may be most severe for teachers who
do not understand children's home cultures and languages and who
may risk misjudging children developmental^ and teaching them
inappropriately.
2. Children become aware of gaps and internalize stereo
types. As they grow older, children begin to assign stereotypes
onto themselves.
3. Adults' expectations reinforce children's internalization
of stereotypes. This is especially true if teachers are perceived to
favor high achievers.
4. Children who are labeled as low achievers are taught
ineffectively. It is suggested that ability grouping, tailored
carefully to fit the student's current proficiency, is most effective.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
71
5. Low achieving children become less engaged in
academic and more engaged in other pursuits. These students
may be in danger of de-emphasizing their schoolwork if they sense
that a label has been placed on them by the school or their peers.
6. Children lose confidence and develop anxiety that
interferes with their academic performance. One aspect of this is
termed "stereotype anxiety," which stems from the perception that
others expect less of them due to their racial or socioeconomic
status.
7. Children do not work consistently enough to move to
higher achievement levels. This is especially true of students who
are performing below their potential and who lack confidence.
8. Public leaders do not share commitment to the idea
that minority children can excel.
9. Resources alone do not explain the achievement gap
(Ferguson, 2000).
Gerald Anderson, the former superintendent for Brazosport,
Texas School District has cited how, over an 8-year period, the
district used data analysis to focus on improvement and close this
achievement gap. Within 5 years, Brazosport, which at one point
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
72
had half of their schools identified as low performing, had achieved
"exemplary" status. It is interesting to note that NCLB closely
parallels the blueprint of success used at Brazosport. The following
is the 8-step, data-driven instructional process used by the
Brazosport School District:
1. Disaggregation of test scores. Data is analyzed over
the summer and given to teachers at the beginning of the school
year.
2. Development of instructional timelines. Time
allocations are based on the needs of subgroups of students and
the importance of the objectives.
3. Delivery of instructional focus. The district gives each
teacher an instructional focus sheet with objectives, target areas,
instructional dates, and assessment dates.
4. Assessment. After the instructional focus has been
taught, teachers must give an assessment on it. Eighty percent of
the students must master an objective before the teacher can
move on.
5. Tutorials. Students who fail an assessment attend
small tutorial groups that reteach the area.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
6. Enrichment During tutorial time, students who
mastered the material attend enrichment classes. At the
secondary level, students must master basics before taking
electives.
7. Maintenance. Supplementary materials for students
help them retain what they have learned.
8. Monitoring. Principals visit classes daily during the
instructional focus time to monitor progress (Lewis, 2001).
No Child Left Behind does not completely address the
situation of students in poverty, however. A study of 32 alterna
tive high schools in Virginia (USDE, 1999) disclosed that although
all programs focused on teaching core academic subjects, 10% or
more of the schools included (a) career awareness and employ
ment skills, (b) anger management skills, (c) life skills, (d) group
counseling, (e) peer mediation, and (f) conflict resolution skills as
supplementary subjects. The Virginia report recommended that all
teachers working in alternative schools should be trained in reading
remediation, behavior management strategies, and counseling
techniques. It also suggested that alternative schools returning
students to conventional, comprehensive high schools should
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
employ a "transition specialist." The report also highlighted four
competency areas for those who teach in an alternative setting.
1. Instructional strategies. Reading and literacy improve
ment, trust, goal setting and motivation strategies, adapted
integrated curriculum, portfolios and high interest topics;
2. Behavior/responsibility. Social responsibility (a caring,
disciplines community that honors civility, service and diversity;
and fosters moral and ethical attitudes and behavior) restorative
justice (a process which addresses both the needs of the victim
and offender, seeing incidents as "teachable moments"); and
personal change, positive classroom and social behavior manage
ment, curriculum-linked social skills, coping skills, gang awareness,
conflict resolution and self-esteem building;
3. Community/language. Cultural variations,
celebrations, and learning styles, family involvement and school
liaison, service learning, and second language acquisition;
4. Institutions/culture. Correctional and isolated
environments and systems, transitional support.
It is an exciting time to be in school leadership in the SCOE
Court and Community Schools. Many changes and innovations are
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
75
evidenced. As Fullan (2001) writes, "Leading in a culture of
change is about unlocking the mysteries of living organizations"
(p. 46).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY AND THE COLLECTION OF DATA
Collection of data will be achieved through a variety of
means. The quantitative data will consist of comparisons of
California Standards Test (CST) scores, California High School Exit
Exam (CAHSEE) scores, a semester-long comparison of the rate of
disciplinary referrals, and a semester-long survey of the Classroom
Management Level Plan, which will consist of weekly document-
tation of student behavioral levels. These scores can be accurately
accessed, and are available to me as an administrator in the
Shasta County Court and Community Schools. There will also be a
review of student attendance. Qualitative data will be collected
through the use of interviews that will be conducted with teachers
and staff.
Data Analysis
The quantitative data collected will be derived from the
scores of students who have attended the Shasta County Office of
Education Court and Community Schools for at least one semester
during the period of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years.
This data will be analyzed to determine whether students on formal
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
or informal probation status achieve higher test scores. Data that
measures student attendance, rates of disciplinary referrals, and
the number of students who achieve Level 5 in the Classroom
Management Level Plan in a comparison of both groups of students
will be measured during the first semester of the 2004-2005 school
year.
The qualitative data will be collected during the first semester
of the 2004-2005 school year. At the time of collection, the
qualitative data will be analyzed with the perceptions of teachers
and staff will be noted and explored.
Test Scores
The test scores that will be analyzed consist of the following:
1. California Standards Test (CST). This data will consist
of post-test results that will measure the test scores of both groups
of students, and will be derived from the scores of students who
have attended the Shasta County Office of Education Court and
Community Schools for at least one semester during the period of
the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years.
2. California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). This data
will consist of post-test results that will measure the test scores of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
78
both groups of students, and will be derived from the scores of
students who have attended the Shasta County Office of Education
Court and Community Schools for at least one semester during the
period of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years.
Other Quantitative Data
1. Attendance rates. This data will be derived from the
attendance records of students who have attended the Shasta
County Office of Education Court and Community Schools for the
first semester of the 2004-2005 school year, and will measure the
attendance rates of both groups of students.
2. Disciplinary referrals. This data will be derived from
the records of students who have attended the Shasta County
Office of Education Court and Community Schools for the first
semester of the 2004-2005 school year, and will measure the
number of disciplinary referrals issued to both groups of students.
3. The Classroom Management Level Plan Policy. This
data will be derived from the records of students who have
attended Live Oak School for the first semester of the 2004-2005
school year, and will measure the number of students who achieve
Level 5 in the Classroom Management Level Plan in a comparison
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
79
of both groups of students. Live Oak School is unique in the
Shasta County Court and Community Schools in that it employs the
Classroom Management Level Plan (CMLP) as a means of training
students in proper school behavior. The CMLP is designed to
measure student improvement in these essential areas, keeping in
mind that these students feature a prominent at-risk and poverty
profile. Probation personnel closely observe the CMLP of students
attending Live Oak. Along with academic performance and
attendance, the CMLP serves as an indicator of student perform
ance and progress.
As previously noted, these three indicators also serve as a
strong measuring instrument for consideration of recommendation
of student readmittance to educational programs in the student's
school district of residence. The Level System is considered one of
the most important aspects of the Behavior Management System
at Live Oak. The Daily Progress Report (DPR) should reflect both
behavior and academics, and is based on the percentage of a
perfect days' behavior. This is an area in which students should
expect the same system regardless of the classroom assignment.
The Level System is defined in the following manner: Level 5
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
80
indicates exemplary behavior, good attendance and a high level of
trust. Minimum daily standard of behavior (DPR of 5) equaling
90% of a perfect day.
Level 5 students are entitled to all Level 5 activities. These
include special activities designed to award Level 5 behavior:
consideration for tasks such as assisting in the office, other
classrooms, or classroom errand; permission to sit in the Level 5
area while the class is on break; permission to use the student
store; and permission to use the restroom unescorted (convicted
sex offenders are not allowed to use the restroom unescorted
regardless of their level). Students may add days to their Level 5,
and will receive Level 5 buttons that reflect this continued growth.
New buttons will be issued at 5.25, 5.50, 5.75, 5.100, and continu
ing on. Level 4 requires a standard of behavior (DPR of 4) equal
ing 80% of a perfect day. The student must remain at this level
for a minimum of 15 days. A student having earned a level of 4.15
must earn a DPR of 5 to progress to Level 5. Level 3 requires a
standard of behavior (DPR of 3) equaling 70% of a perfect day.
The student must remain at this level for a minimum of 5 days. A
student having earned a Level 3.5 must earn a DPR of 4 to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
81
progress to Level 4. All students enter Live Oak at Level 2. This
requires a standard of behavior (DPR of 2) equally 60% of a
