Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readinesss gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on goals and parent involvement
(USC Thesis Other)
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readinesss gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on goals and parent involvement
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 1
A CAPSTONE PROJECT USING THE GAP ANALYSIS MODEL: CLOSING THE
COLLEGE READINESS GAP FOR LATINO ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS WITH A
FOCUS ON GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT
by
Brent A. Morris
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2013
Copyright 2013 Brent A. Morris
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 2
Dedication
I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Ted and Ruth Morris who believed so strongly
in my ability to accomplish any goal, no matter how challenging. My earliest memories are filled
with examples of my parents’ unwavering confidence when others might question my aptitude.
Each of them in their own way provided support and comfort after failure, and encouragement
and praise for success. It’s been about fifteen years since the passing of my parents, but I know
that somehow they are celebrating this very proud moment. I also dedicate this effort to my
mentors, colleagues, and good friends from the University of Southern California Executive
Master of Leadership (EML) program who helped me understand the core value of service. To
Dr. Bob Myrtle, Dr. Rich Callahan, Christine Schachter, Rich Guererro, Jeff Wigintton, Jeneese
Wang and the rest of Cohort 2, a heartfelt thanks for lighting a fire within me to pursue
leadership opportunities for the benefit of others. Finally, I dedicate this effort to my law
enforcement friends and colleagues who have challenged, influenced and protected me
throughout my career.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 3
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge and thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Robert Rueda for being
a superb mentor and effective role model during this challenging process, and for always being
available to offer his expertise, helpful feedback, motivation, and confidence. I also give thanks
to the members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Ken Yates and Dr. Kathy Stowe for offering
their time and keen insights to improve the quality of my work. My sincere thanks go to my
colleagues and partners who worked with me on this project, Evelyn Jimenez, and Michael
Kurland for their friendship, perspective, and dedication. The three of us were always there to
assist, encourage, and challenge one another to move forward. Finally, I would like to thank the
principal, administrators, counselors, teachers, and parents that participated in this project. Their
cooperation, concern, and courtesy were deeply appreciated.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 4
Table of Contents
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ 3
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 7
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 8
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Preface ......................................................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 11
Problems Facing Latino ELLs at the National Level ...................................................... 11
Problems Facing Latino ELLs in the State of California ................................................ 13
ELLs and Education Reform .......................................................................................... 14
National Level ...................................................................................................... 14
State of California ................................................................................................ 15
Importance of the Problem Nationally ............................................................................. 17
Importance of the Problem (State and Local) .................................................................. 18
Trojan High School .............................................................................................. 18
Summary of the Problem ................................................................................................. 19
Purpose of Analysis ......................................................................................................... 20
Chapter 2: Review of Literature on ELL Students ..................................................................... 21
English Language Learner Population ............................................................................. 21
Long-Term English Learners ............................................................................... 22
Heterogeneity of Population ................................................................................ 23
Socioeconomic Status .......................................................................................... 23
Academic Achievement ................................................................................................... 24
Theoretical Models Explaining Differences in
Academic Achievement ....................................................................................... 25
Reclassification to Fluent English Proficient ................................................................... 29
Access to Four-Year Colleges ......................................................................................... 31
Legal Considerations ...................................................................................................... 35
Summary of What We Know ........................................................................................... 39
Chapter 3: Information Gathering Steps ..................................................................................... 41
An Overview of Gap Analysis ......................................................................................... 41
Methodology .................................................................................................................... 43
Institutional Review Board (IRB) ........................................................................ 44
Interviews ............................................................................................................. 45
Scanning Interviews ............................................................................................. 45
In-depth Interviews .............................................................................................. 47
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 5
Student Surveys ................................................................................................... 47
Parent Surveys ..................................................................................................... 48
Parent Focus Group.............................................................................................. 49
Achievement Records .......................................................................................... 50
An Overview of the Community...................................................................................... 52
An Overview of the District ............................................................................................. 52
An Overview of the School.............................................................................................. 53
Student performance ............................................................................................ 53
R-FEP ................................................................................................................... 54
Problem Areas ...................................................................................................... 56
Root Causes Group Presentation ..................................................................................... 58
Solutions Presentation ...................................................................................................... 59
Solutions .......................................................................................................................... 59
Chapter 4: Findings and Patterns ................................................................................................. 60
Findings ........................................................................................................................... 63
Strengths ............................................................................................................. 63
Areas of Growth .................................................................................................. 64
Interviews ............................................................................................................. 64
Student Survey ..................................................................................................... 65
Parent Survey ....................................................................................................... 67
Parent Focus Group.............................................................................................. 67
Achievement Records .......................................................................................... 69
AMAOs ................................................................................................................ 69
Identification of Root Causes........................................................................................... 72
Chapter 5: Solutions – Literature Review .................................................................................... 76
Lack of Intermediate and Performance Goals ................................................................. 76
Lack of Enhanced Parental-Involvement Initiatives ........................................................ 81
Chapter 6: Proposed Solutions ..................................................................................................... 96
Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 96
Develop Intermediate and Performance Goals .................................................... 97
Improve the Effectiveness of Parental-Involvement
Initiatives at THS ............................................................................................... 102
Juntos Para Una Mejor Educación
(Together for a Better Education). .................................................................... 105
Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE) ................................................... 106
Juntos vs. PIQE .................................................................................................. 108
Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 109
Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 111
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 112
References ............................................................................................................................ 114
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 6
Appendices:
Appendix A: Scanning Questions .................................................................................. 127
Appendix B: In-depth Teacher Interview Questions ..................................................... 131
Appendix C: Student Survey For Trojan High School .................................................. 132
Appendix D: Parent Survey (English and Spanish) ....................................................... 135
Appendix E: Gap Analysis Activity Log ....................................................................... 137
Appendix F: Student Survey Results ............................................................................. 138
Appendix G: Parent Survey Results .............................................................................. 140
Appendix H: Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives ........................................ 141
Appendix I: Goal Planning Guides ............................................................................... 143
Appendix J: Parent Involvement Program Contacts and Resources ............................. 144
Appendix K: Letter From Westchester High School Principal ..................................... 145
Appendix L: Letter From El Rancho High School Principal ......................................... 146
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 7
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Assumed Causes of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization .... 62
Table 2: Strengths of THS................................................................................................. .63
Table 3: Validated Root Causes for ELL College Readiness Gap..................................... 73
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Stakeholders and Organizational Goal for Trojan High School ............................44
Figure 2: ELL Students’ Gaps in Achievement on the API, CAHSEE, CST (ELA)
GPA, and A-G Requirements ................................................................................56
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 9
Abstract
This project used a problem solving model to identify root causes and suggest researched based
solutions specifically developed to increase the number of Latino English language learners
qualified to be admitted to a four-year college upon graduation from a high school in Southern
California. The approach used in this project was based upon a problem-solving model called
gap analysis. A team of three doctoral students, acting as consultants to the leadership of the
high school, reviewed relevant research, conducted interviews, reviewed achievement data,
assisted school officials conducting surveys, and hosted a parent focus-group during the gap
analysis process. The gap analysis process focused on three dimensions to identify root causes
and suggest solutions: knowledge, motivation and organizational barriers. Using this process,
each team member identified and studied root causes and made researched based
recommendations. The findings addressed in this project were: achievement goals for ELLs were
communicated in general form without the benefit of performance or intermediate goals to guide
progress, and a lack of enhanced parental-involvement initiatives. The findings from this project
are relevant to the unique context of the high school where the gap analysis project was
conducted, and caution should be exercised in applying the findings in this project to other
school sites.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 10
Preface
Some of the chapters within this dissertation were coauthored and have been so
identified. Such a collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices, but is not the norm for
most doctoral programs. To meet the objective of developing highly skilled practitioners ready to
meet real world challenges, the USC Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of Education
have permitted our project team to carry out this shared venture.
This dissertation was a part of a collaborative project with two other doctoral candidates,
Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland. The project team met with Trojan High School (THS)
officials with the aim of assisting the school to resolve a genuine problem. To maintain
confidentiality, Trojan High School or THS will be used throughout this project as a pseudo-
name for identification purposes. Since the process of for dissecting and resolving the problem
was too large for a single dissertation, the three dissertations produced by our project team
collectively address the needs of THS (Jimenez, E., 2013; Kurland, M., 2013). The team co-
authored Chapters 1-4 with revisions and modifications by each author, and separately authored
Chapters 5-6 that concentrate on specific solutions and recommendations.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 11
Chapter 1: Introduction
Authors: Evelyn Jimenez, Michael Kurland, Brent Morris
1
This project is a gap analysis of college readiness for Latino English language learners
(ELLs) at Trojan High School, (THS) located in Southern California.
2
. The intent is to examine
possible causes for the lower levels of college readiness, and to recommend solutions. The
project was developed through collaboration with a local school district and principal to help
address performance problems deemed important to the school related to organizational goals not
being met. A team of doctoral students then worked collaboratively to conduct a gap analysis.
Initially the school instructed the team to focus on overall Latino ELL achievement. As the
project progressed the school narrowed their interest on college readiness for Latino ELLs.
Because achievement is such an integral part of college readiness by virtue of
admission standards requiring certain Grade Point Averages (GPA) and scores on standardized
tests, an understanding of Latino ELL achievement is essential. Therefore, the challenges facing
Latinos and Latino ELLs will be presented before focusing on the college readiness issue. Before
describing the school, a picture of the issues at the larger national level will be presented.
Problems Facing Latino ELLs at the National Level
3
Immigrants have migrated to many areas of the United States in search of a better life and
economic opportunity. These immigrants have sought to realize the American dream by working
hard to establish economic stability for themselves and their families. Immigrants bring with
them their cultures, values, and languages. Data from the Pew Research Center (2006) indicate
that of the last 100 million inhabitants the United States has gained, over half are immigrants or
1
This chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
2
In order to maintain confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school.
3
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 12
the children of immigrants. As the nation’s population becomes increasingly diverse so does the
student population in public schools.
The growth in racial and ethnic diversity found in public schools has also brought about
an increase in the number of language minority students enrolled in public schools. Today, the
number of school-aged children (children ages 5-17) who speak a language other than English in
their homes has increased to 11.2 million (Aud et al., 2010). The most commonly used terms to
describe these children’s language abilities are limited-English proficient (LEP), English learner
(EL), or English language learner (ELL). For the purpose of this project, the term English
language learners will be used. From the 1997-1998 school year to the 2008-2009 school year,
the number of ELLs enrolled in public schools increased from 3.5 million to 5.3 million,
(National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition [NCELA], 2011). Projections for the
future estimate that by 2020 the population of school age children will grow by 4.8 million, and
Hispanic children, many of whom are ELLs, will account for 98% of the increase (Fry, 2006).
According to the latest Census report, Latinos have outpaced the rest of the nation’s
growth by roughly four times, increasing to 50.5 million as of 2010, or 16.3% of the estimated
total U.S. population of 308.7 million (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). A disproportionate
percentage of Latino students come from low-income households. The poverty rate among
Latinos in 2010 was 6.1 million. Of the 6.1 million Latino children living in poverty, more than
two-thirds, or 4.1 million are the children of immigrants. The other two million are the children
of parents born in the U.S. (Lopez &Velasco, 2011). These numbers are significant because poor
children are at a greater risk to perform poorly in school (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). The
future of Latinos depends on whether today’s Latino youth in public schools can raise their
educational attainment and English ability.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 13
Problems Facing Latino ELLs in the State of California
4
The increase in the number of ELLs at the national level is reflected in the population
changes in the state of California. Today, California has 1.6 million ELLs in grades K through
12
th
grade, approximately 25% of the student population. Of these students in California, 85%
are Spanish-speaking Latinos (California Legislative Analyst’s Office [CLAO], 2008).
Currently, Latinos constitute the largest group of ELLs. The number of Latino ELLs in
California public schools is projected to increase as new immigrants arrive and the U.S. born
children of immigrants begin school.
A greater part of Latino students struggle academically and lag behind their peers. They
demonstrate higher dropout rates and significant achievement gaps on state and national
assessments (Gandara, 2010; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez Orozco, 2009). Nationwide, Latinos
represent more than 20% of public school students in grades kindergarten through twelfth grade
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). In California, almost half of the student population is Latino
(Passel, Cohn, & Lopez, 2011). Disparities in academic achievement between California’s
Latino population and their White and Asian counterparts is present. In the 2009-2010 school
year, Latino tenth grade students had a 73% passing rate for the California High School Exit
Exam (CAHSEE) English-Language Arts test in comparison to a 91% passing rate for white
tenth grade and Asian tenth grade students (California Department of Education [CDE], 2010a).
For the CAHSEE’s mathematics test in the same school year, Latino tenth grade students had a
74% passing rate compared to a 91% passing rate for white students and a 95% passing rate for
Asian tenth grade students (CDE, 2010a). During the 2008-2009 school year, the dropout rate for
4
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 14
California Latino high school students in grades nine through twelve was 7%, compared to 2.5%
and 3.7% for Asian and white high school students respectively (CDE, 2010b).
ELLs and Education Reform
5
The learning needs of ELLs pose challenges to schools. ELLs have low graduation rates,
high dropout rates, and low percentages of students meeting federal or state proficiency targets
(Freeman & Freeman, 2002; Gandara, 2010; McCardle, Mele-Carthy, Cutting, Leos, &
D’Emilio, 2005). Yet, ELLs make up 25% of California’s students (Payan & Nettles, 2008).
Students identified as ELLs need specialized instruction to adequately learn in schools. In some
cases, the learning needs of ELL students are often responded to by schools with remedial, low-
level classes and teachers who are not highly qualified (Rumberger, Gandara, & Merino, 2006).
Schools face challenges in closing the achievement gap between native English speakers and
ELL students.
National Level. Since the 1960s, federal and state legislation has attempted to reform the
educational system to meet the needs of all students. In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) was passed. It provided federal funding for schools in low
socioeconomic communities across the country. In 1967, ESEA underwent reauthorization, and
in 1968, Title VII was introduced, the Bilingual Education Act (Osorio-O’Dea, 2001). The
Bilingual Education Act provided federal funding for school districts to develop educational
programs for students with limited English proficiency.
Most recently, in 2001, Title VII of the ESEA was replaced with the English Language
Acquisition Act, or Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The implementation of
NCLB has placed a demand on states, school districts, schools, and stakeholders including
5
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 15
administrators and teachers to educate all students to proficient levels. NCLB provisions for
assessment and accountability are designed to focus on increased levels of achievement by
requiring states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to students in particular grades
and subgroups of students including: students with disabilities, students from low-socioeconomic
backgrounds, and students with limited English proficiency (NCLB, 2002). Each subgroup must
show growth on the annual standardized assessment. Schools must meet their “Adequate Yearly
Progress” (AYP) which is a specific percentage of the school’s students who must score
proficient or above in English and math on the annual standardized assessment selected by the
state.
State of California. In California, if the school or districts miss their AYP goal for two
consecutive years they are classified as a “Program Improvement” school. Once identified as
“Program Improvement” they face sanctions such as removal of staff or the school being
controlled by the state rather than the district if they continue to miss their target. Title III
expects that students in language supports programs meet the same academic standards as their
English-speaking peers. NCLB standards with respect to ELLs requires that students with limited
English proficiency meet the same challenging state academic content and student achievement
standards as all students are expected to meet (NCLB, 2002).
In California, voters have had a direct impact on English language education policy. In
1994, Proposition 187 was introduced to deny undocumented immigrants health care, social
services, and public education. California voters approved Proposition 187, however, the U.S.
district court overruled it declaring the law unconstitutional. However, Proposition 187 paved the
way for Proposition 227. In 1998, California voters passed Proposition 227, known as the
“English for the Children in Public Schools” which required schools to provide instruction in
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 16
English rather than the primary or home language (Parrish et al., 2006; Stritikus, 2003).
Proposition 227 required that ELLs be taught in English through structured/sheltered English
immersion during a transition period of one-year and then transferred to English mainstream
classrooms. Structured/sheltered English immersion programs use English adapted to the
students’ level of comprehension to provide content area instruction (Parrish et al., 2006). The
thought behind the instructional change was that students would acquire English more quickly
and consequently, gain access to educational opportunities.
Today, due to Proposition 227 California educators must deliver educational programs to
ELL students with minimal support in the student’s primary language, unless a parental
exception waiver is granted. Proposition 227 made provisions for parents to request a waiver to
allow their children to continue to receive bilingual instruction, however, it did so under specific
conditions. The specific conditions included: that the child know English as measured by
standardized tests, the child be over ten years of age and that the school staff agree that another
approach is in the best interest of the student, or that the child has special needs that warrant an
alternate program (Parrish et al., 2006). These limited conditions have made it difficult for
parents to obtain waivers for their children. The reality is that the majority of ELLs in California
struggle academically, failing to progress in English proficiency, and facing high dropout rates.
State and Federal mandates such as Proposition 227 and No Child Left Behind, are
mandates that affect ELLs. In California, this means that ELLs are receiving instruction related
to standards and that instruction is provided in English. Despite these state and federal mandates,
more than 60% of English learners are stuck at the intermediate level of language acquisition and
struggle academically (Clark, 2009). Despite years of implementing policies to create
educational reform that focuses on the needs of ELLs, data continue to show that a significant
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 17
achievement gap exists between native English speakers and ELLs. Meeting the needs of the
growing numbers of linguistically diverse students is a challenge for k-12 educators across the
nation and in particular California.
Importance of the Problem Nationally
6
The lack of English language proficiency is a barrier that prevents Latinos from
competing in the job market and earning competitive salaries. McManus, Gould, and Welch
(1983) report that employees with an English language deficiency, 12 years of school experience
and 20 years of work experience will make an average of 35 percent less than employees who
are English proficient. Given the current high unemployment rate and competitiveness for jobs,
those who lack English language proficiency are at a disadvantage when it comes to
employment.
President Obama underscored the importance of college attainment when he told the
National Urban League that eight out of 10 new jobs would be filled by those with higher
education degrees (Obama 2010). Research suggests that education has a dramatic impact on
crime reduction. Lochner and Moretti (2003) studied crime rates, costs, and high school dropout
rates, concluding that a one-percent increase in the high-school completion rate for men 20-60
years of age, would save 1.4 billion dollars per year, nationally.
Besides changing demographics, employment, and crime rates, there is an inherent
obligation to offer equal opportunities for access to higher education. The No Child Left Behind
Act was passed to motivate schools to ensure that all students meet standards.
6
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 18
Importance of the Problem (State and Local)
7
Latino access to four-year colleges is a serious issue on a state and local level as well.
Demographics are changing as reflected in census data that suggest that Latinos are the fastest
growing ethnic group and the most underrepresented group in higher education. In California,
Latinos account for 36.8 percent of the population, and only 5.7 percent of the University of
California enrolment, 25 percent of California State University enrollment and 29.6 percent of
community college enrollment (Zarate & Burciaga, 2010). The academic achievement of Latinos
and ELL students is important because they represent an increasing percentage of the nation, and
subsequently the school age population. It is important for educators to continue to work towards
closing the achievement gap for Latinos and ELLs. A likely consequence of this pattern is that a
majority of Latinos and ELL students will not be well prepared for college level academic work,
resulting in a significant percentage of California’s future labor force unable to meet the demand
for skilled workers.
Trojan High School (THS)
8
. The site for this project (THS) is a suburban high school
that has experienced the same issues with their ELL population as many other schools,
specifically, low achievement on standardized tests and lack of college readiness. The
achievement gap at THS exists between the achievement of ELLs and the overall performance of
the school. In 2010-2011, the ELL population at THS earned an Academic Performance Index
(API) of 740, compared to the school API of 809. The ELL subgroup had a decline in
performance of 22 points from the previous year. THS must examine the challenges that hinder
7
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
8
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 19
progress towards removing obstacles that prevent their ELL population from achieving the
school’s mission of becoming creative, complex, thinkers and responsible citizens.
Summary of the Problem
9
The growth in racial and ethnic minority students in public schools has produced a
significant increase in the number of ELLs in public schools, both nationally and in California.
Latinos are the fastest growing student population and account for 85% of the ELLs in
California. There is a significant achievement gap between Latino students and their White and
Asian counterparts as evidenced by a 73% pass rate in the CAHSEE English Language Arts test
compared to a 91% pass rate for both White and Asian tenth grade students (CDE, 2010a).
Despite educational reforms that have focused on ELLs, there remains a significant achievement
gap between native English speakers and ELLs, the majority of which are Latinos.
The achievement gap for Latinos ELLs is a serious problem that prevents them from
competing in the job market and earning competitive salaries. Despite being the fastest growing
student population, Latino students are the most underrepresented group in higher education.
THS’s mission is to provide every student with opportunities to succeed in their academic,
social, and personal endeavors while enhancing each student's ability to become productive
contributors to a global society. Within our democracy there is an inherent obligation to provide
equal opportunities for access to the benefits of higher education. THS recognizes this obligation
by their motivation to participate in the gap analysis and by their vision to provide every student
with opportunities to succeed and become productive contributors.
9
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris; these
authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 20
Purpose of Analysis
10
The purpose of this gap analysis project is to identify possible causes that underlie ELL
student achievement gaps related to college readiness at THS, and recommend research-based
solutions for those causes. For the purposes of this inquiry project, the achievement gap is
defined as the difference between the number of Latino ELL students who meet college
readiness requirements versus other students. College readiness is defined as students qualified
for admission to the University of California or a California State University upon graduation
from high school. As we will describe in later chapters college readiness requirements include
grade point average, and state standardized test scores. This inquiry project will be addressing
the question of: What are the root causes that create the persistent achievement gap related to
college readiness amongst Latino ELLs at THS? In order to address this question, the gap
analysis framework will be used to identify the reasons underlying the persistent levels of
underperformance that impact THS’s college readiness gap for Latino ELLs (Clark & Estes,
2008; Rueda, 2011).
The following chapter provides a background on the Latino ELL population in general as
well as the major educational issues seen for this population that can be related to the issues seen
at THS. A literature review will examine theoretical models explaining differences in academic
achievement between the ELL population and other students.
10
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 21
Chapter 2: Review of Literature on ELL Students
Authors: Evelyn Jimenez, Michael Kurland, Brent Morris
11
This chapter will provide a review of the literature describing the ELL population, its
characteristics and achievement related issues. These issues include academic achievement on
standardized tests, re-designation rates, and college access. Theoretical models explaining
achievement differences between the ELL population and other students will also be explored.
Next, this chapter will cover the major legislative considerations regarding the Latino ELL
population, and present a summary of what is currently known about this population. Finally, an
overview of how these issues are manifested at THS
12
will be provided.
English Language Learner Population
13
ELLs represent the fastest growing segment of the school age population. The number of
English learner students has grown consistently over the last twenty years. This growth
represents an increase in school enrollments in every part of the country, including states that
have rarely seen growth in the past. California, Texas, New York, Florida, and Illinois account
for 60% of English language learners (Perkins-Gough, 2007). In recent years, other states have
begun to see a rapid growth in the number of their ELLs. Between 1995-2005 states such as
Alabama, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee have experienced
a 300% growth in their ELL population (National Clearing House for English Language
Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs, 2011). Projections suggest that by
2030 ELLs will comprise 40 percent of elementary and secondary students (Thomas & Collier,
2001).
11
This Chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
12
In order to maintain confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school
13
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 22
Long-term English learners.
14
There exists a growing population of ELL students who
are not recent immigrants. This group is referred to as Long-Term English Learners (LTEL)
because they have been in U.S. schools for more than five years and they have made little to no
progress toward achieving proficiency in English (Freeman et al., 2002). LTELs fall into two
main groups: (a) transitional students who have moved back and forth between the United States
and their families country of origin, subsequently attending school in both countries, and (b)
students who have received inconsistent schooling in the United States because they have moved
in and out of English as a second language and mainstream programs (Freeman et al., 2002).
LTEL students make up more than half of the students identified as ELL students in
California. The number of students referred to as LTEL varies by grade level in California, with
about 69% of elementary school (grades 3-5) ELLs and about 31% of secondary school (grades
6-12) ELL students (Olsen, 2010). ELLs who enroll in kindergarten have a 50% chance of
becoming LTEL (Perkins-Gough, 2007). This is because in many cases ELLs do not receive any
language program development, encounter elementary school curriculum and materials not
designed to meet their needs, or they are enrolled in weak language development programs
(Olsen, 2010). The end result is that ELLs have difficulty in reading and writing, consequently,
they struggle in all content areas that require literacy as they move to the next grade level. By the
time LTELs arrive in secondary schools, they have significant gaps in their academic
achievement. In most cases, these students have weak academic language and deficits in reading
and writing skills. Due to the fact that failure begins early on for ELLs there is limited research
focused on secondary ELL students.
14
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 23
Heterogeneity of population.
15
ELL students are classified as a single subgroup, but
differing characteristics of students within this group pose specific instructional issues and
challenges with regard to student achievement. ELLs are often misplaced or not adequately
served by schools because there is an assumption that ELLs are a homogenous group. There is a
range of backgrounds among ELLs in secondary schools (Freeman et al., 2002). ELLs come into
the school with differences in cultural and economic backgrounds, skills, and past experiences.
They vary in languages spoken but also in countries of origin, immigrant-generational status
(Reardon & Galindo, 2009), level of English proficiency (Solano-Flores, 2008), and dialect of
native language spoken (Solano-Flores & Li, 2006).
Although 85% of California’s ELL students are Spanish speaking, the homogeneity of
primary language masks variations in family make-up, economic and social resources,
proficiency in primary language, and academic readiness (Freeman et al., 2002). Freeman et al.
(2002) identified differing characteristics by classifying ELLs in three groups: newly arrived
with adequate schooling, newly arrived with limited formal schooling, and LTEL. Some of these
students may have attended school regularly and will have the literacy skills and content
knowledge in their native language. Other students may have had no opportunity to attend a
school or had consistent schooling, which prepared them for higher learning.
Socioeconomic status.
16
ELLs are more likely to come from low socioeconomic status.
Over the past 30 years, from 1980 to 2010, the socioeconomic condition of ELL students has
remained persistently low in income, two-parent families, housing, and parental educational
attainment (Lee, 2002). Poverty has been linked to low student academic achievement. A study
15
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
16
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 24
conducted by Brooks-Gunn and Duncan (1997) concluded that family income can affect child
and adolescent outcomes but that the negative effects of poverty are more pronounced for some
depending on the depth and duration of a child’s exposure to poverty. Low educational
attainment of parents is also another characteristic of poverty. Half of ELLs in elementary school
have parents with less than a high-school education, and one in four have parents with less than a
ninth grade education (Capps et al., 2005). As a result, ELLs are more likely to be concentrated
in schools that are under resourced, serve high proportions of minority students, and are located
in high poverty areas.
Academic Achievement
17
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has placed accountability at the head of the national
educational agenda. With the implementation of NCLB across the nation every state is required
to assess students and disaggregate findings by subgroups of students including: students with
disabilities, students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds, and students with limited English
proficiency. NCLB requires that all students be proficient on grade-level standards as measured
by the state accountability test by the year 2014 (NCLB, 2002). Although NCLB calls education
systems of states to educate all students there is a significant gap in achievement across
subgroups of students.
Achievement gaps are the differences in academic ability between various subgroups of
students in academic performance on state and national test scores. Achievement gaps exist
between White and ethnic minorities, native English speakers and English language learners,
socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged students, and disabled and non-disabled
students (Anderson, Medrich, & Fowler, 2007). The disparity in groups is often measured by a
17
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 25
statewide or national standardized test but it is also demonstrated in measures such as test scores,
grades, and dropout rates. Test scores, grades, and drop-out rates show that White, English
language proficient, middle to upper class, and non-disabled students tend to outperform all other
groups (National High School Center, 2009).
English language learners, of which most are Latino students, continuously fall below
academic achievement levels. Latinos, as a group, have underperformed on national standardized
tests. According to the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 50%
of fourth-grade Latinos scored “below basic” in reading and 28% scored below basic in math.
Students classified as ELLs lagged even further. By fourth grade 70% of ELLs scored below
basic in reading and 42% scored below basic in math (National Center for Educational Statistics
[NCES], 2011a, 2011b). The low performance of Latino and ELLs continues through middle
school. On the 2011 reading assessment, 37% of Latino eighth grade students scored “below
basic” and only 18% scored “at or above proficient”, whereas, 41% of white and 46% of
Asian/Pacific Islander eight grade students scored “at or above proficient” (NCES, 2011b).
Similarly, in math 40% of Latino eighth grade students scored below basic, whereas, 20% scored
“at or above proficient” compared with 43% of white and 55% of Asian/Pacific Islander eighth
graders (NCES, 2011a). Furthermore, ELL students in middle school performed worse. On the
reading assessment, 71% of eighth grade ELL students scored below basic and 72% scored
below basic on math (NCES, 2011a, 2011b). The NAEP data suggests that Latinos and ELL
students significantly lag behind other subgroups of students.
Theoretical models explaining differences in academic achievement.
18
According to
researchers there are three perspectives to explain the differences in the achievement gap of
18
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent
Morris; these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 26
ethnic minorities: cultural deficit theory, cultural difference theory, and cultural ecological
theory (Academic Models: Explaining Achievement [AMEA], 2007).
The first theoretical model, the cultural deficit model, explains poor performance of
ethnic minority students as the result of an impoverished and restricted home life as well as other
factors seen to be inherent in individuals, families, and/or communities. The underlying theory
behind the deficit model is that students do not achieve because they lack a cognitively
stimulating environment (AMEA, 2007). Including the lack of parent support, low value placed
on education, and a language poor environment. According to this perspective ethnic minority
students and poor students enter school with a lack of cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu
(1986) defines cultural capital as the accumulation of specific forms of knowledge, skills, and
abilities that are valued by privileged groups in society. Subsequently, suggesting that capital
associated with the dominant group has the most status in society. As a result, ethnic minorities
in this model are seen as second rate when compared to the majority group. Other variations on a
deficit approach focus on additional presumed deficits such as intelligence, motivation, and
related factors.
The second theoretical model, the cultural difference model, points to the differences in
values, expectations, languages, and communication patterns between teachers and students or
schools and families as a source of difficulty for ethnic minority students (AMEA, 2007). The
underlying theory, is that the social organization, learning formats and expectations,
communication patterns, and sociolinguistic environment of schools are incongruent with the
cultural patterns of different ethnic groups, therefore, limiting the opportunity for student success
(AMEA, 2007). The poor academic performance is a result of the mismatch between group
values and school norms.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 27
The third theoretical model, the cultural ecology model, attributes social, economic, and
political forces as factors that interact in complex and dynamic ways with individual and group
characteristics and that in turn affect the achievement of ethnic minorities (AMEA, 2007). One
example of an approach from this perspective is based on a cultural ecological view (Ogbu &
Simons, 1998). The underlying theory is that there are uneven power relationships between
groups in society. Ogbu and Simons (1998) explain that there are two primary forces that
contribute to the academic success or underachievement of minority students in the United
States. They focus on two types of minorities: voluntary and involuntary.
Ogbu and Simons (1998) define voluntary minorities as those that voluntarily moved to
the United States because they believed this would result in more economic well-being and better
opportunities. Examples of voluntary minorities in the United States are immigrants from Africa,
China, India, Japan, and Korea. The positive expectations they bring with them influence their
perceptions of society and schools. Voluntary minorities are generally more optimistic about the
future and their children usually don’t experience persistent problems in social adjustment and
academic achievement (Ogbu & Simons, 1998). In these communities, social, peer, and
psychological pressures encourage them to have academic performance better than average.
Since they choose to come the United States they think of hardship as a temporary problem.
They tend to believe that they will be able to overcome these problems through education and
hard work with losing their minority group identity.
Ogbu and Simons (1998) describe involuntary minorities as those groups that are a part
of the United States society due to slavery or colonization rather than by choice. For example,
these groups include African Americans (brought to the United States as slaves), Mexican
Americans, and Native Americans, and because they do not have another homeland to compare
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 28
to, they compare their chances of success with the dominant White group and conclude that they
are worse off. They often attribute their difficulties to “institutionalized discrimination” which
cannot be eliminated by hard work and education alone (Ogbu & Simons, 1998, p. 172).
Involuntary minorities tend to distrust schools and believe that crossing cultural and language
barriers will result in a loss of their social identity. They see their cultural and language barriers
in school as a group identity to be maintained and therefore avoid change. Individuals from
minority groups have difference socialization experiences that have an impact on their academic
motivation to achieve academically. This model emphasizes that it is important for teachers to
know how students’ backgrounds, cultures, and ethnicity affect their learning. As evidence for
this perspective, Ogbu has noted that high-achieving immigrant groups in the US often perform
significantly less well in other sociocultural contexts. An example would be Koreans in the
United States vs. in Japan. While Ogbu’s perspective has been criticized for “blaming the
victim,” it does illustrate the complex sociocultural factors which contribute to student
achievement outcomes.
Connecting Ogbu’s theory back to student achievement, (specifically Latino college
readiness at THS) it is important to remember that Latino ELL students who were brought to this
country by their parents and have attributed their achievement challenges to institutional
discrimination, may distrust the efforts of THS to assist them. Students may not put forth enough
effort or persist in their efforts to do well enough in high school to attend college.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 29
Reclassification to Fluent English Proficient
19
All schools strive to have their ELL population reclassified to become fluent English proficient
but pushing students too early to reclassify can create issues for the ELL population, depending
on their school, support programs, and classification (Robinson, 2011).
English language learners are generally given auxiliary services and resources to help
them succeed in school. When a ELL student is judged to have attained fluency in English by
their school district, the student status then changes from ELL to reclassified fluent English
proficient (R-FEP). When a student is reclassified generally there is a reduction or elimination of
the extra services and support previously provided. This change in support and instructional
setting may adversely affect the newly reclassified student depending on if the English
development services and support were still helpful (Gandara, 2005; Robinson, 2011). Robinson
(2011) suggests that the only way to know if the services and support were or are currently
helpful is to create a binding score for all standardized tests and compare them for students who
are currently in English immersion programs versus students who have recently reclassified and
been moved to nonsupport programs. He found that existing reclassification policy is currently
harming some students in high school, in that students who were reclassified are not necessarily
doing better on their future tests. He also found that ELL students must pass all levels of the
California English Language Development Test (CELDT), and still must be given further
subjective clearance before a student is reclassified, which in high school turns out to be less
than 67% of the time.
The California Education Code § 313 (2011) requires the use of multiple criteria to
determine if a district should reclassify a student from ELL to R-FEP, though the district has
19
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 30
final discretion. The district then establishes a set of criteria for services that should be provided
to ELL students at all levels. Callahan, Wilkinson, and Muller, (2010) found that recently
immigrated and low-English-proficient ELLs may benefit more from English as a second
language courses, while students that are higher English proficient or long-term ELLs are likely
harmed by ESL services in high school. Flores, Painter, Harlow-Nash, and Pachon, (2009)
reported that in general, reclassification is on average beneficial to the students learning and thus
students should be reclassified as soon as they can. Following that logic, Gandara and
Rumberger (2009) found that ELLs in secondary schools are often tracked into a dead end path
that never complete the A-G requirements needed for a four year institution. They reported that
many ELL students begin their elementary years in English immersion and never exit, with the
highest performing ELLs reclassifying as R-FEP and the lowest performing students becoming
concentrated in the English immersion classes (Abedi & Gandara, 2006; Gandara, Rumberger,
Maxwell-Jolly, & Callahan, 2003). Callahan (2005) found that 98% of ELLs she surveyed did
not apply for a 4 year state college or university because of the lack of qualified teachers, low
expectations and use of tracking for ELL students. Gandara et al. (2003) found that the schedules
for ELL students were primarily place fillers that contained little college preparatory
requirements.
THS’s district has a master plan for ELLs. This plan dictates that ELL students should be
reclassified to fluent English proficient in no more than 5 years, all ELL students must complete
the A-G requirements before they graduate from high school, and that they may be allowed to
take a 5
th
year in high school in order to help them complete the A-G requirements and
CAHSEE. The school district’s regular redesignation processes requires a student to receive a
score of proficient or higher on the CST-ELA, receive an overall score of early advanced or
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 31
higher on the CELDT with all subtests of intermediate or higher, score a 4 or better in four of the
five areas of the SOLOM, achieve a GPA of 2.0 or better in academic classes with no grades
below a “C” or equivalent and lastly be recommended for redesignation by the Redesignation
Team which is comprised of a parent, administrator, teacher, ELD coordinator, ELD program
specialist, and the ELL student. The plan also describes an alternative method for high school
students who have passed the CAHSEE and have strong recommendations to reclassify even
though they have not score proficient. THS in 2011 redesignated 50% of ELs, which is much
higher than the current California state average of 10% of ELLs reclassified each year (CDE,
2011b).
Access to Four Year Colleges
20
Latino English Language Learners face a compound challenge gaining entrance to four-
year colleges. The literature reveals a pattern of obstacles for Latinos in general, including:
parent education levels, access to AP courses, disparate income, and performance on
standardized examinations (Contreras, 2005). Latinos who are ELLs must also contend with the
burden of competing for college access with students proficient in English. According to
universitybusiness.com, 80.8 percent of Latino adults, age 25-34 did not have a college degree as
of 2009. Other national trends illustrate the lack of equity for college-bound Latinos. According
to the US Census Bureau only 12.7 percent of Latino adults earned a bachelor’s degree as of
2007 compared to 30 percent of their white counterparts (Zarate & Burciaga, 2010). A closer
examination of the inputs that play a significant role in Latino college attainment follows
beginning with access to AP or Honors classes at the high-school level. Zarate and Burciaga
(2010) suggest that large schools serving higher proportions of minority students do not offer as
20
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 32
many AP courses as those serving white students. AP courses add one percentage to the student’s
GPA and can earn college credits. University admissions decisions are significantly influenced
by student transcripts that include AP or Honors level course work according to Geiser and
Santelices (2004) who argue that underrepresented students, particularly from poorer schools,
have a distinct disadvantage gaining access to AP courses. Within the same school
underrepresented students are frequently tracked into non-college preparatory courses and
therefore do not enroll in as many AP courses as their white counterparts. Some schools use AP
examination results to evaluate teachers and therefore students who are perceived to be lower
scoring are steered away from taking AP courses according to Geiser and Santelices (2004).
Cultural capital and socio-economic status are also frequently cited in research relating to
the gap in Latino access to four-year colleges. Perez and McDonough (2008) interviewed 106
Latino college-bound high school students in southern California and found that family
members, including cousins, aunts and uncles, are a primary source of information about
colleges. Friends are also cited frequently as influential to Latino college bound students. The
interviews revealed a strong desire to stay close to family and friends, which sway Latino high
school students towards community colleges and public universities. The Latino students
interviewed in this study were influenced by the reduced costs for remaining near home at
community colleges. Older friends and family members who have gone to college are also
influential sources of information. Because Latino students rely so heavily on family sources for
college admission information, Auerbach (2004) suggests that colleges and communities should
target entire Latino families and friendship networks with admission and financial aid
information so that students get quality advice and the opportunity to develop cultural capital.
Ong, Phinney, and Dennis (2006) examined the parental influence of 123 Latino college students
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 33
and found that among socioeconomic disadvantaged students, academic achievement was linked
to individual and family-level influences. The study also revealed that Latino students who
reported higher levels of family support and ethnic identity experienced higher academic
achievement.