perfect day. The student must remain at this level for a minimum
of three days. A student having earned a Level 2.3 must earn a
DPR of 3 to progress to Level 3.
Level 1 is earned by non-cooperation at Level 2 or by school
suspension (either in-house or out of school suspensions). No
privileges are allowed at this level. A student at Level 1 must earn
a DPR of 5 in one day or accumulated over several days in order to
advance to Level 2. More than one day at Level 1 may qualify a
student to be assigned to the in-house suspension room for up to
10 school days. Levels advance sequentially in the following
manner: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3; 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5; 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4,
4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.15; 5.1, 5.2,
5.3 etc. Ideally, a student entering Live Oak School can reach
Level 5 in 23 school days. A disciplinary referral will result in a loss
of one level. For example, a student at 4.11 receiving a referral
will become a 3.1; a student at 5.14 receiving a referral will
become a 4.1. Again, suspension of any kind results in a reduction
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
82
to Level 1 (Live Oak School Policies and Procedures Manuel, 2003-
2004).
Qualitative Research
Teachers will be interviewed concerning probation status of
students as well as students' behavioral performance in the
classroom as measured by the Classroom Management Level Plan.
The following questions will be asked during the interview:
1. Describe what you perceive to be the purpose of the
level system.
2. How effective do you perceive the level system to be in
your classroom?
3. What similarities do you observe between students on
formal and informal probation in terms of the level system?
4. What differences do you observe between students on
formal and informal probation? What differences do you observe
between students on formal and informal probation in terms of the
level system?
5. Do you perceive the level system to be equitable for
students on forma! and informal probation?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
83
6. I f not, how could the level system be more equitable
for formal and informal probationary students?
7. How could the level system be changed to achieve
greater success in the classroom?
Dependent and Independent Variables
The experimental group, which will serve in this study as the
independent variable, are those who are on 602 (formal probation)
status. These are the students that receive all of the support
afforded those on formal probation as outlined in chapter 1. The
control group, or the dependent variable, are the students on 654
(informal probation) status, and who do not receive the same
probationary support as the experimental group.
Policy Evaluation
At the conclusion of data collection, possible solutions will be
offered concerning the results that will emerge as a result of the
research. The literature of educational research and theory will
serve as the basis for this discussion. At this conclusion of the
dissertation, a policy in the Shasta County Office of Education
Court and Community Schools will have been identified and
researched through quantitative and qualitative means. There will
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
be action steps and solutions proposed to the problems that will
emerge as a result of the research. It is the hope that this
dissertation will not only be of assistance to Shasta County Office
of Education Court and Community Schools, but will provide
information useful to school leaders that will benefit court and
Community Schools everywhere.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
85
CHAPTER 4
COLLECTION OF DATA AND RESULTS
This chapter presents the results that were determined
through the collection of data described in chapter 3. The
California Standards Test (CST) and the California High School Exit
Exam (CAHSEE) data consists of post-test results that summarizes
the test scores of both groups of students, and is derived from the
scores of students who attended the Shasta County Office of
Education Court and Community Schools for at least one semester
during the period of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years.
In the English Language Arts, Math, and History sections of
the California Standards Test, there was no statistically significant
difference in performance of students in the experimental group,
students who were on 602 (formal probation) status, and the
control group— students who were on 654 (informal probation)
status. Likewise, in the California High School Exit Exam Scores,
there was not a statistically significant difference in performance of
students in either group.
In Attendance Rates, Disciplinary Referrals, and the Class
room Management Level Plan, there was a statistically significant
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
86
difference among students in the experimental group, students
who are on 602 (formal probation) status, and the control group,
students who are on 654 (informal probation) status. In
Attendance Rates data, students on formal probation had overall
higher attendance rates than those on informal probation. In data
that summarizes Disciplinary Referrals, students on informal
probation had a higher incidence of what may be termed chronic
behavior problems while at school. In the Classroom Management
Level Plan data, students on formal probation demonstrated a
higher rate of Level 5 behavior than students on informal
probation.
Teachers were interviewed concerning the Classroom
Management Level Plan and were asked seven questions pertaining
to their perceptions of effectiveness, limitations, implementation,
and equity in the implementation of the plan. Each teacher
seemed to be enthusiastic about the interview. Many commented
beforehand that they had never been asked to give their insights
and opinions concerning the CMLP. In each case, the teachers
were told that the interview would be 15 minutes in duration, but
as the interview progressed, it became obvious that each wanted
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
87
to take more time to express their views. Their answers were
varied and informative, but a common thread throughout was a
conviction that students on formal probation were more successful
in school than those on informal probation.
The quantitative data supported their views when it came to
attendance and behavior issues. In terms of academic perform
ance, teachers were not asked to give their views on the role of
probation status and academic performance; the interviews were
restricted to the Classroom Management Level Plan which takes
into account both behavior and attendance. However, many
teachers in their comments drew a connection between behavior,
attendance, and resulting academic performance. The data did not
support this aspect of their opinion.
California Standards Test (CST)
The following data consists of post-test results that summar
izes the test scores of both groups of students, and is derived from
the scores of students who attended the Shasta County Office of
Education Court and Community Schools for at least one semester
during the period of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years
(Tables 1-3).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
88
Table 1. California Standards Test English Language Arts
Raw Scale
602 654 602 654
N 156.00 247.00 156.00 247.00
Mean 29.10 28.50 268.10 273.70
Median 26.00 26.00 259.00 266.00
Minimum 12.00 10.00 186.00 197.00
Maximum 63.00 66.00 382.00 416.00
Range 51.00 56.00 196.00 219.00
Std. Dev. 11.60 10.90 39.00 39.10
Skewness 0.87 1.01 0.49 0.93
Variance 134.51 119.10 1522.43 1531.78
Kurtosis 0.07 0.66 -0.34 0.93
T test 0.29 0.08
Table 2. California Standards Test Math
Raw Scale
602 654 602 654
N 58.00 160.00 58.00 160.00
Mean 22.20 23.10 268.00 273.10
Median 22.50 21.00 267.00 267.00
Minimum 13.00 10.00 221.00 205.00
Maximum 43.00 52.00 360.00 407.00
Range 30.00 42.00 139.00 202.00
Std. Dev. 6.10 8.40 29.30 38.60
Skewness 1.06 1.32 0.71 1.14
Variance 37.76 70.72 856.68 1489.56
Kurtosis 1.50 1.65 0.69 1.51
7 test 0.22 0.18
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
89
Table 3. California Standards Test History
Raw Scale
602 654 602 654
N 42.00 17.00 42.00 17.00
Mean 19.60 17.40 271.40 259.90
Median 19.0 17.00 270.00 260.00
Minimum 9.00 11.00 204.00 223.00
Maximum 39.00 30.00 364.00 321.00
Range 30.00 19.00 160.00 98.00
Std. Dev. 6.20 5.40 31.30 28.10
Skewness 1.37 1.01 0.84 0.70
Variance 37.99 29.26 981.23 791.93
Kurtosis 2.85 0.67 2.09 0.10
T test 0.10 0.10
In the English Language Arts, Math, and History sections of
the California Standards Test, using the t-test, there is no statis
tically significant difference in performance of students in the
experimental group, students who were on 602 (formal probation)
status, and the control group, students who were on 654 (informal
probation) status. The t test is used to determine if the mean
scores on the interval-scaled variable (such as test scores) will be
significantly different for two independent groups. None of the t
tests applied to the California Standards Tests reflected a
significant difference.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)
The following data consists of post-test results that measures
the test scores of both groups of students, and is derived from the
scores of students who attended the Shasta County Office of
Education Court and Community Schools for at least one semester
during the period of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years
(Tables 4-5).
Table 4. California High School Exist Exit Exam English Language
Arts
602 654 Total
Pass
No pass
Total
15
44
59
25.4%
74.6%
100.0%
12 38.7%
19 61.3%
31 100.0%
27
63
90
30.0%
70.0%
100.0%
Chi-square 1.71
Table 5. California High School Exit Exam Math
602 654 Total
Pass
No pass
Total
14
52
66
21.2%
78.8%
100.0%
12 33.3%
24 66.7%
36 100.0%
26
76
102
25.5%
74.5%
100.0%
Chi-square 1.80
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
91
In the California High School Exit Exam Scores, there is not a
statistically significant difference in performance of students in the
experimental group, students who were on 602 (formal probation)
status, and the control group— students who were on 654 (informal
probation) status. Using raw percentages, informal probation
students have a much higher rate of success in passing both
portions (English Language Arts and Math) of the California High
School Exit Exam. However, it should be noted that, of all of the
quantitative measures presented in this chapter, the CAHSEE has
by far the smallest sample size, and therefore, the greatest margin
of error. It should also be noted that the sample size of the
informal probation students was much smaller than the sample size
of those on formal probation status. Thus, the chi-square test
was used. The chi-square (x2) test "statistically determines
significance in the analysis of frequency distributions" (Zikmund,
p. GL-3). The chi-square test indicated that there was not a
statistically significant difference between the two groups
(significant > 3.84).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
Attendance Rate Data
These are derived from the attendance records of students
who attended the Shasta County Office of Education Court and
Community Schools for the first semester of the 2004-2005 school
year, and summarize the attendance rates of both groups of
students (Table 6).
Table 6. Attendance
Disciplinary referrals
N 0-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100
602 231 17.00 8.00 13.00 31.00 41.00 121.00
654 384 59.00 33.00 50.00 81.00 77 84.00
602 231 7.36 3.46 5.63 13.42 17.75 52.38
654 384 15.36 8.59 13.02 21.09 20.05 21.88
Chi-square 66.20