The research may create a perception that all underrepresented students, including
Latinos and ELLs, face the same obstacles and have the same beliefs, fears and goals towards
college admission. Tierney (2009) interacted with three 17 year old Latino seniors as they
prepared to go to college. The students were from the Los Angeles area from low income area
high-schools with grade point averages exceeding 3.0. Tierney concluded that each student’s
experience was unique, yet none of the students had accumulated the cultural or social capital
that their white middle class counterparts do throughout adolescence. Applying to college begins
long before a student’s senior year in high school and underrepresented students must develop
social and cultural capital well before their senior year if the college admission gap is to be
closed.
Collins (1999) explains that linguistic capital is a form of gate-keeping that uses writing
composition courses at major universities to segregate students by perceived writing ability.
Collins describes a system where students who come from middle class, suburban, non-minority
backgrounds are frequently placed into a regular composition class because of their experience
with essayist writing. Students in regular composition classes receive full college credit and are
usually tracked toward classes that fulfill degree requirements. Students who come from
minority backgrounds and whose style of spoken English carry over to their writing are more
likely to be placed into basic composition classes that do not earn college credit and impede
student progress towards degrees. Collins compares linguistic capital to Bourdieu’s theory
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 34
(Bourdieu, 1986) of reproduction where higher education institutions distribute social capital to
maintain the economic power of the majority. Social capital and linguistic capital are frequently
barriers for college bound Latinos to navigate.
Standardized testing for ability and intelligence is another input that places Latinos and
ELLs at a disadvantage for college admission. Although the SAT and ACT tests have generally
been accepted as valid, Kaufman (2010) argues that the tests measure something different from
what was intended to be measured for certain ethnic groups and therefore reflects differential
validity. In other words, Kaufman (2010) argues that different constructs may not be measured
across ethnic groups by the same test. The example is given that a test may measure verbal
ability for Caucasians, but may be measuring exposure to American culture for Latinos.
Kaufman (2010) contends that testing for creativity could add a more objective measurement to
the college admission process.
Walpole et al. (2005) studied the perceptions of 227 urban African American and Latino
high school students and found among other things that students’ believed that standardized tests
are obstacles that prevent them from applying to and being admitted to college. The study
revealed that African American and Latino high school students needed more information about
test preparation strategies. Students from a lower socioeconomic status lack the resources to pay
for college admission tests, and preparation courses and materials. The students in this study
were aware of the important role standardized tests play in college admission decisions; however
their lack of cultural capital created anxiety and a belief that the tests are unfair generating an
internalized stereotype and lower test scores, according to Walpole et al. (2005).
Roemer (2011) describes who she calls the invisible minority, or Mexican English-
language learners (MELLS), who attended elementary and middle school in Mexico and moved
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 35
to the United States. According to Roemer, MELLS spend their time learning English instead of
math, science or social studies. The academic content at the high school level is more complex
and therefore MELLS who have developed the informal spoken language of their peers lack the
academic language ability needed and fall behind. These students are not eligible for AP classes
and do not develop the cultural capital necessary to apply for college. Roemer argues that
MELLS need the visibility and support structure that encourage them to continue their education,
such as programs in Texas (under a bi-national agreement with Mexico) that recognize prior
schoolwork from Mexico, and while they learn English in Texas, MELLS take courses taught by
qualified instructors in Mexico.
Administrators at THS were particularly concerned about Latino students, including
ELLs, attending local community colleges instead of applying to four-year institutions. The
concern expressed at THS is reinforced by data that reveal Latinos are more likely to attend
community college (42 percent) than whites (24 percent) according to Fry (2005). Despite 71
percent of Latino community college students expressing interest in obtaining a bachelor’s
degree, only seven to 20 percent transfer to four-year colleges according to Solorzano, Rivas,
and Velez (2005). California Department of Education records indicate that in the 2008-2009
school year, 67 percent of ELLs at THS enrolled in a postsecondary institution, compared to 82
percent of Latinos, and 82 percent of White students. Clearly ELLs, the majority of whom are
Latino, lag behind their native English speaking counterparts when it comes to attending college.
Legal Considerations
21
English language learner education has vastly changed over the last 50 years starting with
the Bilingual Education Act in 1968 up to the most recent laws of No child Left Behind and
21
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 36
Horne v. Flores U.S. Supreme Court decision. The two major sides to the debate have been
having children who do not speak English either assimilate completely to English, or to have
them taught in their native language and slowly build the English into their vocabulary with
several views in between (Gold & Maxwell-Jolly, 2006).
As more non-native English speaking students began to appear in America’s public
schools, the Bilingual Education Act of 1968 was written into law as amendment Title VII of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This Act provided school districts with
federal funds, in the form of competitive grants, to establish innovative educational programs for
students with limited English speaking ability, but was not very specific for requirements for any
school. These lack of specifics pushed civil rights activists to claim minority-language students
were having their rights violated (Stewner-Manzanares, 1988). Thus in 1974, two significant
events help clarify the intent and design for English language learner programs, the landmark
case of Lau v. Nichols and the passage of the Equal Educational Opportunities Act (EEOA).
In Lau v. Nichols (1974), a class action lawsuit was filed for over 1800 Chinese-speaking
students against the San Francisco Unified School District superintendent. The U.S. Supreme
Court over turned the lower court’s decision and found that the district failed to meet the
language needs of these students denying them equal access to education, which is a violation of
their civil rights (Gandara, Moran, & Garcia, 2004). At the same time, Congress passed the
EEOA which effectively extended the Lau ruling to all students and school districts, ensuring
that all federally-funded agencies addressed the needs of those limited in English proficiency
(Gandara et al., 2004, Gandara, 2000). Both Lau v. Nichols and the EEOA contented that
students should not be discriminated because of their language but did not prescribe how schools
should meet the needs of English language learners (Gandara, 2000).
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 37
The next major legislation to affect ELLs was Proposition 227 in California (1998),
which affected access to bilingual education programs (Gold & Maxwell-Jolly, 2006). This
proposition, which effectively ended most bilingual education program and replaced them with
courses taught in overwhelmingly English, creating the structured English immersion models,
Prop 227 was a landmark decision as it was the first state proposition to dictate pedagogical
strategies for instructing students (Gandara, 2000; Parrish et al., 2006; Torrez, 2001). With this
proposition, only students who parents understood that they needed to request a waiver from all-
English instruction program and gathered enough similar students to create a separate class could
get bilingual education. Proponents of proposition 227 proposed that bilingual education was a
failure because only five percent of ELLs were reclassified to fluent English proficient (R-FEP)
annually (Torrez, 2001). This claim helped to pass Proposition 227 in 1998, but the department
of education found that Proposition 227 has had little effect on English language learners test
scores or reclassification rates since its creation (California Department of Education, 2012).
The Bush administration reauthorized ESEA into No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(NCLB). This new version of ESEA sought to push education for all students through four
pillars: Stronger Accountability for Results, More Freedom for States and Communities, Proven
Education Methods, and More Choices for Parents (Thomas & Brady, 2005; U.S. Department of
Education, 2004). This law requires that all government-run schools receiving federal funding
must administer state-wide standardized tests annually to all their students. These students are
then assessed annually to chart their academic growth. The student groups and school’s growth
should increase each year to the expected Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) criteria set by the
U.S. department of education. If a school or district that receives Title I funding fails to meet
their AYP criteria for two consecutive years, they are labeled “in need of improvement” and are
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 38
required to create a two year plan of improvement and must allow students the option to transfer
to another school, as well as other sanctions (California Department of Education, 2011a).
Although many parts of NCLB, such as improper funding, support, and accountability,
punishment issues have been controversial, NCLB has increased greater accountability for all
students as it forces schools to disaggregate their data into individual subgroup populations such
as English language learners (Lindholm-Leary & Hernandez, 2011). By looking at these different
subgroup populations, NCLB has forced schools to be accountable for all individual groups not
allowing any one group to fall by the way side. This has put a spot light on ELLs that they and
their supporters can use to hold schools more accountable for their improvement in achievement.
Most recently, in the 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court decision for Horne v. Flores, allows
states to determine their own requirements with regards to ELL instruction regarding state
funding support for EEOA compliance. This new ruling allows the state to determine its own
requirements with regards to English language learner instruction, programs and funding, with
the 5-4 majority opinion stating that evaluation of the state actions should focus on student
outcomes rather than on spending and inputs to schools (Robinson, 2011, emphasis added).
Thus, the focus is on what the school accomplishes rather than how they accomplish these
outcomes or providing the funding required for programming.
The previous mentioned legislative context builds a backdrop for the requirements and
ways of implementation required and allowed to occur at THS. The rules that are in place allow
the state to determine its own requirements for instruction for ELLs, so for this school in
California, Prop 227 dedicates that the English immersion protocol must be adhered even if there
are other better programs available unless parents waive out their children from the program.
Also, Lau v. Nichols and the EEOA contented that ELLs at THS should not be discriminated
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 39
because of their language. Finally, THS will be held accountable through NCLB for their ELL
achievement for their AYP levels. THS in 2010-2011 failed to meet their AYP for their ELL
population. This legislative context allows further analysis to take place with both an
understanding of the requirements and THS’s needs.
THS has established a commendable record of strong academic achievement and
exceptional graduation rates that will be discussed more later. THS staff understands the need to
improve academic opportunities for their Latino ELL population and have asked our team to
conduct this gap analysis and make recommendations for their consideration. This is a
particularly unique context as the ELL population was only 8% of the otherwise high achieving
student body when the gap analysis began.
Summary of What We Know
22
Based upon a review of the literature and the concerns expressed by the administration of
THS, this Gap Analysis will focus on the academic achievement of Latino ELLs, including those
who are classified as R-FEP, and their readiness to transfer to four-year colleges. Seven major
points can summarize our review of the literature in this chapter:
1. Although schools strive to make all ELLs proficient in English, students classified as
R-FEP face elimination of extra services, monitoring, and support that can lead to
adverse effects on academic achievement and access to four-year colleges.
2. English language learners are frequently tracked into coursework that does not
qualify them to attend four-year colleges.
3. Latino ELLs fall below the achievement levels of their White and Asian counterparts
as evidenced by their performance on the 2011 reading assessment that revealed, 37%
22
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 40
of Latino ELLs scored below basic and only 18% scored at or above proficient.
Conversely, 41% of Whites and 46% of Asians scored at or above proficient
revealing a substantial gap.
4. English language learners are three times more likely to not graduate than native
English speakers.
5. Latino ELLs face substantial obstacles and lack the cultural and linguistic capital
necessary to allow them access to four-year schools.
6. Poorly qualified teachers, low expectations for ELLs and negative attitudes on the
part of teachers are related to lower attainment levels for ELLs. The use of tracking
has been associated with unequal outcomes, growth and achievement for ELLs
according to Callahan (2005).
7. Academic failure begins early on for ELLs, as such, there is limited research focused
on secondary ELLs.
The information presented in this chapter forms an important backdrop for the present
gap analysis. It should be kept in mind that these patterns can vary widely, depending upon the
local context, but they do provide a useful lens with which to approach the current project. In
order to address the specific concerns of the administration of THS, namely the college readiness
of Latino ELLs, our project team used a gap analysis process to confirm the nature and the scope
of the problem and investigate potential causes and solutions. The following chapter will provide
a brief overview of the gap analysis process and how it was applied at THS.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 41
Chapter 3: Information Gathering Steps
Authors: Evelyn Jimenez, Michael Kurland, Brent Morris
23
An Overview of Gap Analysis
24
The purpose of Gap Analysis is to help schools and other organizations solve problems
and make sound decisions about products, professional development and other performance
improvement strategies (Clark & Estes, 2008). Gap Analysis provides a straightforward,
systematic method to clarify goals and identify gaps from current achievement levels. It is a
particularly useful tool to investigate actual causes for the gaps so that resources and solutions
are not squandered on assumed causes (Rueda, 2011).
A brief outline of the Gap Analysis process begins with defining goals. Goals can be
classified as long-term, intermediate, or day to day. When defining or clarifying goals, it is
imperative that all three levels are aligned and that each goal is measurable. The second step is to
determine the gap, which is a comparison of current achievement minus the standard you have
set as a goal. The third step is to determine causes, which is accomplished by assessing the
potential knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors causing the gap. The final step in the
Gap Analysis process is to determine solutions. Solutions should be researched based and
targeted at the causes. Solutions should be considered by cause type. For example, knowledge
based causes require knowledge based solutions.
Once the causes have been identified, research based solutions must be aligned to address
the causes using the three categories of; knowledge, motivation and organizational factors.
Rueda (2011) suggests that even though real world problems are complex and usually include
23
This Chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
24
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 42
elements of all three categories of cause, it is more effective to consider the categories
independently to ensure that solutions will match the cause targeted. For causes related to
knowledge and motivation, Rueda (2011) offers a toolkit based on learning theories and the
research literature on how some causes might be addressed. Existing programs and policies in
other schools may be useful in crafting solutions for THS
25
. It is important to remember that
solutions for one school may not be effective in all contexts and therefore the solution must be
evaluated for suitability at THS.
Solutions related to organizational causes must address areas including, organizational
culture, organizational behavior, work process, resources and change management (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Effective solutions align culture, process and resources, recognizing the importance
of developing implementation and change strategies. When using research to evaluate solutions
for education, McEwan and McEwan (2003) recommend asking five basic questions: The casual
question: Does it work? The process question: How does it work? The cost question: Is it
worthwhile? The usability question: Will it work for me? The evaluation question: Is it working
for me? A further discussion of evaluation methods will be offered in Chapter six.
When applying the Gap Analysis process to problems identified by the administration at
THS, the starting point, as discussed previously, is the clarification or identification of goals. Are
the problem areas defined by the school reflected in their goals or vision statements? Rueda
(2011) reminds us that goals are important for schools, not only to set directions, but to alert
administrators to the need for course corrections and change. If problem areas are not identified
in goals, or if the goals are too vague or not measurable, then finding effective solutions will be
very difficult.
25
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 43
In the case of THS, problem areas include underachievement, and four-year college
admission rates for Latino, English language learners. The vision statement for THS as posted on
their website is: “THS strives to provide every student with opportunities to succeed in their
academic, social, and personal endeavors while enhancing each student’s ability to become
productive contributors to a global society.” At first glance, it is apparent that THS is concerned
about equal opportunity and providing every student with the tools required to make a positive
contribution to society. As the Gap Analysis process and search for causes proceeded, the
investigative team looked for evidence of more specific goals relating to the Latino ELL
population and the problem areas mentioned. All stakeholders were interviewed to determine
whether there is knowledge or agreement with the goals. The team looked for long-term goals,
intermediate goals and daily goals and whether those goals are aligned and measurable.
Methodology
26
As the Gap Analysis process unfolded at THS, a variety of methods were utilized to
clarify goals and narrow the definition of problem and search for causes. Scanning interviews
were initially used to understand the context and perceptions of school administrators, teachers,
and language specialists. Once the problem areas were clearly defined and THS goals were
identified, the investigative team investigated causes. Interviews with administrators, teachers
and staff specialists were utilized to drill-down on information previously obtained through the
scanning interviews. The investigative team focused their interviews on the three areas identified
by Clark and Estes (2008) as the most likely causes for achievement gaps: knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors. Surveys, interviews, observations, and informal
discussions were also utilized to collect data that were useful for finding causes. Clark and Estes
26
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 44
(2008) caution that overconfidence is a real obstacle to finding the causes of gaps. Investigators
must carefully listen to all stakeholders and resist the temptation to jump to solutions based on
misconceptions of the problem or their own experiences. Figure 1 illustrates the stakeholder
goals for THS. The project addresses root causes and solutions impacting each stakeholder
group. This author generally focused on root causes and solutions associated with administrators
and parents, while project team member Evelyn Jimenez focused on teachers and counselors, and
Michael Kurland focused on students.
Mission
All members of the Trojan High School community are committed to providing a safe, orderly
and supportive environment where students learn to become effective communicators,
responsible citizens and creative, complex thinkers.
Organization’s Goal
All ELL students will meet four-year college admission requirements upon graduation from
high school.
Students Teachers Administrators Counselors Parents
Figure 1. Stakeholders and Organizational Goal for Trojan High School.
Institutional review board (IRB).
27
Based upon the description of this project as a
problem solving effort for THS, the USC University Park Institutional Review Board (IRB)
concluded that this project did not qualify as Human Subjects Research and was not subject to
27
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 45
further review. The names of the school, district, and all stakeholders have been withheld to
maintain confidentiality. The primary goal of the project was to solve a performance gap
problem in a specific context, and not primarily to produce generalizable knowledge. Thus, the
major audience for this work was the school and not the larger field of education.
Interviews.
28
Interviews are most advantageous for collecting data on an individual’s
perspective and experience (Patton, 2002). For the purpose of this project interviews were used
as the primary source of data collection. These interviews employed purposeful sampling
strategies that allowed for “selecting information-rich cases for study in depth” to be chosen
“strategically and purposefully” (Patton, 2002, p.243). The purpose in doing so was to select
influential people, also known as key stakeholders, who could provide insight and disclose
important information into the research question. The interviews were conducted in two phases:
scanning interviews and in-depth interviews. Our key informant was the Principal at THS, who
scheduled all of our interviews and observations. The principal has made everyone available that
we have asked to interview. None of our requests have been denied.
Scanning interviews.
29
Scanning interviews were used as short-term informal interviews
meant to provide a quick overview of an organizational context. They were helpful in identifying
important stakeholders, more clearly understanding the performance gaps, and in generating
preliminary possible causes for those gaps. For scanning interviews it was essential to focus on
selecting individuals positioned to give perspective into potential problems. Of particular interest
were the perceptions and beliefs of those currently involved with Latino ELLs. As such, random
probability sampling was not relied upon since the scanning interviews were conducted to learn
28
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
29
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 46
more about the causes affecting the achievement of Latino ELL students. Random probability
sampling is a method that utilizes some form of random selection to ensure that the different
units in the population have equal probabilities of being chosen (Patton, 2002). Instead,
snowball/chain sampling was used to identify key stakeholders to interview based on their
position, years of experience, but most importantly close proximity to ELL students at THS.
Snowball chain sampling allows for the “identification of cases of interest from sampling
people who know people, who know what cases are information rich, that is, good examples for
study, good interview participants” (Patton, 2002, p.243). By utilizing snowball chain sampling
the team was able to interview stakeholders that were familiar with the Latino ELL student
population. Stakeholders included the ELD coordinator, guidance counselors, and instructors
involved with ELL courses. The type of interview conducted is closest to what Patton (2002)
would classify as a Interview Guide approach where questions and topics are listed on a guide or
protocol and the interviewer is free to explore or follow up on particular areas of concern. The
guide allows the interviewer to change the sequence of questions or explore certain areas in more
depth, but still maintain focus and a consistent framework for all interviews. The attached
protocol (see Appendix A) developed by our team is divided into three general areas of focus:
Background (environment), Goals, and Perceptions of the Problem. The environment is the
broadest category narrowing to goals, and the narrowest questions are included in the area of,
perceptions of the problem. Each area of focus includes ten or more questions. As the interview
progressed, we were able to ask the questions that seemed most relevant to the informant and the
flow of the interview.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 47
In-depth interviews.
30
After conducting scanning interviews, the team decided it was
important to interview a small number of ELL teachers that have direct contact with the Latino
ELL subgroup to gain further insight. In-depth interviewing is a technique that involves
conducting individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspective
(Patton, 2002). As with the scanning interviews, the team used a general interview guide
approach and developed a series of seven questions (see Appendix B) to pose to the
interviewees. In-depth interviews were conducted with teachers at THS because the team felt that
it was crucial to gain detailed information about their thoughts and experiences working with the
Latino ELL subgroup. In-depth interviews provided a more complete picture for the team. These
interviews were transcribed and themes were noted.
Student surveys.
31
Individual items were created, after reviewing data from interviews
with school officials and previously listed assumed causes, to assess student’s knowledge,
motivation and environment that would affect their plans for four-year university attainment. An
initial list of 15 demographic questions and 55 descriptive questions were honed and improved
by our group. The final list of questions included 10 demographic questions and 31 descriptive
questions broken into three categories of knowledge, motivation and organization (see Appendix
C). These final items were selected to provide more information for assumed causes implied
through our initial interviews.
The student survey, collected by THS, is a self-reported anonymous device for measuring
the extent to which students understand the requirements to apply and be accepted to a four year
university, the amount of motivation the students have to go to a four year university and the
30
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
31
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 48
organizational factors influencing the student’s application. Survey takers are asked to circle
their demographic information and then to circle yes or no to each of the descriptive questions.
This survey forces responders to concrete agreement or disagreement for each statement. Even
though no undecided answer was provided some students created their own, these answers along
with blank answers were not included in the survey review. To show all answers equally, a
percentage score was given for every descriptive answer to show the percentage of Yes students
put for each category.
The principal and ELL coordinator of THS were asked to review the survey before being
finalized. After all changes were made 200 copies were given to the principal to be passed out.
The principal of THS called all students with a language code (identified as ELL) who were
available into his conference room over a two day period, 10-12 students at a time. He explained
that the survey was intended to improve services to ELL students and had the students complete
the survey before leaving to go back to class. Surveys were provided in English only. A total of
113 surveys were completed and given back to us out of the 191 Latino students who had a
language code. Thirty-five of the students were 9
th
graders, 30 were 10
th
graders, 29 were 11
th
graders, 15 were 12
th
graders and four did not state. Only 15 of these students were born outside
of the United States. The home language for 36 students was English, 39 said English and
Spanish, and 37 said Spanish only. School language levels and parent education was also taken
into account but none of the demographic categories seemed to have had a strong correlation to
the descriptive questions.
Parent surveys.
32
Individual items were generated after reviewing data from interviews
with school officials. An initial list of 30 items was filtered by our group. The list of 30 items
32
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 49
was reduced to ten, after items were excluded based upon redundancy, relevance or clarity
issues.
The parent survey is a self-report device for measuring the extent to which parents are
aware of opportunities to participate in activities designed to involve them in their children’s
education by listing statements reflecting the acquisition of awareness, access, and expectations.
Survey takers were asked to circle a number on a six point Likert scale that most closely
corresponds to their view of parent involvement opportunities. Scoring is accomplished by
assigning weights of 1-6 for each item. Favorable statements are weighted 6,5,4,3,2,1
respectively. This survey forced responders to demonstrate agreement or disagreement by not
including an undecided category. The total score is the sum of all scores on all items with the
higher score reflecting a more favorable evaluation of the acquisition of awareness, access and
expectations related to their child’s academic progress (see Appendix D).
The principal of THS called all ELL students currently receiving language services (191)
into his conference room, 10-12 students at a time, explained that the survey was intended to
improve services, and asked the students to provide the survey to their parents and return
completed surveys to the principal’s secretary. Surveys were provided in English and Spanish.
Parent focus group.
33
Focus groups are optimal to collect data in a natural setting in
which behaviors occur in their usual contexts. These methods allow variables to be looked at in
the natural setting in which they are found and more in-depth information to be gathered (Patton,
2002). According to Patton (2002) focus groups consist of 6-10 subjects with similar
backgrounds who participate in an interview for 1-2 hours. Focus groups allow participants to
33
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 50
hear each other’s responses and can moderate false or extreme viewpoints. Focus groups allow
interviewers the ability to assess consistencies, shared views, or diversity of views.
In the case of THS, our focus group was intended to enhance our understanding of parent
viewpoints gathered from surveys and interviews with THS staff. The focus group session was
held at THS on September 12, 2012 from 5:30 – 6:50 in the evening. The principal provided the
team the list of 191 ELL Latino students with parent contact information. From this list project
team member Evelyn Jimenez, who is a native English and Spanish speaker, randomly called
parents. Upon calling Evelyn explained the purpose of the focus group and invited them to take
part in the focus group. Subway sandwiches were provided to supplement parent’s dinners and to
help as an enticement. Although a focus group was set-up with six parents there were two
parents in attendance.
Achievement records.
34
Achievement information from THS, and the district was
provided by the principal to assist the team in searching for causes and measuring achievement
gaps. Public records of State and Federal agencies were collected and evaluated to establish
benchmarks and measure the size of the gaps for achievement levels, graduation and dropout
rates and four-year college attainment rates. Achievement data is a valuable tool to corroborate
or question the assumptions of THS staff and the investigative team.
An academic transcript is a record of all the education coursework, grades, and credits a
student earns in four years of high school. The Principal provided an academic transcript for all
Latino ELL students enrolled at THS during the spring 2012 semester. Students’ final grades
recorded on their academic transcript at the end of each semester are perceived to be indicative
of the quality of work a student has completed in a certain course. Grades have a significant
34
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 51
impact on the types of courses students enroll in throughout their four years of high school and
the types of courses they are recommended to take by their teachers. In addition, colleges and
universities consider grades to be an important part of the admissions process. In such cases
colleges and universities take the cumulative grade point average into consideration. A
cumulative GPA reflects all courses taken and is calculated using a weighted system.
At THS grades are based on multiple factors including but not limited to tests, quizzes,
class work, and homework. Teachers at THS are required to keep an ongoing and current record
of their student’s grades through the district’s Zangle information system. Teachers report grades
for all students eight times per year: four times per quarter grade reports and four times for
progress reports. THS has also established a rubric for evaluating achievement based on grades.
In general, an A or B grade indicates that a student has demonstrated the capability to do college
work. A student who earns a C grade achieves sufficient subject matter mastery to enable
him/her to proceed to advanced high school work in the subject. A student who earns a D grade
is one whose work is unsatisfactory. A student who earns an F grade infrequently completes
assignments. These explanatory statements are designed to aid teachers in the development of the
evaluative criteria in their classes (please see THS Faculty Handbook for complete explanations).
However, there is no standard grading scale that THS puts in place. THS principal requires that
grades should be input and updated every two weeks. The Principal encourages teachers to use
the Parent/Student Connect as a communication tool to update the progress of students for
students themselves, parents, and teachers.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 52
An Overview of the Community
35
THS is located in a suburban community located in a Southern California region known
as the South Bay. The South Bay is home to several industries including, oil refining, aerospace,
and automotive manufacturers. Toyota and Honda maintain their North American headquarters
in the area. Toyota has made donations and has partnered with THS in the past. The total
population of the city is approximately 145, 000. The community is primarily White (51.1%) and
Asian (34.5%), with the Latino population (16.1%) at third (U.S. Census, 2010). The Census
(2010) indicates that 39.1% of people speak another language other than English at home, almost
all people over the age of 25 have a high school diploma, with 44.6% of them also holding a
bachelor’s degree or higher. More than half of people living in the community own their home
(57.3%), and less than 6.5% of people are considered living in poverty.
An Overview of the District
36
THS’s school district consists of seventeen elementary schools, eight middle schools,
four high schools, one continuation high school, one alternative high school and two adult school
campuses. The district’s has approximately 24, 370 students and is comprised of 35.2% Asian,
31.3% White, 21.4% Latino, 4% African American, 0.7% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander,
0.6% American Indian/Alaska Native, and 4.8% of two or more races, and 2.1% unreported. Of
the student population, 3,334 (13.7%) are designated ELL. The District’s 2010-11 API score of
857 exceeds the performance of the county (762) and the state (778). However, the district is
currently in year one of Program Improvement (PI).
35
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
36
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 53
In order to maintain confidentiality for all stakeholders, the statistical information
referred to in the sections relating to an overview of the community, district, and school were
provided by the principal of THS.
An Overview of the School
37
THS is a public high school located in Southern California in a South Bay area school
district, and is one of four comprehensive high schools. The school has a total enrollment of
approximately 2,229 students, predominately Asian (35%), Latino (29%), White (20%), African
American (7%), and the remainder American Indian/Alaska Native, Hawaiian/ Other Pacific
Islander, or declined to state. From the total population 35.5% of the students are
socioeconomically disadvantaged, up from 28% the year before, 7% are students with disabilities
and 8% are ELLs, which is lower than the districts 13.8% average. THS is not a Title I school,
but one elementary and one middle school that feed into THS are Title I schools. Twenty-one AP
courses are offered at the school and 6.2% of the school population is enrolled in such courses.
THS has 88 teachers, two assistant principals, a site supervisor, and a principal. Support
personnel include a student activities director, five campus security aides, three counselors, one
dean, one librarian, two part-time health assistants, one part-time psychologist, one part-time
speech and language pathologist, and six special education assistants.
Student performance.
38
California ranks schools according to two rankings systems.
The first compares all California schools on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest; the
second compares schools with similar demographics on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the
highest. The API assessed by the CDE currently measures THS as an 8 school and a 5 compared
37
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
38
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 54
to schools with similar demographics. School wide, THS’s Academic Performance Index (API)
went up three points to 809 in 2011. Most of the 2011 API growth came from the
Hispanic/Latino and students with disabilities groups. While all other student groups dropped
slightly in 2011, the two biggest changes were African Americans dropping 26 points to 701, and
English learners, dropping 22 points to 740 groups. All student groups at THS have above 700
API except for the students with disabilities group who are currently at 593. The only two
student groups that met their growth target in 2011 were the Asian and Hispanic/Latino
populations (CDE, 2011b). Although THS is a high-performing school, it has failed to meet AYP
for its EL subgroup in 2010-2011. If ELLs fail to meet AYP for two consecutive years, they may
be subject to federal sanctions (NCLB, 2002).
At the high school level many states, including California have implemented a basic
skills test students must pass to receive a high school diploma. However, grade ten results of the
CAHSEE are also used to establish the percentages of students at three proficiency levels (not
proficient, proficient, or advanced) in ELA and mathematics to compute AYP designations
required by NCLB. Currently, CAHSEE results for THS have 91% of the school population
passing the ELA exam and 92% passing the mathematics portion. When the data is
disaggregated by the performance of each significant subgroup and their proficiency, a telling
gap in the data indicates that 50% of the EL subgroup is proficient in ELA and 79% is proficient
in mathematics, as reported by the Principal of THS. For 2010 the graduation rate for THS was
98.32% with less than 1% of a dropout rate, which has been similar for the past 3 years.
R-FEP.
39
In order to reclassify a student as fluent English proficient (R-FEP) districts
must use several measures, such as results from the CELDT and the California Standards Test
39
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 55
(CST), teacher evaluation, and parent opinion (Cal. Ed. Code § 313). The use of multiple criteria
protects the EL population from being reclassified too quickly and losing support before they are
ready. Districts are allowed to determine their own reclassification criteria, creating nationwide
inconsistencies in classification (Abedi, 2004; Abedi, 2008; Parrish et al., 2006).
THS’s school district has a master plan for ELL redesignation. This plan dictates that
ELL students should be reclassified to fluent English proficient in no more than 5 years and that
all ELL students must complete the A-G requirements before they graduate from high school.
ELLs may be allowed to take a 5
th
year in high school in order to help them complete the A-G
requirements and CAHSEE. The redesignation process requires a student to receive a score of
proficient or higher on the California Standards Test (CST)-ELA. In addition, students must
receive an overall score of early advanced or higher on the CELDT with all subtests of
intermediate or higher, score a 4 or better in four of the five areas of the SOLOM, achieve a GPA
of 2.0 or better in academic classes with no grades below a “C” or equivalent, and lastly be
recommended for redesignation by the redesignation team which is comprised of a parent,
administrator, teacher, ELD coordinator, ELD program specialist, and the ELL student. Also, the
plan describes an alternative method for high school students who have passed the CAHSEE and
have strong recommendations to reclassify even though they have not scored proficient.
The CELDT exam results focuses on levels of proficiency for all English Learners. A
total of 204 students were tested in the 2010-2011 school year. Of these 204 students tested, 91
were Spanish speaking. The data indicates that 4 scored in the early intermediate range, 24
scored in the intermediate range, 41 scores in the early advanced range, and 22 scored advanced.
CSTs measure students’ progress toward achieving California’s state-adopted academic
content standards in ELA, mathematics, science, and history. They describe what students should
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 56
know and be able to do in each grade and subject tested. There is a significant gap between the
overall student group and ELL students. The most significant gaps are in the Latino subgroup
and ELL subgroup. In the Latino subgroup 51% scored proficient or advanced in ELA, 17% in
mathematics, 57% in science, and 55% in history. In the ELL subgroup 15% scored proficient or
advanced in ELA, 11% in mathematics, 31% in science, and 22% in history. These subgroups
show a gap when compared to the overall school performance. Of all students 61% scored
proficient or advanced in ELA, 29% in mathematics, 68% in science, and 60% in history. In
2011, THS redesignated 50% of ELLs, which is much higher than the current California state
average of 10% of ELLs reclassified each year (CDE, 2011b).
Problem areas.
40
From multiple meetings with the THS principal and his team, three
problem areas were identified in regards to ELLs, specifically the Latino population. The first
problem area identified is the academic achievement of ELLs. Their goals in this area include:
achievement improvement on the California Standards Test (CST) by moving all students to
proficient or advanced in every category and improvement for all students to get the minimum C
or better for all A-G required courses. The second problem area identified is the lack of
reclassification to fluent English proficient. Their goal is to have all students reclassified to
fluent English before they graduate. Subcategories under reclassification they would like
improved include: All students should pass their CELDT, all students must have a minimum
grade of C or better for all required courses, and all students’ CST scores must be at proficient
level or higher. The last problem identified is the lack of students meeting eligibility to a 4-year
university. Their goal is 100% completion of the A-G requirements by all students, increase the
first time passing rates of the CAHSEE, increase all students GPAs to a minimum of a 3.0 or
40
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 57
better, and have all students complete the SAT/ACT test requirement for California school
eligibility. See Appendix E for a log of meetings and information gathering events.
THS administrators decided against an examination of graduation rates or retention rates
at this time because they are in the 98 and higher percentage. Instead, our team was asked by the
principal to investigate how the school could raise the achievement of Latino ELL students to
achieve four-year college readiness.
Figure 2. ELL students’ gaps in achievement on the API, CAHSEE, CST (ELA),
GPA, and A-G requirements.
Figure 2 illustrates several gaps associated with academic achievement for the Latino ELL
population at THS. The project team was challenged by the complexity of selecting the best gap
to measure college readiness. On its face, A-G requirements are commonly associated with
college readiness. There are significant flaws with using A-G requirements as a measure for
college readiness in this project. As Figure 1 illustrates, neither THS nor the State of California
disaggregate their data to count the number of ELLs who meet A-G requirements, therefore
improvement in performance would be difficult to measure. Also, A-G requirements require only
a 2.0 GPA, which will not prepare students adequately for admission to the University of
California and in most instances to the California State University system.
API
Schoolwide
809
ELLs
740
Gap
69
CAHSEE
ELA (Proficient)
10th Grade
91%
ELLs
50%
Gap
41%
CST
ELA (Proficient)
All Students
61%
ELLs
15%
Gap
46%
A-G
All Students
Schoolwide
54%
ELLs
Unknown
Gap
Unknown
GPA
Goal - ELLs
100% - 3.0
ELLs 3.0
25%
Gap
75%
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 58
While the Academic Performance Index (API) and standardized tests, such as the CST
and CAHSEE, may be viewed as intermediate steps or goals leading to college readiness, they do
not align themselves closely enough with California four-year college admissions requirements
to be a useful measure for the global goal of making all Latino ELLs college ready by graduation
from high school. Consequently, the project team selected the GPA gap as the best measure
available to gauge college readiness for the purposes of this gap analysis project.
It should also be understood that this project used a modified version of gap analysis that
focused on measuring gaps associated with the organizational goal (see figure 2) and not
intermediate goals associated with individual stakeholder groups (see Figure 1). The issue of
intermediate goals for stakeholders was investigated further as a root cause for the college
readiness gap in Chapter 4 with researched based solutions and recommendations following in
Chapters 5 and 6.
Root Causes Group Presentation
41
After all initial data was collected and analyzed and the inquiry team had a more reliable
understanding of the root problems and a meeting was held with our dissertation advisor. As a
group we agreed that the best way to communicate our progress to the leadership team at THS
was to provide them with a group presentation. We brainstormed and mocked up our
presentation for how it would be presented. The three member team created a cohesive
presentation for the common initial findings from the data and each team member focused on
their unique root cause focus areas.
Powerpoint was then used to create a presentation that contained a quick explanation of the
gap analysis process, the method and time line used to collect and analyze our data, showcasing
41
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 59
the positive assets THS already has and can be built upon, the assumed initial causes and finally
the six prioritized causes that will be researched for solutions in the literature. The main purpose
of this meeting was used to make sure that we were on the right track as far as priority causes
and to make sure nothing was missed during our investigation.
Solutions Presentation
42
Once all the research literature solutions were complied and assessed for our prioritized
causes, a solutions presentation for THS leadership was conducted on March 1, 2013 to
showcase possible ways to achieve closing the college readiness gap for ELL Latino students at
THS.
Solutions
Solutions were offered based upon a careful review of research and analysis by the team.
Should THS decide to implement the recommended solutions, a carefully designed
implementation strategy is important to have in place. The Kirkpatrick evaluation plan
(Kirkpatrick, 1998) as described in Chapter 6 was offered to THS administration for their
consideration and potential utilization to evaluate the solutions. Chapter four reports our findings
and identifies the root causes for the Latino ELL college readiness gap.
42
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 60
Chapter 4: Findings and Patterns
Authors: Evelyn Jimenez, Michael Kurland, Brent Morris
43
The purpose of this chapter is to report findings from data collected related to possible
causes for the English Language Learner’s (ELL) college readiness gap at THS
4445
. Our intent is
to rule out and validate the root causes for the problem, which will then serve as the basis for
solutions. Our methodology is based upon the principles of problem solving. According to Patton
(2002) such effort is concerned with societal and human problems. Our strategy was to
investigate root causes that will assist THS to understand the nature of the problem in order to
intervene, increase effectiveness and achieve their goal of college readiness for Latino ELL
students.
More precisely, our strategy is used by practitioners to solve specific location-based
problems (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Educators who use evidence-based decision making to
address problems and identify solutions generally focus more on identifying assumed problems
and finding creative solutions rather than systematically searching for root causes and ensuring
that solutions are properly aligned with the problems they are expected to address. According to
Rueda (2011) institutional practices that reward action rather than results encourage solutions to
be implemented based upon assumed causes without a closer examination of the root causes. The
result can be a mismatch, where solutions do not correspond with true problems. A more
systematic approach to analyzing problems, causes and solutions is the gap analysis process
previously described in chapter three.
43
This Chapter was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by all those listed.
44
In order to maintain confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school.
45
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 61
Using the gap analysis process as a framework to study the root causes of the ELL 4-year
college readiness gap at THS, we assumed the role of consultants for the administration of THS
and generated possible causes based upon an initial review of the literature, relevant educational
theories, from initial scanning interviews and surveys. The Clark and Estes’ gap analysis frame
enabled this inquiry team to uncover possible causes for students’ underperformance at THS.
According to Patton (2002) from purpose come decisions about design, measurement,
analysis, and reporting, and we are reminded that in contrast to basic researchers who seek to
generalize findings, our gap analysis is intended to be limited specifically to THS and their ELL
population, as the relationship established for this project is that of a consultant for THS. For this
project, we investigated the causes using the following sources: (a) interviews, (b) student
surveys, (c) parent surveys, (d) parent focus group, (e) review of school records, and (f)
observations. Findings are presented later in this chapter. Again we must caution that the purpose
was not to create generalizable knowledge, but to validate possible causes in this specific
context.