In the survey of attendance, there was a statistically signify-
cant difference in attendance of students in the experimental
group, students who were on 602 (formal probation) status, and
the control group— students who were on 654 (informal probation)
status.
As the chart indicates, in all ranges less than 91%-100%
attendance (0%-50%, 51%-60%, 61%-70%, 71%-80%, and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
93
81%-90%), informal probation students had a higher rate of
attendance within those ranges. This demonstrated statistically a
much greater rate of attendance in the lower ranges, which may
also be expressed as a much higher rate of absenteeism.
In contrast, in the 91%-100% range, formal probation
students had a much greater rate of attendance. The 52.38%
students on formal probation attended 91%-100% of school days,
whereas 21.88% of students on informal probation attended 91%-
100% of school days. The 83.55% of students on formal probation
had an attendance rate of 70% or better, whereas 63.02% of
students on informal probation had an attendance rate of 70% or
better. The data suggest a significantly greater rate of attendance
for students who were on formal probation (602) status.
The chi-square test result of 66.20 demonstrated that there
was a statistically significant difference between the two groups,
and that students on formal probation had overall higher attend
ance rates than those on informal probation (significant > 11.07).
Disciplinary Referrals
These were derived from the records of students who have
attended the Shasta County Office of Education Court and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Community Schools for the second semester of the 2003-2004
school year, and the first semester of the 2004-2005 school year.
These data indicate the number of disciplinary referrals issued to
both groups of students (Table 7).
Table 7. Disciplinary Referrals
Referrals
0 1-10 11-20 20+
602 42.62% 49.53% 6.36% 1.50%
654 47.89% 41.54% 7.55% 3.02%
Chi-square 9.54
In the survey of disciplinary referrals, there was a statistic
ally significant difference in the occurrence of referrals of students
in the experimental group, students who were on 602 (formal
probation) status, and the control group, students who were on
654 (informal probation) status. As shown in the table 7, 42.62%
of students on formal probation received no disciplinary referrals,
whereas 47.89% of students on informal probation received no
disciplinary referrals. However, 49.53% of students on formal
probation received one through 10 disciplinary referrals, whereas
41.54% of students on informal probation received 1 through 10
permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
disciplinary referrals. For those students who received between
11-20 disciplinary referrals, 6.36% were on formal probation, while
7.55% were on informal probation. Finally, for those students who
received 20 or more disciplinary referrals, there was a significant
difference, with 1.5% of students on formal probation receiving 20
or more referrals, while 3.02% of students on informal probation
receiving 20 or more referrals.
To break down the numbers even further, 92.15% of
students on formal probation received 10 or less disciplinary
referrals, while 89.43% of students on informal probation received
10 or less disciplinary referrals. For those students who received
11 or more disciplinary referrals, 7.86% of students on formal
probation received 11 or more disciplinary referrals, while 10.57%
of students on informal probation received 11 or more disciplinary
referrals.
The chi-square test result of 9.54 demonstrates that there is
a statistically significant difference between the two groups, and
demonstrates that students on informal probation had a higher
incidence of what may be termed chronic behavior problems while
at school (significant > 7.82).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Classroom Management Level Plan Survey
This data is derived from the records of students who
attended Live Oak School for the first semester of the 2004-2005
school year, and measures the number of students who achieved
Level 5 in the Classroom Management Level Plan in a comparison
of both groups of students. Each classroom was survey on a
weekly basis, noting how many students were performing at Level
Five, and of those students, how many were in the experimental
group, which serve in this study as the independent variable, and
are on 602 (formal probation) status, and the control group, or the
dependent variable, are the students on 654 (informal probation)
status (Table 8).
Table 8. Classroom Management Level Plan
602 654 Total
Level 5
Not level 5
Total
425
492
917
46.4%
53.6%
100.0%
459 39.8%
694 60.2%
1,153 100.0%
884
1,186
2,070
42.7%
57.3%
100.0%
Chi-square test 8.92
In the Classroom Management Level Plan survey, there was a
statistically significant difference in the achievement of Level 5
permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
status of referrals of students in the experimental group, students
who were on 602 (formal probation) status, and the control group,
students who were on 654 (informal probation) status. As derived
from the chart above, 46.34% of students on Level 5 status were
on formal probation, whereas 39.80% of students on Level 5 status
were on informal probation.
Using chi-square, the difference is 8.92, demonstrating that
students on formal probation had a significantly higher rate of
Level 5 behavior in the Classroom Management Level Plan
(significant > 3.84).
Teacher Interviews
Live Oak teachers, who employ the Classroom Management
Level Plan, were interviewed concerning probation status of
students, as well as students' behavioral performance in the
classroom as measured by the Classroom Management Level Plan.
Twelve teachers were interviewed, whose experience in teaching
ranged from 2 years to 19 years. Following are the questions were
asked during each interview, and a representative sample of the
responses that were given.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
1. Describe what you perceive to be the purpose of the
level system.
There was a sense of unanimity among the faculty when
responding to this question. One teacher responded, "It is a way
of tracking students' progress toward the goals of behavior, grades
and credits. It also serves as a reward system." Another noted,
"It provides a criterion for success and Live Oak and a means of
measuring whether a student is a candidate for exiting." One
teacher said, "The level system promotes positive behavior and
allows students to have a perception of a goal to be reached."
Another said, "It holds each student accountable for their own
actions and is an immediate reflection of their behavior. It serves
as a means of getting kids to buy in and move up the level ladder
in a clear and understandable way." In a similar response, one
said, "It gives kids a goal to reach. It inspires them. It also serves
a guide for teachers as well as students." One added that, "It
makes good sense. The kids see the connection between a higher
level and more privileges."
A veteran teacher said it this way: "Students become aware
of behaviors, accept responsibility for their behavior and begin the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
process of modifying their behavior. The incremental steps and
'perks' that come with these steps sends a strong, reinforcing
message." A veteran teacher emphasized the potential outcome
for the students: "It helps the students to achieve a level of
behavior that is acceptable when they return to 'regular' school.
It's for the students, not for us."
2. How effective do you perceive the level system to be in
your classroom?
Responses were more varied when teachers were posed this
question. One said, "It is very effective in my classroom. It is
very visual. The students want to move up so it is a motivator.
They see others getting rewards and they want that for them
selves." Another teacher mirrored this idea: "They're concerned
about their levels. They don't always follow through, but that's a
big reason why they're here. They couldn't follow the rules else
where. That's okay. They buy in and I keep reinforcing it." One
teacher expressed much of the same experiences but added, "It
depends on individual students' willingness to be involved in it."
Similarly, one said, "It's successful for about 75% of the students,
but some couldn't care less. To some kids a soda or certificate is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
100
valuable. Some really like the level 5 activities, but some kids
think they are corny." Another teacher noted that the level system
is "effective especially for group home kids.
There is a tie-in with their level at school and the points they
receive at home. It is immediate because of the DPRs (Daily
Progress Reports). If there's no buy-in, rewards or consequences
at home, then it is less likely that the student to see the import
ance in it." One felt that, "It's not as effective as it was in the
past." When asked why, the teacher replied, "There are more
654's (informal probation) now then there used to be. It works
better for the 602's (formal probation) and that use to set the tone
for the classroom." This teacher felt that 654's have little as far as
consequences, as opposed to the 602's that answer to a probation
officer or a group home staff. "The only consequence for 654's is
in-house suspension," this teacher added. One teacher said, "It's a
success because I hold the students accountable. I keep strict
track of points, and make a big deal of it in class. My students buy
in because I buy in." Another teacher expressed a similar
sentiment and said, "It's very effective. Every day they come to
class and check the level chart." This teacher saw a direct
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
connection between the manner of implementation of the level
system in the classroom and student performance. In this
classroom, there are no privileges for Level 1 or 2 students. They
are not allowed out of their seats. When they achieve Level 3,
they can work in partners at appropriate times, can buy chips from
the student store, and can take a ball out for break. At Level 4,
they can get out of their seat at their own discretion (except during
direct instruction), and are allowed to buy soda (in addition to
chips) from the student store. At Level 5, students may buy candy
from the student store (in addition to chips and soda), and are
accorded all school-wide Level 5 privileges. This teacher sees a
direct correlation between the diligence of the teacher in the
administration of the Level Plan and its effectiveness, regardless of
the student's probation status.
3. What similarities do you observe between students on
formal and informal probation in terms of the level system?
"They are exactly the same", said one teacher emphatically.
"Neither sees consequences and probation does not respond to the
level system." This teacher noted an important exception. "Group
homes, however, respond immediately and consequentially. For
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
them, weekend activities, home passes, and even bedtime are tied
to our level system." Another teacher echoed a similar sentiment.
"Agency kids (group home or foster care) do the best (with the
level system). Consequences at home or with probation are the
key. The 654's take longer to buy in, if at all, because of the lack
of support or consequences at home. For them, self-motivation is
a must. Their motivation must be intrinsic, but both groups will
respond. It really depends on the motivation of the student." One
teacher said, "If the culture of the classroom is strong, I see very
little difference between formal and informal probation students."
Another stated, "Everyone operates under the same rules. In my