Based on our review of the literature and pulling from learning and motivation theories as
well as our experience we created a list of possible causes broken down into the domains of
knowledge, motivation and organization as seen in Table 1.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 62
Table 1
Summary of Assumed Causes of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Type of Cause
Knowledge* Motivation* Organizational*
ELLs do not know university
admissions
process/requirements. (L)
ELL students have low self-
efficacy (T)
Parents lack access to
electronic academic resources
(L)
Lack of knowledge of time
management skills (P)
Teachers and counselors have
low expectations of ELLs -
deficit perception (L)
Policies reinforce cultural
deficit perceptions of ELLs
(L)
Teachers don’t know how to
differentiate instruction (P)
Teachers don’t see value in
differentiated Instruction (P)
Teachers lack support for
differentiated instruction (P)
Teachers don’t know how to
use strategies and goals (P)
Teachers don’t see value in
strategies and goal use (P)
Teachers lack support for
strategies and goal use (P)
ELLs have low linguistic
capital (L)
School staff has excessive
workload and doesn’t see
value in ELL support (P)
School organization
compartmentalizes support for
ELLs (P)
School staff do not fully
understand or share goals (P)
School staff lack commitment
to goals that unclear or not
shared (L)
The school has not established
the clarity or importance of
goals (P)
ELLs do not know effective
learning strategies/skills (L)
Self-fulfilling prophecy (P) School does not provide
enough professional
development (L)
ELLs lack access to AP or A-
G courses (L)
Insufficient interaction with
parents (L)
Staff has heavy workload that
prevents ELL support (P)
ELL families have low SES
(lack of financial resources)
(L)
ELL families have minimal
social/cultural capital (L)
Note. *Indicates whether source is Personal Knowledge (P), Literature (L), or Learning and
Motivation Theories (T).
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 63
Findings
Patterns emerged as the team reviewed scanning interviews, in-depth interviews, student
surveys, parent surveys, a parent focus group, and achievement records.
Strengths.
46
THS is a high performing school with a higher than 98% graduation rate and
high test scores overall. Our observations, interviews, and informal conversations with staff at
THS revealed a very positive educational environment. People seemed genuinely happy to be at
work and seemed committed to student learning. The campus itself is well maintained and
people feel safe and secure. The security personnel are visible, engaged and friendly. The
principal is highly motivated and engaged in ongoing activities at the school. Teachers seek to
improve their instruction and are open to new ideas. Clearly the atmosphere is positive; the
school boasts high graduation rates, a college going culture, and the staff understands the need to
improve academic opportunities for their ELL population (See Table 2).
Table 2
Strengths of THS
Knowledge Motivation Organization
98% Graduation Rate Teachers seek to improve
instruction
Positive Environment
High Standardized Test
Scores (overall)
Open to new ideas Safe, Secure Campus
Staff understands the need to
academic achievement for
ELL population
Principal highly motivated and
engaged in school activities
Well Maintained Campus
46
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 64
Areas of growth.
47
Our interviews with THS administrators, counselors, and teachers
revealed a consistent pattern of delegating nearly all responsibility for ELL issues to the ELL
coordinator. While the interviews reflect high praise on the ELL coordinator, it is clear that most
THS staff do not feel a sense of ownership or identification with ELLs and their challenges.
Another consistent finding from our interviews reflected the lack of a shared vision within the
organization. All of our interviews echoed a clear understanding for the global goal of
encouraging a “college-going culture,” but no consistent definitions were offered, and there was
no sense of how to produce the “college-going culture,” or what type of intermediate steps could
be taken to achieve the global goal. Most staff suggested that they were not a part of the goal
setting process although they consistently voiced support for the idea of preparing students for
college.
There was a palpable sense of confusion over some policy initiatives uncovered in the
interviews. Although hesitant to be critical or say anything that could undermine a very
productive working relationship, there was unexpected candidness about frustration with the
manner in which policies were communicated and implemented. For example, several staff
members spoke about a policy requiring teachers to write learning objectives on the blackboard
for each lesson. They expressed reservations about the effort because of uncertainty about the
reason or the benefits of the procedure, and a perceived lack of follow- up to see whether or not
the policy was being followed or whether it was succeeding.
Interviews. The interviews revealed a common perception that policies were initiated from
the school district or THS administration without the opportunity to participate in the process.
During an informal event several staff members were heard lamenting that certain policies may
47
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 65
not become permanent due to the traditional rotation of administrators who move on to other
leadership opportunities. There was a discernible sense that the teachers and counselors consider
themselves the “permanent” staff, while higher level administrators transfer to other schools or
districts leaving them to contend with issues that previous initiatives failed to solve. The project
team was cautioned on several occasions by interviewees that the practice of administrators
advancing to new leadership roles is not unique to THS and is part of the culture of education. It
was also pointed out that previous administrators from THS had been promoted to new
leadership positions, reflecting positively on the school, which is recognized as a high
performing institution.
On balance, the interviews reflected more positive feelings about the school than criticism.
Morale seems to be high and most staff enjoy their jobs and working with the students at THS.
Our interviews focused on those issues that most directly related to ELL achievement and
college readiness. The Gap Analysis process by its nature tends to heighten the awareness of
gaps, which can sometimes overshadow highly effective performance. The project team was
committed to investigating the root causes for the gaps and finding researched based solutions
while presenting an accurate assessment of the school site and its staff.
Student survey.
48
The knowledge questions focused on the students perceived
understanding of the components to applying to a university (see Appendix C). First it asked if
they knew all the requirements for applying to a 4 year university, and then it asked if they knew
about each individual requirement. Almost 90% of the students said they did know all the
requirements to apply, but less than 70% knew what A-G requirements meant. The students
knew the CAHSEE test the best at about 92% and ACT the worse with about 55% knowing.
48
This section was written by Michael Kurland. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 66
With a gap of 20% between knowing all and A-G, there is an issue with understanding the
requirements and not knowing that they do not know some of the requirements.
The motivation questions were broken into the students expectations, such as “Do you
expect to get B’s or better in your classes” and if they thought it was important such as “Passing
the California High School Exit Exam is important to me” (see Appendix F). Overall the students
had very high expectations and importance for most of the questions. Several questions such as
graduating and passing the CAHSEE test were yes for 100% of the students for both
expectations and importance. Over 90% of the students expected and thought it was important to
get B+’s or higher. Over 90% expected to do well on their SATs and about 95% thought doing
well on their SATs was important. The drop is the expectancy to attend a four year university,
which drops to about 80% and the importance of attending a four year university again about
80%. The biggest drop is if they think they have a fair shot at getting into a four year university,
which only about 70% of respondents did. Overall this group seems motivated to be successful,
get good grades and graduate but the idea of going to a four year university is not as high a
priority.
The final group of questions related to how the students felt about the organization they are
immersed in. The origination group of questions focused on the expectations they felt from
friends, family and teachers, as well as how supported and amount of access they feel they have.
The students seemed to think their parents wanted them to go to university the most, followed by
teachers and lastly by friends at below 70% (see Appendix F). In general, the students thought
they were supported by the teachers, staff and THS as a whole and that if they wanted to go to
college their family would support them. It was found that most of the students thought their
families wanted them to stay close to home at 60% and their friends expected them to stay
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 67
nearby at 50% after the student graduated. Finally, the largest perceived obstetrical from the
entire survey was the idea that they could not afford college and money was an issue to going to
college, only about 40% thought that money was not an issue and they could afford to go to
college. It does appear that organizational factors greatly influence the student’s decision to
apply and attend a 4 year university.
Parent survey.
49
The parent survey findings are listed in Appendix G. Only 13 surveys
were returned out of 170. The principal indicated that he had not distributed the survey until a
few days before the end of the school year and did not have a chance to follow up with students
and remind them to return the surveys. The two most consistent findings from the survey were
that parents indicated they had not been invited to meet with THS officials concerning their son’s
or daughter’s progress with school work, and that within the past six months they have not met
with THS officials concerning their son’s or daughter’s progress with schoolwork.
Parent focus group.
50
Out of six parents that accepted our telephonic invitation to the
parent-focus group, two attended. Both attendees were mothers of THS students (1- 10
th
grader
and 1- 11
th
grader) and appeared very interested and engaged in their children’s academic
progress. When asked if they had been given the opportunity to participate in the parent-survey,
one parent indicated she had not been given the survey (which had been sent home with
students), the other parent indicated that she was offended by the survey because it appeared to
her that only Latinos were being asked about parent involvement. Apparently the briefing and
instructions given to students by the THS Principal were either relayed inaccurately or not at all.
We learned from both parents that a formal letter from the school explaining the purpose of the
49
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
50
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 68
survey would have made them both feel more supportive of the survey and the school’s efforts to
improve services for ELLs.
Two consistent findings from the parent-focus group revealed: (a) frustration over a
perceived lack of communication from THS and, (b) frustration over the language
reclassification process. Both parents agree that there is either no communication or minimal
communication between teachers, counselors, and parents. We heard frustration voiced over a
counselor who refused to make an appointment, and would only accept email communication.
Since the parent could not communicate through written English, she was not able to speak with
the counselor.
Although both parents indicated that they have internet access and regularly check the
school websites, they expressed frustration that all of the online resources were English only.
Both parents were aware of the English Language Multi-Cultural Advancement Committee
(ELMAC) meetings, however their only communication about the meetings came through a
letter from the school district providing dates, but the parents received no communication
directly from THS.
One parent became quite emotional, and began to cry when she related her experience
trying to get her daughter reclassified. Both parents experienced similar obstacles trying to
convince THS counselors that their children were born in the U.S. and speak English fluently.
Every year these students are forced to study for English Tests and when they pass, are still not
reclassified, apparently due to poor grades and lack of a teacher recommendation. Both students
receive no services other than a study skills class, but cannot gain access to A-G compliant
classes. Both students have been classified as L5 for the last 5 years. The parents interviewed
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 69
believe the yearly frustration over reclassification has produced a sense of learned helplessness
and a lack of motivation in their children.
The project team considered this experience highly informative and useful but
acknowledged that perceptions of the two parents that participated in the focus group may not be
consistent with other parents of Latino ELL students. A pattern was discovered that revealed a
lack of parent participation with the ELMAC meetings, the parent-survey, and the parent focus
group, which reminded the project team how complicated the issue of parent involvement is even
though THS was reaching out to parents with progressive initiatives.
Achievement records.
51
Transcripts were collected for the 191 Latino students at THS.
Grades were used to obtain a student’s collective GPA for coursework completed. The data
indicate that the majority of Latino ELL students at THS are not performing at a GPA of 3.0 or
above. Of the 191 students, 48 students (25%) are meeting a GPA of 3.0 or above. The
remaining 143 (75%) Latino ELL students fall in the 2.9 or below GPA range. Of these students,
71 (37%) are receiving a GPA of 2.0 or below. This number is significant because a GPA of 2.0
or better in academic classes with no grades below a “C” or equivalent are needed for an ELL
student to meet one area of the reclassification criteria. Also, four-year universities will not
consider students with a GPA below a 2.0.
AMAOs.
52
Title III of the NCLB requires districts to define AMAOs to measure and report
on progress toward the attainment of English proficiency and academic achievement standards.
Under NCLB three specific AMAOs must be put in place. Each state must define two AMAOs
for increasing the percentage of ELL students making progress in learning English and attaining
51
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
52
This section was written by Evelyn Jimenez. Contributions were made by Michael Kurland and Brent Morris;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 70
English proficiency. Also, states must include a third AMAO related to meeting AYP for the
ELL subgroup (CDE, 2011). When one or more of the AMAOs are not met the, the district must
notify the parents of ELLs. Expectations of AMAOs require schools to work towards meeting
two targets for ELL students: grade level proficiency in academic core subjects and the
development of English language proficiency within five years.
AMAO 1 Progress measures the percentage of ELLs in an LEA who met the annual growth
target on the CELDT. To calculate AMAO 1 two data elements are needed: One, the number of
annual CELDT takers who took the CELDT during the annual assessment (AA) window. It does
not include initial test takers. Two, the number of ELLs with required prior CELDT scores. To
determine the percentage of ELLs making annual progress in AMAO 1 the following formula is
used:
Number meeting annual growth target
Number with required prior CELDT scores
Using the above formula, AMAO 1 was calculated for students to measure the percentage of
students at THS making annual progress in learning English (see Appendix H). Figure E1 shows
that for AMAO 1 there were 164 CELDT takers at THS, of those CELDT takers 80 students are
of Latino descent. Of these 80 only 61 students (76.2%) are meeting proficiency for AMAO 1.
The required percentage of ELLs making annual progress in learning English is 56.0%. This is
significant because the majority of Latino ELL students are making progress in learning English.
AMAO 2 Attainment measures the percentage of ELLs who attained the English
proficient level on the CELDT. Two cohorts are established for AMAO 2 to determine the
percentage of ELLs attaining English proficient level on the CELDT. First, the less than five
years cohort contains all ELLs who have been in language educational programs for less than
five years. Second, the five years cohort or more contains all ELLs who have been in language
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 71
instruction educational programs for five years or more. The time in a language instruction
educational program is determined by subtracting the date first enrolled in a U.S school from the
date CELDT testing was completed. To determine the percentage of ELLs in each cohort who
attained the English proficient level on the CELDT during the AA window, the following
formula is used:
Number in cohort attaining English proficient level
Number of ELLs in cohort
Using the above formula, AMAO 2 was calculated for ELLs who have been in English language
instruction for less than five years and for ELLs who have been in English language instruction
educational programs for five years or more (see Appendix H, Figure H1).
For AMAO 2 (cohort one) there were 52 students at THS who have been in English
language instruction educational programs for less than five years, of those 11 students are of
Latino descent. Of these 11 only 3 students (27.3%) are meeting the required attainment
percentage. The required percentage for this cohort is 20.1% as set by the state. This is
significant because Latino ELLs at THS who have been in English language instruction
programs for less than five years are meeting the attainment percentage. For AMAO 2 (cohort
two) there were 122 students at THS who have been in English language instruction educational
programs for five years or more, of those 74 are of Latino descent. Of these 74 students, 54
(73%) are meeting the required attainment percentage. The required percentage for this cohort is
45.1% as set by the state. This is significant because Latino ELLs at THS who have been in
English language instruction programs for five years or more are exceeding the attainment
percentage.
AMAO 3 AYP measures the percent of ELLs that must be proficient or above in ELA
and mathematics. The 2011-2012 AMAO 3 requirements are the 2012 AYP requirements for
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 72
participation rate (95%) and percent proficient (77.8% in ELA and 77.4% in mathematics) for
the ELL student subgroup only. In order to meet AMAO 3 both AYP participation and percent
proficient targets in ELA and mathematics for the ELL subgroup must be met. The ELL student
subgroup for AYP includes RFEP students until they score proficient or above three times on the
CST.
For AMAO 3 the data indicates that the Latino subgroup population at THS is not
meeting AYP proficiency in ELA and mathematics (see Appendix H, Figure H2). In ELA, there
were 16 Latino students and only 2 (13%) met the criteria for scoring proficient or above. In
mathematics, there were 16 Latino students and only 3 (19%) met the criteria for scoring
proficient or above. These percentages reflect that Latino students at THS are struggling to meet
the academic content and achievement standards (see Appendix H, Figure H2).
Identification of Root Causes
53
Based upon our collective experience, relevant theory, and data collected from the
school, six causes have been identified that contribute to the lack of college readiness for the
Latino ELL population at THS as illustrated in Table 3 below.
1. Achievement goals for ELLs are communicated in general form without the benefit of
performance or intermediate goals to guide progress. Based upon the Gap Analysis Process by
Clark and Estes (2008), this cause is based upon both organizational and knowledge based
issues. Performance goals are specific tasks to be completed within structured criteria and
deadlines. The most effective performance goals are aligned, and compliment the global goals of
the organization.
53
This section was written by Brent Morris. Contributions were made by Evelyn Jimenez and Michael Kurland;
these authors are listed alphabetically to reflect their equal contribution.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 73
Table 3
Validated Root Causes for ELL College Readiness Gap
Cause Knowledge (K)
Motivation (M)
Organizational (O)
How Assessed
Validated?
1. Achievement goals for ELLs
communicated without benefit of
intermediate or performance goals
(K) (M) (O) Interviews
Records
2. Lack of enhanced parent-
involvement initiatives
(K) & (O)
Interviews
Focus Group
Survey
3. Lack of enhanced coordination of
school support for ELLs
(O)
Interviews
Focus Group
4. Inadequate access to school
counseling resources
(O)
Interviews
Focus Group
5. Lack of perceived university
affordability
(K) & (O)
Survey
6. ELL student achievement is not
consistent with expectations
(K) & (M)
Survey
The lack of performance goals can be viewed as knowledge based because those
responsible for communicating goals are unaware of the need for, or the process to construct
performance goals. The lack of performance goals may also be related to organizational barriers.
For example, the workload at the school may preclude administrators from investing the time to
develop performance goals. Creating a college-going culture is the vision or global for THS and
the Torrance Unified School District, but we could find no evidence of clearly understood
performance goals that would help guide progress towards the global goal.
2. The need for enhanced parental-involvement initiatives. THS recognizes the value of
parental involvement and has developed efforts to encourage involvement with limited success.
There is no doubt that the leadership at THS understands the important role parents play in
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 74
developing a college-going culture. Tierney (2009) points out the importance of family and
counseling networks that support plans for college years before the actual application process
begins. At THS, some parents of ELL students are frustrated at what they perceive to be a lack of
direct communication with them. Ineffective parent-involvement initiatives are both knowledge
based and the result of organizational barriers. THS administrators may be unaware of how to
effectively reach-out to the parents of ELL students, pointing to knowledge based cause.
Organizational barriers, such as a lack of bi-lingual resources, may also contribute to the
ineffective parent-involvement initiatives.
3. School Support for ELLs. Developing strong relationships with students is a top priority
for faculty members at THS. Faculty members expressed that a key to academic success is
building relationships with students. Although faculty members are aware of this, the interviews
revealed that there is not a strong support system between the teachers who taught ELLs, the
counselors, the school administrators, and the ELL coordinator. THS faculty did not feel a sense
of ownership in regards to their ELL subgroup. Instead the responsibility of ELL students is
compartmentalized. Faculty members expressed feeling overwhelmed and subsequently defer
responsibility of ELL students to the ELL coordinator. The result clarifies the need for closer
collaboration between the stakeholders mentioned above. Parent frustration over the
reclassification process is one example where closer collaboration is indicated. In addition,
teachers lament that there is a lack of access to professional development opportunities because
of the economic crisis that has affected schools.
4. Inadequate access to school counseling resources. The current school counseling
program at THS does not adequately serve ELL students and their families. THS has felt the
result of the state educational budget crisis resulting in the loss of two counselors, increasing
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 75
their caseloads. The outcome is that ELL students receive inadequate advisement, lack of
availability, and lack of individual counseling and attention. ELL students and their families at
THS need access to a trained school counselor that can provide them with information and
resources to learn about options for their future. Survey results highlight the fact that the majority
of these students do not know the requirements needed to attend a four-year university and
perceive university affordability as an obstacle. Creating a college-going culture remains a
challenge without access to counselors.
5. Lack of perceived university affordability. Both from the student survey and the parent
survey money was an issue for going to a university. The student survey shows the larger gap of
only about 40% of students believe they can afford to go to a university. Less than 70% believe
they can even afford to apply. Interviews with THS counselors revealed that several students in
the past have mentioned this concern to them so they told the students about fee waivers and
about financial aid to those that asked. It appeared that only students who expressed these
concerns were told it appears that there is a knowledge and organization issue around the lack of
perceived university affordability for this student population.
6. Matching grade expectations and motivations to grades received. With the grade point
average requirement to get into California 4 year university a 3.0 or higher, grades can play a
large factor for students to get into a university. An overwhelming 90% of these students said
that getting a B or higher average was important to them and they expected to get that. But
looking at their overall GPAs only about 25% of these students are achieving a 3.0 or higher and
37% of the students are actually getting below a 2.0 GPA. These students seem motivated to do
well but from our interviews and data collection are lacking the study skills and organization to
allow achievement.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 76
Chapter 5: Solutions – Literature Review
Author: Brent Morris
This gap analysis was a joint team effort. The project team focused on and validated
several root causes, including: (a) lack of intermediate and performance goals, (b) ineffective
parental-involvement initiatives, (c) need for greater school support for ELLs, (d) need for
further collaboration, (e) student perceptions that college is unaffordable, and (f) matching grade
expectations and motivations to grades received. As part of the gap analysis approach, the team
divided the solutions aspect of the work by the areas of interest and specialization of the other
team members. While the complete gap analysis needs to consider all of the root causes jointly,
this chapter and the following chapter were written solely by the author and focus more narrowly
on: (a) lack of intermediate and performance goals, and (b) ineffective parental-involvement
initiatives, which is my individual area of specialization.
The purpose of this chapter is to review current literature and theory concentrated on
solutions to this focus in order to provide guidance to the district in solving the outstanding
issues related to its goals. The chapter is outlined as follows: a review of the literature related to
goal setting theory and the proper structure of goals within the gap analysis process, followed by
a review of the literature related to the value of parental-involvement programs and introduction
of two model parental-involvement programs. The chapter concludes with two recommendations
for THS.
54
Lack of Intermediate and Performance Goals
As a practical matter most educational practitioners understand the value of goals in the
development and implementation of policy. It is important for educational practitioners at all
levels to gain further insight into how goals can be structured most effectively to enhance
54
In order to maintain confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 77
motivation and productivity. Research informs us that providing employees with goals alone are
not nearly as effective as proving employees both goals and feedback (Bandura & Cervone,
1983). Social Cognitive Theory suggests that both performance feedback and goals are required
to activate self-evaluative mechanisms that along with self-efficacy increase performance
motivation and productivity (Bandura & Cervone, 1983). Self-evaluative mechanisms represent
our reactions to our performance compared with our internal standards. In other words, if a
student has a goal of getting a B grade on a test, then the B grade becomes a standard that can be
compared against the actual outcome, or final grade earned on the test. If the student scores a C
on the test, the reaction is based on the comparison between the standard of B and the
performance of C, and will likely result in self-dissatisfaction. The process described is what
Bandura and Cervone (1983) call, a “self-evaluative mechanism.” Bandura and Cervone’s (1983)
experiments demonstrate that perceived negative discrepancies between what people do and
what they want to achieve creates self-dissatisfaction, which provide inducements for increased
effort. Conversely, people who achieve their goals make a positive evaluation and react with
satisfaction, which increases their confidence for performing future tasks, a term referred to as,
“self-efficacy.”
Bandura and Cervone (1983) also point out that explicitness, sub-goals, and
challengeability impact self-evaluative mechanisms by specifying the amount and type of effort
needed to reach the goals. The authors conclude that the comparative ingredient created from a
personal standard and performance feedback is essential to increase motivation. Using the
previous example of a student with the goal of scoring a B on a test, we can infer from Bandura
and Cervone (1983) that when the student’s performance results in a C, the student will feel a
sense of self-dissatisfaction that the goal of B was not reached. In order to increase the student’s
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 78
motivation for the next test, Bandura and Cervone (1983) suggest that the student must receive
feedback about the performance, so that the student can compare the goal (or standard) against
the performance.
To further explain and support the use of sub-goals, and goals that are challenging but
achievable, an experiment by Stock and Cervone (1990) will be described. Eighty undergraduate
psychology students participated in an experiment that utilized a scenario called the
“Missionaries and Cannibals” problem (M&C). The students were instructed to transfer the
hypothetical figures across a river while observing a set of rules and conditions. The students
were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: no sub-goal, achievable sub-goal, or one of
two unachievable sub-goal conditions. All of the participants were informed that the problem
was rather difficult. Students in the no sub-goal condition received only the distal goal (final
goal), while students in the achievable sub-goal condition were shown a representation of a
fourth step in the 10 step problem. Students in both of the unachievable sub-goal conditions were
shown a representation of a fourth step that appeared to be attainable, but could not actually be
reached based on the conditions and rules of the problem. Each step of the problem was timed
for individual participants, who were given a limit of 25 minutes to complete the problem.
Participants were allowed to switch to a different problem if they wished. All subjects completed
two questionnaires that assessed their self-efficacy; one questionnaire before the problem began,
and a second after step four was reached.
The results of the experiment demonstrated that students in the sub-goal condition persisted
on the problem for a mean 9.93 minutes after reaching step four, while students in the no sub-
goal condition persisted for a mean of 6.76 minutes and those in both the unachievable sub-goal
conditions persisted for a mean of 6.50 minutes. Stock and Cervone (1990) conclude that setting
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 79
sub-goals increases self-efficacy, which involves a comparison of one’s abilities and the
challenges of the approaching activity. The authors remind us that breaking down the activity
(through the use of sub-goals) can make the activity seem more attainable, and increase our
perceived capabilities for performing the activity.
Locke and Latham (2002) inform us that use of specific and difficult (but attainable) goals
are preferable to common instructions in the workplace, such as urging people to do their best.
The authors also explain the importance self-efficacy with goal-setting: “When goals are self-set,
people with higher self-efficacy set higher goals than do people with lower self-efficacy (Locke
& Latham, 2002, p. 706).”
Locke and Latham (2002) agree with Bandura and Cervone (1983) that both self-efficacy
and feedback are necessary to increase motivation, which in turn enhances productivity.
Educational leaders can increase the self-efficacy of their staff: (a) by providing professional
development to increase mastery that yields success experiences, (b) by providing role models
that staff can identify with, and (c) by persuasive feedback that demonstrates confidence that
staff can achieve the goal.
The gap analysis process described by Clark and Estes (2008) describes the utility of both
business goals and performance goals. Business goals are larger, high level goals of the
organization. In the case of THS, creating a college-going culture for all students is the current
business (global) goal. According to Clark and Estes (2008) it is important for each member of
the organization to know what their own performance goals are, how and when they are to
achieve them, whether or not progress is being made, and how they support the business goals of
the organization. Clark and Estes (2008) caution us that failure to provide specific and clear
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 80
performance goals can result in members pursuing their own career objectives instead of the
business goals of the organization.
Global or business goals are essential for any organization, but lower goals are just as
important and many times missing. Rueda (2011) explains that organizations like people can
become discouraged and distracted if goals are not challenging, clear, and broken up into
manageable pieces. Rueda (2011) recommends three levels of goals: (a) global goals, which are
wide ranging and long term, (b) intermediate goals, which are necessary in order to achieve the
global goal and are usually accomplished within weeks or months, and (c) performance goals,
which indicate what needs to be done in the very short-term to achieve the intermediate and
global goals.
In the case of THS, the leadership and entire school appear highly motivated towards their
global goal to create a college-going culture for all students. The global goal is concrete and
measurable, but what the school lacks are lower goals with specific objectives and deadlines,
understood by all stakeholders, and aligned with the global goal. The previously described study
by Stock and Cervone (1990) demonstrate that breaking up the main goal into shorter term or
proximal goals make the task more manageable and increase confidence or self-efficacy that the
task can be successfully completed. The study also demonstrates that breaking up the main goal
into sub-goals (sometimes referred to as proximal goals) increases persistence towards achieving
the main goal.
The lack of lower goals represents a procedural knowledge issue and can be remedied with
the help of this gap analysis project and appropriate professional development. Research helps us
understand how professional development can improve performance in the area of goal-setting.
Gist, Bavetta, and Stevens (1990) studied whether an orientation to goal-setting was as effective
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 81
as teaching people self-management skills. The areas covered in the self-management training
were: identification of obstacles to success; problem-solving methods to overcome these
obstacles; setting specific challenging goals for performance outcomes and interim practice
activities; self-monitoring progress during implementation; and the use of self-reward
techniques. The results of the study indicated that where performance was based on knowledge
of different strategies (novel task), and not just motivation, training in self-management
(sometimes referred to in the literature as self-regulatory or self-monitored) was significantly
more effective for the transfer of training to workplace tasks.
In the context of THS, motivation of leadership does not appear to an issue, rather the issue
was a lack of awareness of the need for lower goals. The lack of lower goals or sub-goals can be
remedied by providing specific knowledge in the area of goal-setting. The research tells us that a
simple orientation might suffice for increasing motivation, but where specific knowledge is
required for new strategies, a more comprehensive “self-management” course is warranted.
Therefore, professional development that covers self-management or self-regulation in the goal
setting process is preferred to a simple goal-setting orientation.
Lack of Enhanced Parental-Involvement Initiatives
Parent Involvement is a term that can mean many things to different people depending on
their culture, experience, or educational background. In this chapter, the construct of parent
involvement will be defined in a way that can suggest to educational practitioners at THS, the
most effective parent involvement initiatives for their specific context. Parental involvement
programs are school-sponsored events developed to encourage, and in some cases require parents
to participate in their children’s education (Jeynes, 2012). The literature review will focus on the
overall effectiveness of parent-involvement as a tool to increase academic achievement, and
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 82
suggest that parent-involvement is much more than helping with homework or attending school
meetings. Both traditional and non-traditional forms of parent-involvement will be explored.
Following the discussion of general effectiveness, parent involvement will be studied more
narrowly as it relates to Latino families. Finally, research concerning parent involvement
processes will be explored to reveal current patterns of success and concern.
In the 21
st
century, technology has increased the pace of modern society. With more
parents in the workforce, the declining role of the family makes parent involvement more
challenging, especially in urban settings. Epstein (2001) identified six types of parent
involvement (a) parenting, (b) communicating, (c) volunteering, (d) learning at home, (e)
decision making, and (f) collaborating with the community. Jeynes (2012) conducted a meta-
analysis of 51 studies to examine the relationship between parent involvement programs and
academic achievement. The meta-analysis revealed that school sponsored (K-12) parent
involvement programs do have a positive impact on academic achievement. The results of the
meta-analysis were reported in effect size or the magnitude of the relationship between parent-
involvement and student achievement. The most significant outcome statistically (.51) was
shared reading, followed by emphasizing a partnership between parents and school officials
(.35). Communicating between parents and teachers, and checking homework followed with
variables of .28 and .27 of a standard deviation, respectively. Jeynes (2012) concluded that
parent involvement need not be relegated to a strictly voluntary effort, and that schools can teach
parents how to become involved, and motivate them to participate in their children’s education
with teachers.
In an earlier analysis of recent research, Jeynes (2010) suggests that teachers can encourage
parental involvement by acknowledging that more subtle forms of parental involvement, such as
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 83
communication, and high expectations are some of the more important aspects of parental
involvement. A healthy balance of love, respect, and reasonable expectations may actually be
more important than parents helping with homework or other specific pedagogies.
A study of 110 fifth graders (White) in a small Canadian city used self-reports from
parents, teachers and students along with report cards to investigate the impact that mothers and
fathers had on parent-involvement processes. Rogers, Theule, Ryan, Adams, and Keating (2009)
found that the maternal involvement is related to participation with homework, active
management of the learning environment, and support for learning, are positively associated with
academic competence. Interestingly, paternal involvement reveals that active management of the
learning environment was associated with academic competence, however participation with
homework and academic pressure were associated negatively with academic competence. It is
unclear whether these models suggest implications that can be generalizable beyond the context
of the study, and no other research could be located to support generalizing the findings in this
study.
There are two significant means by which parental involvement stimulates academic
achievement according to Hill and Taylor (2004). The first is by increasing social capital or the
skills and information parents need to support their children in school related activities. Another
way of describing social capital is to say that it is the result of people intentionally building
relationships, expecting benefit in the future (Portes, 2000). Involvement exposes parents to
school expectations, policies, practices and extra-curricular activities. Parents learn how to help
with homework, meet other parents, and collaborate on problem solving strategies. More
importantly, parents establish meaningful relationships with school personnel that reveal vital
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 84
information about how to navigate the bureaucracy and take advantage of academic, social, and
community opportunities.
The second way that parental involvement stimulates academic achievement according to
Hill and Taylor (2004) is social control. When parents and teachers collaborate to communicate
consistent messages about appropriate behavior and study skills, students benefit from clear
expectations from multiple sources across settings. The result is an increase in competence and
motivation to learn. For example, when parents and teachers collaborate, and consistently tell a
student that a pending examination requires at least two hours a day of study, expectations are
clear across both the home and school settings, and results in more competence and motivation.
Another example could involve a consistent message from both teachers and parents to stay
away from certain acquaintances that are distracting the student from school study practices by
leaving school early to go to the local shopping mall and “hang-out.”
The benefits of social capital and control become clearer when teachers, counselors or
school administrators differ culturally from students. School officials who differ culturally are
less likely to know students or parents, and are more likely to conclude that they are disinterested
in schooling. Parental involvement is a powerful tool to mitigate this type of deficit perspective.
A study by Hill and Craft (2003) found that teachers believed that parents who volunteered at
school cared more about education than other parents. Teacher perceptions about the value
placed on education by parents was positively related with higher teacher ratings of student
academic skill and achievement.
For Latino students who struggle with inequities as they compete for college admission,
parent involvement looks very different than for their European-American counterparts, and the
prevailing deficit perspective often times fails to recognize the value Latinos place on education.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 85
A multiple case study by Kiyama (2010) found evidence of a deficit perspective that Mexican
American families do not value education highly, and that such a perspective leads to inadequate
familial socialization for academic competence, and eventually school failure. The study
involved 85 Latino (mostly Mexican-American) families from the Southwest in a parent outreach
program that focused on providing parents of K-5 students information about high school and
college. Kiyama (2010) used a case study design to interview six families during the 2007 parent
outreach program.
The study found that parental-influence forms early in the K-6 years of their children’s
education. According to Kiyama (2010) schools should encourage non-traditional forms of
parent-involvement through funds of knowledge. Funds of knowledge are described in the study
as historic and cultural forms of knowledge and skills essential for survival or routine household
functioning. The term is based on the assumption that that people are competent and that their
life experiences are valuable. Funds of knowledge have not been traditionally connected to
college access; however Kiyama (2010) argues that this framework can be useful in
understanding how Mexican-Americans form their educational beliefs and values. Mexican-
American families place a high value on education, and college attainment is very important. The
Mexican-American families in the study influenced their children through survival strategies,
resilience, perseverance, respect, pride and faith. Children were taught to outthink and outwork
others to demonstrate their potential. In other words, the values learned by children from their
parents’ experience working and struggling to provide for their families can be applied to the
classroom. For example, a mother working two jobs to help support her family can impart the
value of hard work as a survival technique to her child working hard to understand English in
school.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 86
Unfortunately, without additional social capital, these funds of knowledge can lead to
incomplete knowledge of college choice and effective preparation strategies. In many cases, the
limited educational experience of parents further exacerbates the difficulty of discovering the
most useful information to guide college attainment. To navigate these barriers, Kiyama (2010)
suggests leveraging the experience and knowledge of extended family members such as nieces,
nephews, aunts and uncles. In one example from the study, a grandfather who participated in the
outreach program described his extensive experience at a local university. The grandfather was a
vending machine repairman and was very proud of his experience. He explained that he knew
where all of the university departments were located and who to go to for various issues.
Sometimes just having a long-term relationship with someone you have been working around
can pay dividends when it comes to asking for help or information. The grandfather’s interview
is an example of funds of knowledge that are many times rejected as menial or trivial from a
deficit perspective. Kiyama (2010) argues that the example of the vending machine repairman
represents potentially valuable information about the location of people and places that could be
helpful on a university campus.
Manny times funds of knowledge are communicated through social networks made up of
family, extended family, and friends. Academic cultural symbols are also communicated through
social networks and form an important component of funds of knowledge according to the study.
Academic cultural symbols include such artifacts as, class rings, caps, gowns, college marching
bands, and televised college athletics. Cultural symbols shaped the way families think about the
reality of going to college. These symbols, especially when they are experienced and
communicated by family members, form the basis for motivating students to learn more about
college, and motivate them to compete for admission according to the study. During the study a
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 87
father was interviewed about where his daughter would like to go to college. He replied
“Michigan,” and then described why his daughter wanted to go to there. The father described
how his daughter was exposed to him watching Michigan football on television and the
commercials that tout the accomplishments of the university. Even the school colors appealed to
his daughter. During the interview the daughter began playing the Michigan fight song on her
band instrument. Educational cultural symbols can be a powerful influence when communicated
through family funds of knowledge according to Kiyama (2010).
Kiyama (2010) concludes that schools must be determined to find ways to involve parents
and allow families to contribute their unique social capital and funds of knowledge during
outreach activities. Successful outreach programs require structure, follow-through and
continuous collaboration with former participants.
Another case study that reinforces the effectiveness of non-traditional forms of parent-
involvement focused on the Padillas, a Latino migrant family (Lopez, 2001). Mr. Padilla was a
young adult with significant field work (migrant farm worker) experience before he entered
school at the age of 14, and never developed the motivation to excel in academics. However, he
did develop a deep understanding of the importance of education for his children. Mr. and Mrs.
Padilla consistently reinforced the values of hard work and persistence to their children. The
Padilla children were frequently taken to work with their parents in the fields to demonstrate how
hard the work was, and to reinforce that if their children did not receive a good education, they
would have few alternatives to the hard work faced everyday by their parents in the fields.
Although Mr. and Mrs. Padilla did not participate in traditional school activities, they did
calculate and reinforce the value of school by demonstrating the consequences of failing to
succeed in school. Lopez (2001) informs us that the Padilla’s oldest child, Jose graduated second
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 88
in his high school class and is now studying biology and is pre-med at the U.S. Naval Academy.
The Padilla’s second oldest daughter, Kathy was ninth in her class and is now enrolled in nursing
school at the University of Texas, Pan American. Aimee, the Padilla’s middle child was sixth in
her class and is majoring in biology at the University of Texas, Austin. The Padilla’s second
youngest child was sixth in her class and is a business major at their local community college.
What we learn from this study is that traditional methods of supporting children in school
are not the only options for Latino parents who care deeply about their children’s’ education. All
Latino parents have experiences that can be leveraged to support their children in school without
necessarily helping with homework or attending school activities. Funds of knowledge, or
culturally developed skills and knowledge used traditionally for raising a family and running a
household, are central to the educational ideology of Mexican-American parents, and can be
used to support their children in school.
There is much research that reinforces the value of parental-involvement for Latinos in
education. A clear pattern of parental-involvement in Latino households suggests that both
traditional and non-traditional forms of involvement are present depending on a multitude of
factors including; the educational experience of the parents, linguistic capital, extended family
networks, and socio-economic status. Whether Latino families participate through structured
school activities and partnerships, or whether their involvement stresses hard work, persistence
and competition, Latino families value education according to the research on parental-
involvement. Davidson and Cardemil (2009) studied forty Latino-child (10-14 years old) dyads
in the Massachusetts area and found that more open communication was associated with child
well-being, which included success in school, and less externalizing behavior (delinquency). A
meta-analysis of 20 studies, including 12,000 K-12 Latino and Asian students, found that
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 89
parental-involvement had a significant positive impact on academic achievement and
standardized achievement tests with a smaller but positive effect on GPA (Jeynes, 2003).
Since research supports parent-involvement as an effective tool to increase academic
achievement for both Latino and ELL students, two model programs were reviewed to assess
their potential fit as a solution to the college readiness gap at THS. Juntos Para Una Mejor
Educación Program (Together for a Better Education) is a collaborative effort between the North
Carolina State University Cooperative Extension and 14 school districts developed to assist 6
th
-
12
th
grade Latino students and their parents. Behnke and Kelly (2011) describe the six week
program designed to reduce dropouts and promote interest in higher education:
1. Parent Involvement: Making education a family goal by developing rapport with
facilitators and other parents, establishing a shared individual understanding of parent
involvement and identifying barriers to getting to graduation or college and ways to eliminate
these barriers.
2. School Communication: Increase understanding of school structure and the roles of
school staff, increase knowledge about how to improve contact with school staff, and gain skills
and knowledge to have better parent-teacher conferences.
3. Knowing the School System: Standards and Testing by understanding State graduation
requirements, required courses, tests, attendance and grades, indenting the courses their child
needs to meet their expectations and goals, and the identification of successful strategies for
students to score at or above grade level.