class, it works the same for all students."
4. What differences do you observe between students on
formal and informal probation in terms of the level system?
One teacher strongly stated, "Formal probation kids tend to
achieve higher levels. They have more to lose." Similarly, another
teacher said, "Informal probation can be a joke when it comes to
the level system— 654's don't respond. When Live Oak was a
predominantly a "602" school, by a 3 to 1 margin, the 654's tended
to follow their lead." Still another said, "With formal kids, all you
i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
have to say is, "I'll call your P.O. (probation officer) and they stop
their behavior most of the time. They know the consequences.
Informal kids have a 'what are you going to do about it' attitude."
However, this same teacher noted that, "When a formal student
does explode, they really explode!" The influence of probation
officers was also observed by many of the teachers. One voiced,
"It depends on the P . 0. If the kids know they mean business,
they shape up. With certain P.O.'s, they know they can do what
they want. And these kids know which are which." One teacher
was adamant that, "there are worse behaviors and worse attend
ance with the informal kids." Finally, one teacher said, "Informal
kids get SARBed here (placed by the School Attendance and
Review Board) and are intimidated at first. After a few weeks, they
have either bought in to our program or resume the behaviors that
got them here. The formal kids have a lot more hanging over their
heads." One teacher voiced a different perspective, saying that,
"Informal probation students get to go to Room 12 (in-house
suspension) and formal probation students don't. In some ways,
that gives me more immediate leverage with informal kids."
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
5. Do you perceive the level system to be equitable for
students on formal and informal probation?
There was difference in opinion amongst the responders
when answering this question. "Yes. Very equitable. It is there
for everyone equally," was the response of one. Another said,
"Yes. The level system demonstrates consequences and reward for
everyone in a tangible way." "Yes, there's the same system for
everybody" stated another. One teacher did note that it was "fair
and equitable, but I've heard of other teachers treating kids
differently based on their probation status." One answered, "Not
really. There are no real consequences for 654's, but huge
consequences for 602's. I guess the system itself is equitable but
the consequences are not." One noted, "In my class, yes. I
implement the program correctly. It is only equitable if that
happens." Finally, one teacher said that the program is equitable,
"But without question, the consequences are different. Formal
students usually have much greater consequences than informal.
If there's support at home, or with a probation officer, there is
extra leverage."
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
105
6. I f not, how could the level system be more equitable
for formal and informal probationary students?
For those teachers who did not believe that the level system
was equitable for all students, there was a great deal of unanimity
among the teachers. "Probation needs to recognize our level
system, hold students accountable for level, and even make it a
stipulation of their probation. And that could be done," stated one
teacher. One teacher said, "It is only fair and equitable if the
consequences are the same for all kids. On our end, the system
itself is fair. But for the kids, there is such a variety in conse
quences that, at home, it becomes inequitable." Another teacher
said, "Probation Officers should be stricter as a group. Some kids
'skate,' while other kids get taken to the Hall (Juvenile Hall).
Where's the fairness there?" One teacher noted, "It is fairly
applied but not necessarily equitably applied" when referring to the
difference in classroom application and the consequences that
students receive due to their probation status. Another summed
up their feeling by saying, "The system itself is fine. It works when
taken seriously at home or by probation or both. But there need to
be effective consequences for it to really work for these kids."
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
7. How could the level system be changed to achieve
greater success in the classroom?
Many teachers responded similarly to this question. "There
needs to be more rewards for Level 5 behaviors. There should be
more freedom on campus, and a variety of field trips. The level 5
parties are not particularly attractive for the kids," stated one
teacher. Another said, "More tangible rewards." One teacher
echoed this idea. "There needs to be better rewards, and more
extracurricular activities. Level 5 kids need to see more rewards.
We need more focus on reward and less focus on punishment."
Another teacher underscored the role that consistency plays
school-wide. "The Policy and Procedure Manual is very specific in
how students are to move through the level system. School-wide,
there should be much more consistency concerning what happens
when, such as student store privileges, playing basketball and the
like. It really bothers me when I see a student that I know is a
Level 1 or 2 out playing basketball or buying sodas. Teachers who
undermine the program undermine it, to some degree, in my class.
Kids want to be transferred to another class with more lax rules. I
hear teachers complain about behavior in their classroom, but then
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
I see the inconsistency. These kids are here in large part due to
inconsistency at home. They don't need that at school. Too many
teachers are not prepared to work hard enough to make the
program consistent." Finally, a teacher observed, "The Level
System, over time, has proven itself to be pretty hardy. It just
depends on who's using it."
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
108
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Probation Supervision and its role in performance of students
identified as living in poverty in Shasta County Court and Commun
ity schools was the focus of this study. Specifically, two questions
were asked:
1. Is there a difference in the academic and social
performance of students due to their probation status?
2. I f so, what are the implications for schools that serve
this population of students?
Patton (2002) notes that, "Content analysis requires
considerably more than just reading to see what's there" (p. 5).
With that in mind, the following is a summary, discussion and
recommendations as they apply to Shasta County Court and
Community Schools.
The results presented in chapter 4 demonstrate that, in
summarizing the data on student achievement in the English
Language Arts, Math, and History sections of the California
Standards Test, there was not a statistically significant difference in
performance of students in the experimental group, students who
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
were on 602 (formal probation) status, and the control group,
students who were on 654 (informal probation) status. The data
also shows that in the California High School Exit Exam Scores,
there was not a statistically significant difference in performance of
students in either group.
There was a different outcome in attendance rates, disciplin
ary referrals, and the Classroom Management Level Plan. There
was a statistically significant difference among students who are on
602 (formal probation) status, and students who are on 654
(informal probation) status. In addition, according to attendance
rates data, students on formal probation had overall higher attend
ance rates than those on informal probation. In data that summar
izes disciplinary referrals, students on informal probation had a
higher incidence of what may be termed chronic behavior problems
while at school. In the Classroom Management Level Plan data,
students on formal probation demonstrated a higher rate of Level 5
behavior than students on informal probation.
In the interviews with teachers concerning the Classroom
Management Level Plan, teachers were unified in their belief that
students on formal probation were more successful in school than
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
those on informal probation. The quantitative data supported their
views in the areas of attendance and behavior issues. Many
teachers believed that behavior, attendance, and academic
performance were interrelated. The data did not support the belief
that is aspect of their opinion.
The results of the study provide a powerful basis for further
discussion. There was a statistically significant difference in the
social performance of students due to their probation status, but
there was not a statistically significant difference in the academic
performance of these two groups of students. The second question
then comes into focus. What are the implications for schools that
serve this population of students?
Social Performance of Students
Probation status has a significant effect on students in the
realm of social performance. The Classroom Management Level
Plan is the foundation of the student discipline program at Shasta
County Court and Community Schools. Behaviorism is the
theoretical foundation of the Classroom Management Level Plan.
This theoretical foundation offers a strong rationale for its
effectiveness with students on formal probation.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
I l l
There are two main characteristics associated with behavior
ism. First, behavior is viewed as an observable phenomenon. It
does not concern itself with other factors, such as those considered
by Cognitive Processing or Sociocultural theories. Second,
behavior is seen as an objective science whose methods consider
the analysis of behavior. Behaviorist B. F. Skinner believed that
the causes of behavior are not intrinsic, but rather extrinsic
(LeFrancios, 2000). Gregory A. Kimble (2000) writes, "The
defining feature of behaviorism is that it works with publicly
observable stimuli and responses." (p. 208). Further, Kimble says,
"The major enemy of behaviorism is subjectivism, which takes
mental states (e.g., cognition) instead of stimuli . . . the science
and its concepts must be grounded in public observation" (p. 209).
Richard Mayer (2000) takes a more sterile view of behaviorism,
writing, "The response-strengthening view of learning defines the
role of the teacher and the student within the educational setting.
Based on the response-strengthening view, the teacher is a
dispenser of rewards and punishments whereas the student is the
passive recipient of rewards and punishments" (p. 11).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
Kimble (2000), however, makes an important statement that
places the student, along with the teacher, at the center of the
educative process. "Behavior is a blend of adaptation and coping,
a mixture of cognition, affect, and reaction tendencies. Thus,
excellent students value (affect) academic achievement, know
(cognition) that success in school takes work—both adaptation--
and require the coping skills (reaction tendency) required to reach
that end" (p. 211).
At Shasta County Court and Community Schools, there is an
assumption that, in the realm of classroom behavior, intrinsic
motivation has not been successful with this population of students
in their previous educational settings. Therefore, the CMLP is
employed as an extrinsic motivator in a more restrictive environ
ment. It is also helpful to align the constituent parts of Behavior
ism with the CMLP.
Any consequence that increases the probability that the
response it follows, will be emitted again is termed a "reinforcer"