4. Life after High School: Understand the long term cost-benefit of obtaining a college
degree, increase knowledge of available financial aid resources and the differences between each
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 90
type of financial aid, and develop knowledge and skills to gain confidence in completing FAFSA
financial aid forms.
5. Roads to Higher Education: Increase knowledge about the PSAT, SAT, ACT tests and
how to help students achieve a high score, and understand the importance of essay writing in the
application process and learn tips to improve essays.
6. Moving to Action: Develop a personal action plan to guide participants and focus on
their next steps towards achieving their goals. Some planners are available commercially, but
essentially an action plan is a checklist, or to do list, that guides students towards completing the
necessary requirements for graduation, college admission, or whatever their goals are. For
example an action plan would remind students to study for and take the PSAT and SAT tests. An
action plan would remind students which courses are college preparatory courses and need to be
completed for college admission. Even details such as meeting reminders for counseling or study
sessions should be included in an action plan.
Pre and post-test surveys were collected from 134 Latino youth and 176 Latino parents
who had completed the six week program. Both youths and parents reported better understanding
of graduation requirements, classes needed, and higher education options and processes. Parents
reported more meetings with school staff, a better understanding of the college application
process and a significant increase managing and monitoring their children’s homework. Youth
reported a significant increase with planning for after high school and discussing those plans
with their parents (Behnke & Kelly, 2011).
This program builds the knowledge, motivation, and strategies to overcome organizational
barriers necessary to bridge the college readiness gap at THS. The staff at THS understands the
value of parent-involvement but is challenged by a relatively small Latino ELL population and
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 91
the resources to support them. The Juntos Para Una Mejor Educación Program leverages
partnerships with State Colleges, school districts, community organizations, and volunteers in a
creative way that can be tailored to the specific needs at THS. The program is available at no
cost and their 332 page curriculum and support resources, including handouts, posters, teaching
aids, and videos are available online at: http://ncfamilies.com/spanish/juntos.
A second parent-involvement program designed specifically for ELL families is “The
Institute for Quality Education” (PIQE) and seeks to remove barriers associated with parental
engagement. Arias and Morillo-Campbell (2008) remind us about the barriers faced by the
parents of ELL students including:
1. School-based barriers that include a deficit perspective of ELL parents as lacking
resources or interest in supporting students. ELL students and their families are frequently
viewed as “the problem” as opposed to the school that seeks one-way support from parents
without considering what schools can do for the families of ELL students.
2. Lack of English language proficiency is a formidable barrier to parental-involvement
because ELL parents find it difficult to help their children with homework or express their
concerns to school staff.
3. Parental education level and lack of school experience in the U.S. often foster the
impression with school staff that parents do not understand or support their children’s
educational goals. For parents, the lack of educational experience can be intimidating and
embarrassing.
4. Disjunctures between school culture and home culture involve differing expectations
over the role of parents and schooling. Generally, ELL parents see their role as teaching values,
discipline and nurturing good behaviors, and see teachers as the “experts” in the area of learning
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 92
tasks. ELL parents frequently view their role as home-based as opposed to participating in
activities at the school.
5. Logistics can be challenging for ELL parents who may have labor intensive schedules
and find it difficult to arrange for transportation for their children to participate in after-hours
tutoring or special events, and who find it difficult to attend parent teacher conferences.
Arias and Morillo-Campbell (2008) describe some helpful steps that school should take to
address barriers to parent-involvement. Schools need to create an environment that is warm,
caring, and receptive to ELL parents. This can be accomplished in many ways including, a
home-school coordinator, home visits, bilingual newsletters, multi-lingual homework telephone
lines and monthly meetings. Deficit perceptions can be modified by acknowledging parents’
cultural values, incorporating community into the curriculum and inviting extended family
members to school activities.
The Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE) offers a program recommended by Arias
and Morillo-Campbell (2008) called, “Parent Engagement Education Program” that is designed
to create a bridge between the home and school by offering a nine week program, free to parents.
The program costs are estimated to be $200-$300 per parent, but are covered by special grants
and Title I, No Child Left Behind funds. Parents learn how to create a positive educational
environment at home and to encourage ongoing discussions with their children about academic
successes, challenges and college expectations. The program is offered in 16 different languages,
fosters collaboration with teachers, counselors, principals, and helps parents develop the skills to
navigate the school system and access its resources.
Some of the instructional methods used in the Parent Engagement Education Program are:
(a) addressing parents’ direct needs by offering programs in the parents’ primary language,
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 93
providing child care, and offering programs at convenient times; (b) making personal
connections using warm, personalized, and non-judgmental communication and recruiting
parents who have previously felt unwelcome due to barriers involving educational experience,
culture, or financial concerns; (c) raise awareness and concern for student achievement and the
need for parent-involvement by using community organizing practices that raise parent
awareness about their rights to be involved in their child’s education, and the benefits or
problems that may occur if they are not involved; (d) establishing a clear shared goal between
parents and their children that the child will go to college; (e) demystifying the school system by
using small group exercises and discussions aimed at informing parents about grading,
promotion, retention and parent conferences and other topics; (f) suggesting concrete behaviors
that support their child’s academic achievement by providing a list of ideas that parents can use
immediately such as, establishing a regular time and place for doing homework and having their
child rad for 20 minutes a day; (g) use methods that have proven to support learning such as,
modeling, scaffolding, role-playing, and visual aids that help parents practice how to address
problems with school staff; and (h) creating a sense of community and a peer network that will
continue after the class and support parents as they try new behaviors and question certain school
practices(Golan & Petersen, 2002).
More than 475,000 parents have completed the program and most research studies reveal
an increase in achievement and college readiness (Parent Institute for Quality Education, 2012).
A study from the University of California, San Diego reveals that students whose parents
completed the PIQE program are doing consistently better in completing A-G requirements,
however GPAs (on average) are still below the 3.0 level required for university admission. The
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 94
study advocates increased use of tutors and expanded program focus on GPA importance
(Chrispeels, & Bolivar, 2008).
A study by San Diego State University revealed that students whose parents completed the
PIQE program had a 93% graduation rate, and a dropout rate of 7% compared to a 41% dropout
rate for other students in San Diego County. College admission rates were 79.2% compared to
52% for other students. Of the 79.2% admitted to college, 51.4% enrolled in a community
college and 27.8% enrolled in a four-year university. Overall, study participants successful in
admission to a four-year university were 19%, compared to 7% for other students in San Diego
County (Vidano, & Sahafi, 2004).
The most recent study, Cal-PASS (2011) studied 278 students whose parents completed the
PIQE program in Visalia, CA, from 2006-2009. Overall, 63% of participants enrolled in college
after 12
th
grade compared to 47% of other students in the Visalia Unified School District.
Finally, a word of caution, not all research points to success for the PIQE program. A Rand
Corporation study found that positive results were, for the most part, limited to parents, one-third
of who reported that the program increased their school participation significantly. Teachers
reported far less contact with parents than parents reported with teachers (Zellman et al., 1998).
The study found that Latino students of PIQE graduates showed only small, insignificant,
improvement in grades or behavior compared to students of parents who had not participated in
the program. It should be noted that this study was the first conducted after the establishment of
PIQE, and was limited to seven elementary schools in two districts. The study suggests that it is
possible for effects to increase over time, and the study only allowed for a three-month window.
One of the major recommendations from the study (to add a professional development
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 95
component for teachers to the PIQE program) has already been implemented and may be
contributing to the more positive results reported in recent studies.
By strengthening and enhancing their existing parent-involvement programs using
appropriate elements of the two programs described, THS can increase parent-involvement,
which our review of the literature suggests can improve the academic achievement and the
college readiness for Latino ELL students.
Chapter 6 will address specific suggestions and details for how each solution might be
implemented and evaluated.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 96
Chapter 6: Recommendations and Evaluation
Author: Brent Morris
Recommendations
The following recommendations were offered to THS
55
for their consideration as solutions
to the college readiness gap issue for Latino ELLs at their school. These two recommendations
have been carefully crafted from research, and are targeted at the root causes of the college
readiness gap for Latino ELL students at THS. While other root causes will be addressed in
separate chapters by other team members, the root causes addressed in this chapter include: (a)
lack of intermediate and performance goals, and (b) the need for enhanced parental involvement
initiatives. The recommended solutions for these two issues were developed with sensitivity to
limited financial resources and workload considerations. This chapter was informed by a
literature review which focused on the importance and utility of goal-setting and successful
strategies for encouraging both traditional and non-traditional forms of parental-development;
the recommendations include the following:
1. To address the root cause for the lack of intermediate or performance goals: Develop
cascading intermediate and performance goals aligned to support the global goal of creating a
college-going culture for all students at THS. Intermediate and performance goals should
specifically address the Latino ELL population and be developed by a diverse group of THS
stakeholders.
2. To address the root cause for the need of enhanced parental involvement initiatives:
Improve the effectiveness of parental-involvement initiatives at THS by considering the adoption
of relevant parts of two programs that research has identified as successful: Juntos Para Una
55
In order to maintain confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to refer to the school.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 97
Mejor Educación Program (Together for a Better Education) and resources offered by, The
Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE).
Develop intermediate and performance goals. We know from the research cited in the
previous chapter that global goals are not sufficient to guide THS toward the achievement of
college readiness for all Latinos ELLs. An encouraging sign present at THS is the motivation,
across all stakeholders, toward the shared global goal of creating a college going culture at the
school. This gap analysis has provided THS with evidence of the gap in college readiness for
Latino ELLs and the root causes associated with the gap. Now the school is ready to develop
intermediate goals that are clear, concrete, measurable, and aligned with the global goal.
Research indicates that goals with these features are more likely to serve as useful structures to
guide action than goals which are vague, too big in scope, and not measurable (Clark & Estes,
2008).
It should be noted that both THS and the school district have identified objectives to
improve the achievement of ELLs and their college readiness. The gap analysis process revealed
that not all stakeholders are aware of these intermediate steps which are contained in the THS
“Single Plan for Student Achievement” and the school district’s “Master Plan.” The plans
mentioned do not appear to be aligned specifically to Latino ELL college readiness or provide
intermediate and performance goals that are aligned with the global goal. It is clear that THS and
the school district have given serious consideration to college readiness for all students, but
perhaps due to a relatively small population of Latino ELLs, have not focused their efforts on
this particular sub-group.
In order to facilitate this recommendation, it was proposed that a team or working group
be formed by the leadership at THS to develop cascading goals which flow from the overall goal.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 98
These cascading goals are shorter in scope and serve to guide action both short term and over a
longer period of time. Considering the expertise of school staff, budget constraints, and limited
financial resources, the use of a paid specialized consultant should not be necessary. By selecting
a diverse group of stakeholders, the leadership will encourage individual members of the team to
promote increased effort towards goal setting. Research informs us that the value placed on the
task at hand is related to higher levels of performance (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). A diverse
group of stakeholders will likely find attainment value in demonstrating their competence and
interest in defining goals that will serve the interests of Latino ELLs. There is also utility value in
participating on a team that is working to make Latino ELLs college ready. For example, Parents
see themselves as engaging in a task that is directly related to their child’s future success, which
demonstrates utility value, and encourages buy-in.
Additionally, a diverse group of stakeholders will be more efficient at pointing out
potential pitfalls and unintended consequences of some proposed intermediate goals. For
instance a group of teachers might propose after-school study periods to increase academic
achievement. Without the benefit of parental participation, teachers may be unaware that
students will not have transportation to get home after the extended hours, or that such extended
hours may interfere with after-school responsibilities to supervise younger brothers and sisters at
home.
It is imperative to the success of the team that leadership considers the capacity each
member has to contribute to the goal setting effort. Leadership will need to assess (this can be
achieved informally, through their own experience and asking other members of the team) how
much capacity is necessary to set appropriate intermediate goals and then provide enough time
and resources so that the activity can be successful.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 99
Although THS leadership will ultimately decide on the team composition, my
recommendation includes the following staff: (a) ELL Coordinator, (b) Asst. Principal, (c)
Counselor, (d) two teachers with ELL experience (e) a representative from a neighboring four-
year university with knowledge of admission requirements, and (f) two parents of Latino ELL
students. It is understood that language barriers exist that will challenge the ability of the parents
to contribute, but these barriers can be mitigated with the use of translators and or translation
technology. The inclusion of parents in the intermediate goal setting process is essential to
establishing a culture of inclusion and concern for the participation of parents.
The rationale for this composition is based on research that suggest that the global goal,
and the cascading goals beneath, are focused on stakeholder groups such as, teachers,
administrators, students, and parents (Rueda, 2011). In other words, what actions must each of
these team members undertake to achieve the global goal of making all Latino ELLs college
ready? For example, in the case of teachers, the focus might be on raising expectations for Latino
ELL students, or embracing non-traditional forms of parent-involvement. Administrators might
focus on strategies to make Latino parents feel welcome and involved in their child’s education.
Students may need to focus on developing their study habits. Each stakeholder group contributes
an integral ingredient toward crafting intermediate goals that are aligned with and support the
global goal of making all Latino ELL students at THS, college ready.
Another advantage at THS is that the leadership is highly motivated towards discovering
best practices that will reduce the college readiness gap for Latino ELLs at the school. Some
organizations have to work around their leadership due to indifference, by translating global
goals into intermediate and performance goals through midlevel managers and outside vendors.
At THS the leadership is committed to the gap analysis process and has been highly visible and
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 100
cooperative. Leadership must consistently monitor the goal setting process and provide
resources, reassurance and support for the team.
While team members will undoubtedly have access to the findings from this gap analysis,
the identification of intermediate and performance goals should be left to their discretion, as their
own experience with the students, community, and school will position the them to develop the
most effective goals for their unique environment. It should be reiterated that intermediate goals
are those that cover a time span of weeks to months, while performance goals provide direction
about day to day activities. Both should feed into each other and be aligned with the global goal.
That said, the review of the literature for this part of the gap analysis process does offer some
relevant topics, supported by research, that are worthy of consideration. Access to college
preparatory classes, acquisition of social capital, parental involvement, reclassification
procedures, student self-regulation, student self-efficacy, and meaningful feedback are all areas
worthy of further exploration and translation into potential intermediate goals.
Included in Appendix I of the gap analysis, a guide for the goal setting process and
provides a helpful checklist and format to develop both intermediate and performance goals.
Performance goals should cascade from, and be in alignment with, both the intermediate goal
and global goal. From the discussion in the previous chapter we know that performance goals are
short-term in nature, and are the steps that must be taken on a daily or weekly basis to meet the
intermediate goal. For instance, if an intermediate goal is to increase the GPA of all Latino ELL
students, then performance goals might address teacher expectations, study habits supported
through student self-regulation strategies, parent-involvement, and appropriate feedback. Table
I1 (see Appendix I) illustrates how the goal planning guide can be used to develop performance
goals from intermediate goals.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 101
Next, the team will begin working on creating performance goals. To illustrate this
process using our previous example of the intermediate goal of raising the GPA of all Latino
ELLs, a group consisting of teachers can be tasked with developing performance goals for
establishing appropriate student feedback. A performance goal might be constructed as follows:
“teachers must provide daily feedback so that ELL students can monitor their progress towards
achieving a 3.0 GPA.” A group of ELL parents and teachers can be tasked with developing
performance standards for establishing appropriate study habits. A performance goal might be:
“Parents and teachers will consistently communicate the need for, and assure that students spend
at least two hours per week studying with a mentor.”
Table I2 (see Appendix I) provides helpful guidance to ensure that the performance goals
are clear, aligned to the intermediate goal, measurable, achievable and when the goal can be
expected to be achieved. Using our previous example of the performance goal; “Parents and
teachers will consistently communicate the need for, and assure that students spend at least two
hours per week studying with a mentor.” The planning guide reminds us to check for clarity.
Parents and teachers giving students the same message to study with a mentor for two hours a
week seems clear enough, so the box is checked and alignment with the intermediate goal is
considered next. Using a mentor to model and promote successful study habits is consistent with
the intermediate goal of raising students’ GPA, so check the alignment box and move to
measurement. This one is relatively simple as parents and teachers can monitor time spent with a
mentor at home or school, so fill in the box and move to the “achievable” category. Is it possible
for ELL students to study for two hours a week with a mentor? Probably so; check the box and
move to time frame. When can this performance goal be achieved? This activity can be achieved
on a weekly basis and is therefore appropriate as performance goal.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 102
The last section on the guide prompts us to consider how important this goal is compared
to other performance goals and enter a priority number. The purpose for prioritizing goals is to
facilitate necessary adjustments during implementation and evaluation stages. If for example,
measurement becomes difficult or the time frame becomes extended, we may want to consider
dropping the goal, or revising it, depending upon how important we consider the goal to be.
Once performance goals have been developed, drafts should be forwarded to the intermediate-
goal team to be reviewed and forwarded to the leadership for final approval.
Implementation should be staged incrementally to ensure that the process is clear and that
participants are not overwhelmed with their responsibilities. As a suggestion, leadership should
consider meeting amongst themselves to decide who should be on the intermediate-goal team.
The process for soliciting, and selecting members should be completed within 30 days.
Leadership should brief the goals team and offer support before sending the team off to do their
work. Intermediate goals should be developed within 30 days. Once the intermediate-goals have
been drafted, the performance development process should be completed within 30-90 days
depending upon the number of intermediate and corresponding performance goals developed.
The entire goal setting process should take no longer than six months to complete. This process
may be repeated in the event that goals must be added, dropped or revised.
Improve the effectiveness of parental-involvement initiatives at THS. The initiatives
implemented at THS including: an ELL coordinator, the ELMAC meetings, and the institution of
college and career months in October and April are all progressive and impressive steps towards
encouraging parent-involvement and increasing college readiness, but research suggests
additional strategies that may be helpful to improve parent-involvement. The literature review in
the proceeding chapter describes some of the barriers faced by Latino parents as they try to
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 103
support their children’s education. As a reminder, Arias and Morillo-Campbell (2008) described
these barriers including; viewing parents as the problem, and lacking interest in supporting
students, a lack of English proficiency making it difficult to help their children with homework, a
lack of parental educational experience that can be intimidating, a different culture that stresses
parents teaching values, discipline and good behavior, and leaving academics to the school, and
labor intensive schedules that make it difficult for parents to provide transportation for after-
hours tutoring or conferences.
We also learned from the previous chapter that parents of Latino ELLs need a Spanish
speaking contact at the school. Parents do not feel comfortable asking questions or attending
meetings when the programs or meetings are conducted entirely in English. The use of
translators is certainly a viable option for some meetings; however THS should carefully
consider other options as well. Translators may or may not have a background in education and
may not be able to translate the proper emphasis for certain academic topics or answer questions
appropriately. Likewise, translators may not be appropriately familiar with THS, its policies and
culture. To make parents truly feel welcome on the campus translators should be full-time
members of the THS staff with comprehensive knowledge of THS policies and practices.
If THS does not have Spanish speaking resources available at the campus, resources
should be requested from the District, County, or State. As an alternative to full-time educational
staff from the District, perhaps THS could recruit volunteers from the community (including
retirees) or from local colleges who could be developed as ambassadors for THS.
Invitations to the ELMAC meetings should be formally constructed on THS letterhead in
Spanish and English under the signature of the Principal. Follow-up phone calls from THS in
Spanish would reinforce the importance of the meetings and demonstrate a welcoming culture.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 104
Translators or ambassadors should be available for Spanish speaking ELL parents at all meetings
and conferences. Spanish language availability on school websites would also reinforce outreach
efforts.
The use of bi-lingual newsletters or a homework telephone line would help to connect
Latino ELL parents to their child’s current academic curriculum and performance. THS uses
their website to connect parents with student progress and track homework assignments, but
access to the internet and English only resources create barriers for parent-involvement.