(Henson & Eller, 1999). Skinner, extending Thorndike's Law of
Effect (if a stimulus is followed by a response and then a satisfier,
then the stimulus-response is strengthened) termed this effect a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
113
positive reinforcer (as cited by Lefrancios, 2000). Certainly a daily
DPR is a reinforcer. The students, in their enrollment contracts,
are told that the DPRs are to be taken home and signed by the
parent or guardian. Failure to do so will result in a reduced DPR
score the following day, as well as in a telephone call home (which
itself is a reinforcer in any teenager's life). Therefore, the DPR is a
positive reinforcer if it is signed and returned to the teacher for
points, and it is a positive reinforcer if it results in a reduced DPR
the following day or a telephone call home. Negative reinforcers,
on the other hand, strengthen a behavior by removing aversive
stimuli. In a very real sense, Levels 1 through 4 are an aversive
stimulus. At this level, students are not allowed to experience free
time away from the classroom, visit the student store, or use the
restroom unattended. Only Level 5 students have these privileges.
The only way to remove these aversive stimuli is to move success
fully through the levels and achieve Level 5 status.
Many mistake negative reinforcement for punishment. It is
quite different. Punishment is presenting an aversive stimulus
after an undesired behavior. Upon the presentation of an
undesired behavior, students receive immediate feedback through
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
114
the subtraction from the daily point total, or removal from the
classroom to the Time Out room. Students remain in Time Out for
5 minutes, and points are deducted from the DPR as a result.
Three visits to Time Out in one school day, results in a disciplinary
referral. The usual result of a disciplinary referral is a loss of level
(for instance, from 4.3 to 3.1), or possibly assignment to the in-
house suspension room. Again, the CMLP features a strong
component of punishment.
Certainly, the goal of the CMLP is centered in shaping.
Shaping, defined as "a procedure whereby desired behavior is
taught by reinforcing successive approximations of the behavior"
(Henson & Eller, 1999, p. 216) is at the core of the CMLP
experience. Upon observation, a student beginning at Shasta
County Court and Community Schools would find themselves
approximating the behaviors that were desired in the compre
hensive schools where they have previously met failure. However,
this same student, observed after they had progressed successfully
through the CMLP, would very possibly exhibit behavior consistent
with the desired behavior at the comprehensive schools. When
students have completed a 6-month contract, the school and the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
115
student's school of resident (usually where the student attended
before being referred to SCOE) meet and decide whether the
student will remain at Shasta County Court and Community
Schools for another contract or return to the school of residence.
This is almost always based on the CMLP results, with academic
performance being viewed as important but secondary.
Students on formal probation know that their probation
officers are receiving daily reports of their behavior as reflected by
the CMLP. Likewise, the parents or guardians of students on
informal probation receive these reports. It appears that students
on formal probation are much more concerned about the reaction
of their probation officer than are students on informal probation
and the reaction of their parents or guardians. This, in most cases,
is with good reason. Whereas parents or guardians have a limited
array of punishments that might be meted out to students at
home, probation officers can (and do) take wards of the court into
custody when the student's behavior becomes and/or remains
substandard.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
116
Academic Performance of Students
Probation status did not have a significant effect in the
academic performance of students in the Shasta County Court and
Community Schools. In light of this finding, a discussion of best
academic practices applied to the student population served by
court and Community Schools may be helpful.
As previously noted, Ruby Payne (2001) has identified 10
features of poverty that serve to underscore the role of poverty in
the lives of these students. Four of those features come to the
forefront when considering the educative future of this population
of students. Payne noted that students bring with them the hidden
rules of the class in which they were raised. Even though the
situations may differ, many of the patterns of thought, social
interaction, and cognitive strategies remain with the individual.
However, schools operate from middle-class norms and use the
hidden rules of middle class, and these norms and hidden rules are
typically not directly taught in schools. This is certainly true of the
Shasta County Court and Community Schools. Therefore, for
students to be successful, school leaders, teachers and staff must
understand these hidden rules and teach students the rules that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
117
will make them successful at school and at work. Payne also
insists that students must neither be excused nor scolded for not
knowing the hidden rules of middle class, but that educators bear
the responsibility to teach these hidden rules and provide support,
insistence, and expectations (pp. 10-11).
As described by Druian and Butler (1987), the primary
characteristic of successful programs for at-risk youth seems to be
a strong, even intense, level of commitment on the part of the
instructional staff. There is a clear belief that the student will
succeed. Successful programs are characterized as having fair,
though strict, programs of discipline that clarify offenses and
consequences administered in a consistent manner. All support
staff, such as Probation Staff, are integral in this scenario.
Margaret C. Wang et al. (1998) wrote of educational
resilience to describe how children from poverty may rise above
these circumstances through education. Wang et al. wrote that
teachers can foster educational resiliency by using strategies such
as caring attitudes and high expectations. Additionally, teachers'
belief that all children can learn and contribute to society holds
students to higher social performance and academic standards.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
118
Along with this set of beliefs, powerful, research-based instruct
ional practices that facilitate learning for students at risk of school
failure must be combined with caring and belief in the students.
The effective school setting features teachers who function as
facilitators of learning rather than transmitters of knowledge
(p. 13).
Bonnie Benard (1997) described how educators and schools
can foster resiliency in students, and stated that the "starting point
for building on students capabilities is the "adults' belief that the
children have an innate resilience." Benard articulated that
resilience skills are the ability to form relationships, to problem
solve, to form a sense of identity, and to plan with the future in
mind. Benard also pointed out that developing these skills is not
the cause of resiliency, but rather the outcome of resiliency. In her
research, Benard found that between 50% and 70% of all children
born into high risk environments grow up to be successful as
measured by societal indicators. As schools seek to build resil
ience, they must teach students that adversity in life must not be
taken personally, that adversity in life need not be permanent, and
that students must become aware that setbacks are not all
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
119
encompassing. There must be the shared belief that resilience can
be developed. Not only can resilience be developed, but Benard
states that the first step in creating a school that fosters resilience
is to share the belief among staff that resilience can be developed
from an innate foundation (p. 2).
Zarate (1997) pointed out that increasing expectations for
student learning is another important ingredient necessary for
school improvement, and that blaming the students' home
situations or socioeconomic status is common among teachers,
administrators, and school boards of low-performing schools. All
too often there is a general conviction that low performance goes
hand-in-hand with challenging home situations and/or low socio
economic status. This thinking must be replaced by an under
standing that, in the high performing schools that serve a low
socioeconomic clientele, students are given challenging curricula
and are expected to succeed. Further, schools experiencing high
poverty and high performance have a clearly stated vision of their
students' success, and invest their energy and resources in the
fulfillment of this vision. Every individual involved with the school,
whether the community, parents, students, teachers, staff or
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
120
administrators understand that there must be a high expectation of
quality.
Too often, there has been the practice of teaching "the
basics" to this population of students. This often comes in the form
of photocopied worksheets and packets. It is important to
remember that Michael Knapp (1992) put to rest the idea that
students from poverty are best taught "the basics." Instead, he
asserted that higher level learning works best with these students.
Examples of this type of instruction were emphasizing meaning and
understanding, embedding skills in the context of other academic
disciplines, and helping students to make the connections to
experiences outside of school. In his study, Academic Challenge
for the Children of Poverty, higher level learning was proven to
work well with both high poverty, as well as higher socioeconomic
levels. Knapp also found that the "basics" approach was not
helpful to either group.
It is also essential to recall the experience of the Brazosport,
Texas School District, which experienced impressive academic
growth over an 8-year period. The district used data analysis to
focus on improvement and close this achievement gap, and within
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
121
5 years, moved from having half of their schools identified as low-
performing to achieving "exemplary" status. The data-driven
instructional process used by the Brazosport School District
features eight steps. It begins with disaggregation of test scores,
with data being analyzed over the summer and given to teachers
at the beginning of the school year. Next, there is a development
of instructional timelines, with time allocations are based on the
needs of subgroups of students and the importance of the
objectives. This is followed by delivery of instructional focus. The
district gives each teacher an instructional focus sheet with
objectives, target areas, instructional dates, and assessment
dates— then follows assessment. After the instructional focus has
been taught, teachers must give an assessment on it. Eighty
percent of the students must master an objective before the
teacher can move on— tutorials are then offered. Students who fail
an assessment, attend small tutorial groups that reteach the area.
Another feature is enrichment. During tutorial time, students who
mastered the material attend enrichment classes. At the
secondary level, students must master basics before taking
electives. Then maintenance is emphasized. Supplementary
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
122
materials for students help them retain what they have learned.
Finally, monitoring is implemented. Principals visit classes daily
during the instructional focus time to monitor progress (Lewis,
2001).
Recommendations for Shasta County
Court and Community Schools
It has been shown, that in summarizing the data on student
achievement in the English Language Arts, Math, and History
sections of the California Standards Test, and in the California High
School Exit Exam Scores, there was not a statistically significant
difference in the academic performance of students in the experi
mental group, students who were on 602 (formal probation)
status, and the control group, students who were on 654 (informal
probation) status. In the area of attendance rates, disciplinary
referrals, and the Classroom Management Level Plan, there was a
statistically significant difference in the social performance between
the two groups.
Besides implementing much of the research summarized in
this chapter and presented in detail in chapter 2, what course of
action should the Shasta County Court and Community Schools
take, in light of the findings of this study?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
123
Bolman and Deal (1997) provide an excellent framework for
analyzing an organization, and realistically looking at the potential
for powerful change. These frames, or lenses, empower the
change leader to view the organization from four different
perspectives. The Structural, Human Resource, Political, and
Symbolic frames provide fascinating perspectives in looking at the
Shasta County Court and Community Schools and suggesting a
potential plan for growth.
The Structural Frame looks at the social aspect of the school.
This lens demonstrates that the staff is organized into working
units, and allows the leader to objectively determine whether the
structures lend themselves to the ultimate success of the organi
zation. In the case of the Court and Community Schools, the
structure is typical of most schools, where there is administrative,
credentialed, and classified staff. It appears that within these
groups, there is leadership that is focused on student and
professional growth. It falls upon the administrative leadership,
then, to work with the leaders of these other groups and provide
the overarching vision. The six assumptions of the Structural
Frame appear to be in place:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
124
1. Organizations exist to achieve goals.
2. Organizations succeed when the organizational goals
are deemed more important than any personal agendas.
3. Structural design matches organizational goals.
4. Organizations are most efficient when there is a proper
specialization of labor.
5. Individuals and groups within the organization must be
involved in a coordinated effort.
6. Problems that come from structure may be changed
through restructuring.
Of these six assumptions, only six appears that it might be
problematic, if in fact, it were an area that needed to be
addressed. Due to the limitations imposed by the bargaining unit,
it would be very difficult to restructure the main themes of the
groups. However, within a remaining structure, those groups could
be somewhat redefined and reconfigured.
The Human Resource Frame encourages the leader to view
the organization as a large family or community. The individuals
within the organization are considered, rather than viewing people
as impersonal cogs in a wheel. Does the organization put people in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
a position where then may succeed? Are people given a place of
significance within the organization? This area of Bolman and Deal
(1997) is especially important in the school setting, which is in the
"people business". Of all the Frames, this appears to be the area
of greatest strength in the Court and Community Schools. Over
and again, staff members give positive feedback regarding their
feelings of personal satisfaction and significance. This also has
proved to be a strong entry point when appealing to the staff in
areas of change.
The Political Frame looks at the organization as a configura
tion of political players. Five areas of interest are cited by Bolman
and Deal (1997):
1. Organizations have many interest groups. In the
school setting, this involves the union (bargaining unit) model.
This reality is never far from the thinking of the leader. For
example, when a teacher is deemed to be in error by an admini
strator, the administrator will offer the teacher to bring a repre
sentative to a meeting that will address the issue.
2 There are differences among those in the interest
groups in areas of value, belief, and perceptions of reality.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
126
3 Decision-making frequently involves the allocation of
resources, which can often be a political process.
4. The most important enduring resource is often power.
5. Decisions often involve negotiation and bargaining
amongst the group members. It is this frame that remains the
most troubling, and probably rightly so. Bolman and Deal (1997)
are extremely helpful in the sense that they help the organizational
leader to understand that these political structures are a normal
part of any organization. They also remind us that great care must
be taken in negotiating these waters. To fail to look at the organi
zation through the Political Frame is a recipe for early departure as
an organizational leader and change agent.
Finally, Bolman and Deal (1997) encourage leaders to look
through the lens of the Symbolic Frame. This has to do with the
culture of the organization. What are the artifacts, stories, and
rituals of the organization? Who are the heroines and heroes? The
SCOE Court and Community Schools are alive with the whole of the
Symbolic Frame. With a veteran staff, some featuring nearly 20
years of service at one school, there is much history, some rich,
and some unfortunate. Any effort to lead change must be done
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
127
with the recognition that, for many of the stakeholders, it will be
weighed based not only on current vision and goals, but also past
victories as well as foibles.
It is also fascinating to view the Shasta County Court and
Community Schools challenge through the lens of the Stages of
Concern. These Stages, as identified by David Marsh, consist of
the following:
0. Awareness : "I am not concerned about the
innovation."
1. Informational: "I would like to know more about it."
2. Personal: "How will using it affect me?"
3. Management: "I seem to be spending all my time
getting material ready."
4. Consequence: "How is my use affecting kids?"
5. Collaboration: "I am concerned about relating what I
am doing with what other instructors are doing."
6. Refocusing: "I have some ideas about something that
would work even better" (Marsh, 2003).
Without question, just 3 years ago, the teaching profess-
sionals in SCOE Court and Community Schools were in the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
128
Informational Stage (1). Standards-based teaching and curriculum
was an abstract. Faculty had heard that this was on the horizon,
and some had even seen the Standards. They were interested and
wanted to know more. There was, however, a disconnect. Stand
ards were for "real" schools with "normal" kids. The overarching
feeling on campus seemed to be that the Standards movement
would somehow bypass Alternative Education. That feeling quickly
changed. By mid-year (of the 2002-2003 school year), it had
moved to the Personal Stage (2). With WASC accreditation and
the ASAM (Alternative Schools Accountability Measures) unveiled,
and with the site administrators leading the way, the reality of
Standards-based education and its role in our schools was coming
to the forefront. There began to be a real sense of personal
concern that asked, "How will this affect me and my teaching?"
Very few took the attitude of "this too shall pass". These were
veteran teachers who had a "been there, seen that, it too will go
away" attitude. Others were beginning to ask for the help that we
are offering as far as designing a Standards-based curriculum.
This school year finds many, but not nearly enough, of
teachers at the Management Stage (3). There are now several
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
129
teachers who are spending a preponderance of their preparation
time aligning their teaching to the Standards. Once teachers move
past the Personal and Management Stages of Concern (stages 2
and 3), there remains a large question that looms for the teachers
in the Court and Community Schools, and has to do with Conse
quence (stage 4). How will this affect our students, and more to
the point, are these students up to the task?
How do organizations move to the top levels of concern?
That is the starting point for asking the question of the Conse
quence Stage (4), "How is my use affecting kids?" This is a needed
step of professionalism for all administration, faculty and staff. As
Tucker and Codding (1998) write, "The way educators think about
professional development is intimately related to the question as to
what is required to turn teaching into a true profession" (p. 122).
Teachers will begin the process of personally understanding how
standards-based education can benefit their students. Not only
that, but teachers will also begin to recognize through experience
that, in a standards-based classroom, their individual teaching
styles, the art of teaching, can remain intact (the fear among
teachers is that their classrooms will lose their distinctiveness).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
130
There exists, in successful schools, a strong culture and clear
sense of purpose that defines the general thrust and nature
of life for their inhabitants. At the same time, a great deal of
freedom is given to teachers and others as to how these
essential core values are to be honored and realized. These
combinations of tight structure around clear and explicit
themes representing the core of the school's culture . . . may
well be the key reason why these schools are so successful.
(Lewis, 2001, p. 8)
It is also necessary during this effort of change to establish a
Comprehensive Accountability and Assessment System (Marsh,
2003). The five elements consist of:
1. Schools continuously assess student progress;
2. Student assessment is outcome-based;
3. Schools compile graduation portfolios;
4. The California Department of Education and schools set
targets; and
5. The administration supports assessment activities.
Conclusion
What strategies should be employed in the immediate future
to further the academic performance in students in the Shasta
County Court and Community Schools? Marzano, Pickering and
Pollack (2001) assert that there are many research-based
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
131
strategies that can be employed in the classroom that will enhance
student achievement. These are:
1. Identifying similarities and differences;
2. Summarizing and note taking;
3. Reinforcing effort and providing recognition;
4. Homework and practice;
5. Nonlinguistic representations;
6. Cooperative learning;
7. Setting objectives and providing feedback;
8. Generating hypotheses;
9. Cues, questions and advance organizers, (p. 7)
These are, according the Marzano et al. (2001), "instructional
strategies that have a high probability of enhancing student
achievement for all students in all areas at all grade levels" (p. 7).
In the 2004-2005 school year, 3 in-service days were dedicated to
developing the nine strategies with the teachers and administrators
of the Shasta County Court and Community Schools. Each in-
service day featured three of the strategies, ensuring that
adequate time was provided for this essential professional
development.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
132
Mike Schmoker (1999) has written that school improvement
will result when there is a district-wide commitment to that
outcome. It begins with effective teamwork. Schmoker writes,
"One of the primary roles of the staff development or district office
staff should be the collection, dissemination, analysis, and
discussion of success stories from within and outside the district"
(p. 20). He speaks of a school setting where, "A group of teachers
(are) sitting around a table talking about their student's work,
learning and asking, 'what do we need to do differently to get the
work we would like from the kids'" (p. 13). The enemy is isolation;
"Everyone in the educational community must work diligently to
change the structures that impede teamwork" (p. 11).
Schmoker (1999) also cites measurable goals as being
essential to school improvement. He writes that the criteria for
effective goals include:
1. Measurable goals;
2. Annual goals, that reflect an increase over the previous
year of the percentage of students achieving mastery, usually
within a subject area;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
133
3. Focused goals, with occasional exceptions, on student
achievement;
4. Goals linked to a year-end assessment or other
standards-based means of determining if students have reached an
established level of performance, usually within a subject area;
5. Goals written in simple, direct language that can be
understood by almost any audience (p. 31).
At the heart of Schmoker's (1999) work is the conviction that
performance data must drive the agenda of the school. "Once
goals are established, teachers can monitor progress, and goals
and data can begin to exert a positive influence" (p. 45). Further,
notes Schmoker, "Common goals that are regularly evaluated
against common measures—data— sustain collective focus and
reveal the best opportunities for practitioners to learn from one
another and hence to get better results" (p. 45).
Schmoker (1991) asserts that,
When the three concepts of teamwork, goal setting, and data
use interact. . . these three concepts operate to produce
results. If we collectively focus on such goals and regularly
measure the impact of the methods we are learning from
each other, we will get results, (p. 55)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
134
Finally, Schmoker (1991) writes that, "The key is to marry a
district priority on learning with an obsession with funding and the
school calendar. If we do this, we dramatically increase the odds
of steady, incremental improvement in student learning" (p. 76).
The Sacramento County Office of Education (2005) has
identified the Nine Essential Components of an Effective Program.
Subtitled A Universal Tool to Support Student and School Achieve
ment, these action steps are to be implemented in schools that are
placed on program improvement or preprogram improvement
status. SCOE Court and Community Schools have chosen to enter
preprogram improvement as a means of school improvement. The
nine components are:
1. Instructional program. The district provides State
Board adopted core instructional program including interventions
for reading/language arts and math.
2. Instructional time. The district monitors instructional
time for the adopted programs.
3. Principals'instructional leadership. The district
provides AB 75 training for school administrators.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
135
4. Credentialed teachers and professional development
opportunities. The district staffs classrooms with credentialed
teachers and provides AB 466 training (which includes a 40-hour
workshop, 80-hour practicum, and a portfolio).
5. Student achievement monitoring system. The district
implements a system for assessing, reporting, and monitoring
student progress.
6. On-going instructional assistance and support to
teachers. The district provides instructional assistance and support
to teachers.
7. Monthly collaboration by grade level or department.
The district facilitates teacher grade level collaboration in the
instructional program to plan and discuss lesson delivery.
8. Lesson pacing schedule. The district prepares and
distributes a pacing schedule for each instructional program.
9. Fiscal support. The district appropriately uses general
and categorical funds to support the instructional program goals in
the school plan.
Each action step will be a welcome addition to the improve
ments that have already been implemented in the last 3 years
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
136
through the WASC accreditation process, will serve to continue the
momentum of positive growth, and change that have become an
integral part of the culture of SCOE Court and Community Schools.
These components will undoubtedly be greeted with a mixture of
excitement as well as caution by the staff, but it cannot be denied
that the alternative education students that SCOE serves will
benefit from their implementation.
The performance of students identified as living in poverty in
Shasta County Court and Community Schools must be the obsess-
sion of every member of the organizer. Administrators, teachers
and staff must continue to focus on the academic and social
performance of all students. It must be the conviction of all that
no child shall ever be left behind.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
REFERENCES
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
138
REFERENCES
Barker, A. (2002). Poverty Takes a Toll on Education. Retrieved
May8, 2003, from http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe
Benard, B. (1997, August). Turning it around for all youth: From
risk to resilience. (ERIC Document No. 412309).
Bernhardt, V. (2000). How crossing data can help you piece
together a clearer picture of your school. Journal of Staff
Development, 21(1), 33-36.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing organizations (2n d
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Brahms, H. (2005, January) California's Nine Essential Program
Components: A Universal Tool to Support Student and School
Achievement. Presentation to AB75 Principal Training,
Redding, CA.
Buzuvis, E. (2001, March). 'A 'fo r Effort: Evaluating Recent State
Education Reform in Response to Judicial Demands for Equity
and Adequacy. Retrieved May 8, 2003, from http://web.lexis-
nexis. com/universe
Cambron-McCabe, N., McCarthy, M., & Thomas, S. (2004). Public
school law: Teachers'and students'rights. (5th ed.).
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Chidester, M. (2003). The laws and politics of education. Los
Angeles, CA: University Bookstore Custom Publishing.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bell, D. (1998). Teaching for high
standards: What policymakers need to know and be able to
do. (ERIC Accession No. ED426491)
Druian, G., & Butler, J. (1987, November). Effective schooling
practices and at-risk youth: What the research shows.
School improvement research series (SIRS). Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
139
Dyson, M. (2002). Leave No Child Behind: Normative Proposals
to Link Educational Adequacy Claims and High Stakes
Assessment Due Process Challenges. Retrieved May 8, 2003,
from http://web.lexis-nexis. com/universe
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor.
Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15-27.
Elmore, R., & Rotheman, R. (1999). Testing, teaching and
learning: A guide for states and school districts. (ERIC
Accession No. ED447172)
Ferguson, R. (2000). Minority student achievement. Presentation
to the Minority Student Achievement Network Annual
Conferences, Arlington, VA.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Guerin, G., & Denti, L. (1999). Alternative education support for
youth at-risk. The Clearing House. Retrieved October 3,
2002, from http://www.ascd.org/frameedleed.htm
Henson, K. T., & Eller, B. F. (1999). Educational psychology for
effective teaching. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
Company
Kimble, G. A. (2000). Behaviorism and unity in psychology.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(6), 208-212.
Knapp, M., Shields, P . M., & Turnbull, B. J. (1992). Academic
challenge for the children of poverty. Study of academic
instruction for disadvantage students. Summary report.
(ERIC Accession No. ED353355)
Kucerik, E. (2002). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Will It
Live Up to Its Promise? Retrieved May 8, 2003, from
http://web. lexis-nexis.com/ universe
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
140
Lefrancois, G. R. (2000). Theories of human learning. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Lein, L., Johnson, J., & Ragland, M. (1997). Successful Texas
schoolwide programs: Research study results. Austin, TX:
STAR Center at the Charles A. Dana Center, University of
Texas.
Lewis, A. (2001). Add it up: Using research to improve education
for low-income and minority students. Washington, DC:
Poverty and Race Research Action Council.
Live Oak School Policies & Procedure Manual. (2003-2004).
Shasta County Office of Education. Live Oak School Policies
& Procedure Manual. (11th ed.). Redding, CA: Author.
Marsh, D. (2003). The concerns-based assessment model
(CBAM). Presentation to USC School of Education. Redding,
CA.
Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. (2001). Classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Mayer, R. E. (2000). Theories of learning and their application to
technology. In O'Neil, H. F., & R. S. Perez (Eds.), Technology
Applications in Education: A Learning View (pp. 127-157).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McClure, P . (1996, June). Title 1 and Resource Allocation.
Presentation to Successful Schools Network, Kansas City,
Missouri.
McDermott, P. C. (1999). Teaching in high-poverty, urban school:
Learning from practitioners and students. (ERIC Accession
No. 431058)
Newman, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructur
ing: A report to the public and educators. (ERIC Accession
No. ED387925)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
141
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
Payne, R. K. (1998). A framework for understanding poverty.
Baytown, TX: RPF Publishing.
Phillips, V. (1999). Empowering discipline: An approach that
works with at-risk student. Carmel Valley, CA: Personal
Development Publishing.
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results (2n d ed.). Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tucker, M.S., & Codding, J. B. (1998). Standards for our schools.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
U. S. Department of Education. (1999). Title 1: Supporting
academic excellence on high poverty schools through Title 1.
Retrieved October 3, 2004, from http://www.edgov/off ice
/ OESE/ESEA/themes/cc-title-i.htm.
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1998). Educational
resilience. Office of Educational Research and Improvement
of the U. S. Department of Education. Retrieved October 3,
2004, from http://www.templeedu/LSS/pub98-ll.htm
Washburn, A. (2001). Campaign for Fiscal Equity v. State: A
Template for Education Transformation in New York.
Retrieved May 8, 2003, from http://web.lexis-nexis.com/
universe
Wirt, F., & Kirst, M. (1997). The political dynamics of American
education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.
Wong, K. (2002). Federal Educational Policy as An Anti-poverty
Strategy. Retrieved May 8, 2003, from http://web.lexis-
nexis. com/universe
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
142
Zarate, R. (1997). Principal of national blue ribbon school says
high poverty school can excel. Intercultural Development
Research Association Newsletter Vol. XXIV, No. 6, June-July
1997 (ERIC Accession No. 410083)
Zikmund, W. G. (1997). Business research methods (5th ed).
Orlando, FL: The Dryden Press.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

An evaluation of the REMEDY project with an emphasis on sustainability: A Safe Schools /Healthy Students federal grant

PDF

A quantitative and qualitative study of computer technology and student achievement in mathematics and reading at the second- and third-grade levels: A comparison of high versus limited technolo...

PDF

Cognitive coaching training for master teachers and its effects on student teachers' ability to reflect on practice

PDF

Into, Through and Beyond: Evaluation of migrant education reading tutor program innovations

PDF

Effects of the STAR testing program on teachers and the curriculum

PDF

Implementation of performance indicators for the district office of the Dos Palos -Oro Loma Joint Unified School District

PDF

Institutional factors affecting academic persistence of underprepared community college freshmen

PDF

Evaluation of CLAD training in northern California

PDF

Corrective action plan for program improvement of a middle school

PDF

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

PDF

Family group conference: An innovative approach to truancy in schools. A case study

PDF

Evaluation of a two -period double math program on the academic achievement of underperforming seventh grade math students

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

Increasing student retention through benchmarking and organizational improvement

PDF

Effects of an integrated content and methods course on preservice teachers' beliefs and efficacy toward mathematics

PDF

A descriptive study of probation officers' views of delinquency in males and females

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 Math Matters professional development program in one elementary school

Asset Metadata

Creator Borgaard, Michael D. (author)

Core Title An evaluation of probation supervision and its role in performance of students identified as living in poverty in Shasta County Court and Community Schools

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,OAI-PMH Harvest,sociology, criminology and penology

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Hocevar, Dennis (committee chair), Cohn, Carl (committee member), McLaughlin, Michael (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-355833

Unique identifier UC11340991

Identifier 3180437.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-355833 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3180437.pdf

Dmrecord 355833

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Borgaard, Michael D.

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