Depending upon the availability of Spanish speaking resources, THS should consider home visits
as another option to demonstrate the importance of parent-involvement and the school’s concern
for Latino ELL students.
This gap analysis project has identified a highly motivated school administration and staff
dedicated to their students. As mentioned previously, THS is a high performing school and their
ELL population at the time this project began was only 8% of the total student body. Given the
overall high performance of the school and the limited resources available, it is a testament to the
leadership of THS that such a serious emphasis was placed on Latino ELL achievement. The
leadership was aware of the need to provide additional support to the ELLs and was an
enthusiastic partner in this project. Examination of the research revealed two parental-
involvement programs worthy of further consideration by THS leadership. Before introducing
these two programs it is important to be reminded that THS has a progressive strategy toward
parent-involvement. The two programs offered for their consideration contain specific elements
that may be helpful to the school and the parents of Latino ELLs. The principal and the school
administration have demonstrated their concern for the college readiness of their Latino ELL
population, and no one is in a better position to examine what these two programs have to offer
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 105
and decide which elements may be useful for their school. With this context in mind, a
discussion of the two programs follows.
Juntos para una mejor educación (together for a better education). The “Juntos”
program as described in the previous chapter was developed for 6
th
-12
th
grade Latinos and their
parents to promote interest in higher education, higher academic achievement, and a lower
Latino student dropout rate (Behnke & Kelly, 2011). This program was chosen as a good
example to present to THS because of several factors. First, the program is contemporary, and
focused on Latino high school students. Secondly, the program is backed up by research that
demonstrates positive results, such as parents feeling increased confidence working with their
child’s school. Third, the program focuses on parent involvement as a tool to increase college
readiness, which is closely aligned with the root causes of the THS college readiness gap for
Latino ELLs. Fourth, the program focuses on creative solutions to the previous described barriers
faced by Latino parents. Finally, the program is fully developed with all teaching materials
available at no cost, which may be attractive to THS, given their limited financial resources.
Although the program was created by a partnership between the North Carolina State
University System and 14 School Districts, the program is available free of charge to any school.
As mentioned previously, THS may be particularly interested in the ready-made nature of the
curriculum that is available online. All materials including brochures, teaching aids, surveys,
videos, and PowerPoint presentations are available online in English and Spanish. The only
condition of use is to display the “Juntos” official logo on the materials. The “Juntos” curriculum
is contained in the “Leaders Program Manual,” which can be accessed through website links
provided in Table J1 (see Appendix J) for ready reverence (Behnke & Kelly, 2011).
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 106
The leadership at THS should review the online materials and contact Cintia Aguilar,
North Carolina State University Extension, who is the coordinator for the “juntos” program in
each school district. Cintia can assist with setting up a “train the trainer” program. Depending
upon the nature and extent of the assistance required, THS may consider sending a representative
to North Carolina for the training. Specific contact information is provided in Table J1 (see
Appendix J).
Parent institute for quality education (PIQE). A second parent-involvement program
worthy of consideration by THS is the “Parent Engagement Education Program (Arias &
Morillo-Campbell, 2008).” This program was chosen as a second example of a promising
solution to the ineffective parent-involvement program at THS because of the following factors:
First, the program is contemporary, and being used in Southern California and neighboring
schools. Second, the program is supported by extensive research (detailed in Chapter 5) that
points to higher graduation rates and higher college admissions for students whose parents
participated in the program. Third, the program addresses the previously described barriers faced
by Latino parents, and offers a structured program facilitated by a specially trained staff. Fourth,
the program has local resources and references.
The Parent Engagement Education Program is offered by PIQE in several states including
California, where the program was created in 1987. The “Parent Engagement Program” is nine
weeks and offered in 16 different languages by PIQE facilitators. Parents learn how to create a
supportive learning environment at home by dedicating a home study location and time of day
for homework. Other topics include how grades are important for college admission, navigating
the school system, and creating dialog with their children about college expectations, academic
successes and challenges.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 107
This program is facilitated by PIQE professionals with an impressive infrastructure and
network of regional offices, corporate sponsors and college partners. The Los Angeles regional
office has worked with over 600 schools in 25 districts, graduating over 171,000 parents. To get
started with PIQE, the principal from THS would contact Maria Elena Meraz, the Executive
Director of the Los Angeles regional office. Specific contact information can be located in Table
J2 (see Appendix J).
There are professional development programs offered for administrators and teachers
designed to help them be more effective when dealing with parents from diverse cultural and
socio-economic backgrounds. There is a six-hour and a three-day program both designed in
cooperation with the Stanford Research Institute (SRI). After learning more about the program
from Ms. Meraz, THS leadership could attend one of the two professional development
opportunities to evaluate PIQE further.
Costs associated with the “Parent Engagement Education Program” are $200-$300 per
parent and can be offset by Title 1 funding or corporate sponsors. THS has established an
impressive record of working with corporate sponsors in the Torrance area in support of school
activities and may want to consider such funding opportunities. There are neighboring high
schools that have collaborated with PIQE and would be a good source of information about the
effectiveness of the programs offered. Dr. Bruce Mims, the principal of Westchester High School
wrote a letter to Ms. Meraz in May of 2010 stating in part: “… Furthermore, the facilitators’
ability to connect with our parental audience and capture their interest and attention for the
duration of the (9-week) course series was a testament to their consummate professionalism; as
well, their innate ability to establish and sustain relationships with the divergent social cultural
groups that comprise our greater school-wide community.” The entire letter as well as a second
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 108
letter from the principal of El Rancho High School in Pico Rivera is included in Appendices K
and L, respectively. Gardena High School, located within a mile of THS, began the program in
the Spring of 2012 and may also have valuable experience to share with THS leadership.
Juntos vs. PIQE. While evaluating which program might be the better fit for THS, the
leadership should consider that both programs offer a similar approach towards parent-
involvement; helping parents to understand the culture of the school, the importance of grades,
communicating with their child and the school, and understanding the college admission process.
Research indicates that both programs have a positive record for raising parent-involvement and
college admissions (Arias & Morillo-Campbell, 2008; Behnke & Kelly, 2011). The Juntos
program relies on its partnership with North Carolina State University Extension and its
collaboration with 21 local school districts. The PIQE programs were created in California and
are now offered in Arizona, Minnesota, Montana, and Texas. While there is more local
infrastructure and support for the PIQE programs in Sothern California, there are significant
costs involved, and funding sources must be identified to participate. The Juntos program and all
of its materials are offered online at no cost, although there will be indirect costs associated with
printing materials and mailing, etc.
Professional development is available from both programs, but clearly the PIQE
resources are closer and are offered in more than one format. While both programs have research
to back-up their success, the PIQE programs are operating in neighboring high schools and
districts making onsite evaluations more convenient. In summary, the PIQE programs offer local
support, resources, and corporate sponsors at a cost of $200-$300 per parent; the Juntos program
offers a similarly successful program at no direct cost with access to online program materials,
although support and professional development resources are located in North Carolina. There is
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 109
good evidence that the social context is key in learning and development. Therefore, caution is
needed in the adoption of an entire program without assessing its fit to THS and it’s uniqueness
as a school.
Evaluation
After developing research-based solutions, the next step is to offer a plan to evaluate
outcomes. Based upon the work by Kirkpatrick (1998) and Clark and Estes (2008), it is proposed
that four levels of evaluation can be utilized:
Level one, Reactions. Are the participants motivated by the changes implemented? Do
they value it? These questions can be asked in the form of a brief survey before the solutions are
implemented to measure expectations during implementation, and after the solutions have been
in place for a set period of time. The survey should have both open-ended questions that allow
participants to explain which features of the new program they value the most, and closed-ended
questions that through the use of scales assess participants’ reactions to the program. The
purpose of these questions is to gauge the motivation of participants through their values and
emotional reactions. Responses do not tell us whether participants gained useful information or
will continue to use the teams’ recommendations; the responses are only an indication that
participants are motivated to invest effort implementing the recommendations.
Level two: Examines the learning, motivation or organizational change that takes place
during the program: Is the system effective while it is being implemented? Level two measures
the progress of changes taking place. Clark and Estes (2008) caution us not to simply ask
memory related questions, but assess whether participants can apply procedural knowledge
learned and know why they are doing it. A checklist can be used to assess whether progress is
actually taking place. For example, using our parent-involvement solution for THS, we can
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 110
construct a checklist that asks parents a series of questions that assesses their level of
involvement in the school. Specific questions might ask whether parents have received a
personal invitation to attend school events; or whether parents know how to use school websites
to access their son or daughter’s academic progress; or if they know college admission
requirements. The checklist can assess parent-involvement and provide the opportunity for a
brief explanation if questions reveal a lack of involvement. In other words, if a parent indicates
that they do not know how to use a school website, the checklist will have a space available for
the parent to indicate a brief reason: no training offered by the school or, the website is an
English only site.
Level three: Transfer: Does the program continue to be effective after it is implemented?
Level three evaluates whether improvements made during the implementation persist. Are the
skills taught in the program in a form that can be applied in practice? To support transfer of
knowledge and skills after training or learning new strategies, participants must be encouraged to
apply what they have learned as soon as possible. Administrators should clearly communicate
the expectations that teachers and staff will apply the adopted solutions. And demonstrate their
support by closely monitoring progress and asking staff how the program is progressing. The
same checklists identified in level two can be used to spot check participants’ knowledge and
skills after 60 to 90 days to ensure that they have not reverted back to old habits or patterns.
Interviews may be helpful with THS leadership, counselors and teachers to help assess whether
parent-involvement is increasing and whether parents are learning new skills. Likewise, parents
can be interviewed to assess whether teachers and counselors are collaborating and valuing
parental involvement.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 111
Level four: Bottom line: Has the transfer contributed to the achievement of organizational
goals? Here, THS can use assessments already in place to determine whether the college
readiness gap for Latino Ells is narrowing. The school can review GPA data, the number of
students reclassified to English proficient, (R-FEP) standardized test data, (CELDT, CST) and
track admissions to college.
Limitations
The findings and solutions in this project are limited to the specific context at THS and
caution should be exercised in applying the findings in this project to other school sites. Because
this project was deemed “not human research” by the IRB, the project team was not able to
interview ELL students, which limited the project team’s ability to collect firsthand impressions,
feelings and opinions. The gap analysis process is a problem-solving inquiry framework, but is
certainly not the only framework available.
Positive Deviance (Pascale, Sternin, & Sternin, 2010) is an asset-based problem solving
approach that focuses on the identification of successful strategies and behaviors of “positive
deviants” and constructs a plan to transfer these positive successful strategies to others. For the
present project, positive deviance could have been used to locate successful schools that were
able to qualify high percentages of their ELL population for college. Once identified, similar
strategies could have been adapted for THS.
Community Action Research (Stringer, 1999) leverages community members in a
collaborative effort to gather information, interpret analyze, plan, implement, and evaluate
solutions. For the present project ELL parents, interested community members, and school
officials could collaborate to find solutions for the low college readiness rates among Latino
ELLs at THS.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 112
The Gap Analysis framework was chosen partly due to time limitations. The staff at THS
was interested in finding solutions within a relatively short time frame. Both Positive Deviance
and Community Action Research frameworks, by their nature, do not offer the degree of control
over the timeline of the project as the Gap Analysis framework. For instance, locating positive
deviants could take a substantial amount of time. Likewise, recruiting and working around the
schedules of community members could significantly lengthen the project.
Conclusion
In sum, the strategies for achieving the goals described in the beginning of this chapter
focus on two areas, goal-setting and parent involvement. Specific recommendations, based on a
careful review of the literature, were provided.
As stated previously, this gap analysis project was implemented using a problem-solving,
consultant model where issues identified by the staff at THS were analyzed, prioritized and
selected for the gap analysis process. Our findings and recommendations therefore are limited to
THS and more specifically, the college readiness of their Latino ELL population.
The recommendations offered to THS concerning the adoption of relevant parts of two
parental-involvement programs, (Juntos, and PIQE) must be examined and evaluated within a
context of establishing critical dialog between parents and the school. Providing parents with
facts about THS procedures or inviting parents to listen to presentations that focus on
enculturating Latino families into the Anglo culture will not be effective. Parents and THS must
establish a meaningful relationship where the experiences and concerns of the parents are valued
and welcomed when making decisions about their Latino ELL students (Rueda, Monzo, &
Arzubiaga, 2003). That is why recommendations include Latino ELL parents on the goal-setting
team so that they understand that their voices are needed and valued.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 113
Although the college readiness gap at THS is a challenging 75%, the positive
environment of the school, added to parent concern, and motivated leadership at THS, will in our
opinion, mediate the recommendations and lower the gap.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 114
References
Abedi, J. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act and English language learners: Assessment and
accountability issues. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 4-14.
Abedi, J. (2008). Classification system for English language learners: Issues and
recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(3), 17-31.
Abedi, J., & Gandara, P. (2006). Performance of English language learners as a subgroup in
large-scale assessment: Interaction of research and policy. Educational Measurement:
Issues and Practice, 25(4), 36-46.
Academic Models: Explaining Achievement. (2007). In The Praeger Handbook of Latino
Education in the U.S. Retrieved from:
http://www.credoreference.com/entry.abclatinoed/academic_models_explaining_
achievement
Anderson, S., Medrich, E., & Fowler, D. (2007). Which achievement gap? Phi Delta Kappan,
88(2), 540-550.
Arias, M., & Morillo-Campbell, M. (2008). Promoting ELL parental involvement: Challenges in
contested times. Retrieved from http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0801-250-
EPRU.pdf
Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Frohlich, … Drake, L. (2010). The
Condition of Education 2010 (NCES Publication 2010-028).
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010028.pdf
Auerbach, S. (2004). Engaging Latino parents in supporting college pathways: Lessons from a
college access program. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3(2), 125-145.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 115
Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1983). Self-evaluative and self-efficacy mechanisms governing the
motivational effects of goal systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
45(5), 1017-1028.
Behnke, A., & Kelly, C. (2011). Creating programs to help Latino youth thrive at school: The
influence of Latino parent involvement programs. Journal of Extension, 49(1), 1-11.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press.
Brooks-Gunn, J. & Duncan, G. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. The Future of
Children, 7(2), 55-71.
Cal. Ed. Code § 313 (2011). CELDT Regulations. Retrieved from
http://law.onecle.com/california/education/index.html
California Department of Education (2010a). DataQuest: California high school exit
exam (CAHSEE) results for Mathematics and English-language Arts (ELA) by gender
and race/ethnicity designation, (combined 2010) for (Grade 10) state report. Retrieved
from California Department of Education website:
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/cahsee/ExitEth1.asp?cLevel=State&cYear=2009-
10&cChoice=ExitEth1&cAdmin=C&tDate=000000&TestType=E&cGrade=10&Pageno
=1
California Department of Education. (2010b). DataQuest: Dropouts by ethnic designation
by grade: State of California for the year 2008-09. Retrieved from California Department
of Education website: http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/DropoutReporting/GradeEth.aspx?c
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 116
California Department of Education. (2011a). 2011 adequate yearly progress report:
Information guide. Retrieved from California Department of Education website:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ayp
California Department of Education. (2011b). Language census data: 2010-2011 [Dataquest
query]. Retrieved from http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
California Department of Education. (2012). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on
the education of English learners, K-12. Retrieved from
http://cde.ca.gov/sp/el/er/prop227intro.asp
California Legislative Analyst’s Office. (2008). Analysis of the 2007-2008 budget bill:
education. Retrieved from California Legislative Analyst’s Office
website: http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2007/education/ed_11_anl07.aspx
Callahan, R. M. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunity to
learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328.
Callahan, R., Wilkinson, L., & Muller, C. (2010). Academic achievement and course taking
among language minority youth in the U.S. schools: Effects of ESL placement.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(1), 84-117.
Cal-PASS (2011). Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE) student outcomes. Retrieved
from www.piqe.org/docs/annualreport/2011_PIQE_AR.pdf
Capps, R., Fix, M., Murray, J., Ost, J., Passel, J., & Herwantoro, S. (2005). The new
demography of America’s schools: Immigration and the No Child Left Behind Act.
Urban Institute: Washington, DC. Retrieved from
http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/311230_new_demography.pdf
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 117
Chrispeels, J., & Bolivar, J. (2008). Parent Institute for Quality Education: High school study.
University of California, San Diego.
Clark, K. (2009). The case for structured English immersion. Educational
Leadership, 66(7), 42-46.
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Collins, J. (1999). The culture wars and shifts in linguistic capital: For combining political
economy and cultural analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
12(3), 269-286.
Contreras, F. E. (2005). Access, achievement and social capital: Standardized exams and the
Latino college-bound population. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 197-214.
Davidson, T., & Cardemil, E. (2009). Parent-child communication and parental involvement in
Latino adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(1), 99-121.
Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values and goals. Annual Reviews of
Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Epstein, J. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (2002). Closing the achievement gap: How to reach limited-
formal-schooling and long-term English learners. Westport, CT: Heinemann.
Freeman, Y. S., Freeman, D. E., & Mercuri, S. (2002). Closing the achievement gap: How to
reach limited-formal schooling and long-term English learners. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Fry, R. (2005). Recent changes in the entry of Hispanic and White youth into college. Pew
Hispanic Center.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 118
Fry, R. (2006). The changing landscape of American public education: New students,
new schools. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. Retrieved from
http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/72.pdf
Gandara, P. (2000). In the aftermath of the storm: English learners in the post-227 era. Bilingual
Research Journal, 24(1-2), 1-13.
Gándara, P. (2005). Addressing educational inequities for latino students: The politics of
"forgetting." Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 295-313.
Gandara, P. (2010). Meeting students where they are: The Latino education crisis. Harvard
Educational Leadership, 67(5), 24-30.
Gandara, P., Moran, R., & Garcia, E. (2004). Legacy of Brown: Lau and language policy in the
United States. Review of Research in Education, 28, 27-46.
Gandara, P., & Rumberger, R. W. (2009). Immigration, language, and education: How does
language policy structure opportunity? Teachers College Record, 111(3), 750-782.
Gandara, P., Rumberger, R., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Callahan, R. (2003). English learners in
California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 11(36).
Geiser, S., & Santelices, V. (2004). Role of Advanced Placement and Honors courses in college
admissions. UC Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher education, 4(4), 1-29.
Gist, M., Bavetta, A., & Stevents, C. (1990). Transfer training method: Its influence on skill
generation, skill repetition, and performance level. Personnel Psychology, 43(3), 501-
523.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 119
Golan, S., & Petersen, D. (2002). Promoting involvement of recent immigrant families in their
children's education. Retrieved from http://www.hfrp.org/family-
involvement/publications-resources/promoting-involvement-of-recent-immigrant-
families-in-their-children-s-education
Gold, N., & Maxwell-Jolly, J. (2006). The high schools English learners need. Retrieved from
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6h72r068
Hill, N., & Craft, S. (2003). Parent-School involvement and school performance: Mediated
pathways among socioeconomically comparable African American and Euro-American
families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 74-83.
Hill, N., & Taylor, L. (2004). Parental school involvement and children's academic achievement:
Pragmatics and issues. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(4), 161-164.
Jeynes, W. (2003). A meta-analysis: the effects on parental involvement on minority children's
academic achievement. Education and Urban Society, 35(2), 202-218.
Jeynes, W. (2010). The salience of the subtle aspects of parental involvement and encouraging
that involvement: Implications for school-based programs. Teachers College Records,
112(3), 747-774.
Jeynes, W. (2012). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types of parental involvement
programs for urban students. Urban Education, 47(4), 706-742.
Jimenez, E. (2013). A capstone project using the gap analysis model: Closing the college
readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on school support and
school counseling resources (Unpublished Dissertation). University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, CA.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 120
Kaufman, J. (2010). Using creativity to reduce ethnic bias in college admissions. Review of
General Psychology, 14(3), 189-203.
Kirkpatrick, D. (1998). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. San Francisco, CA.
Barrett-Koehler Publishers.
Kiyama, J. (2010). College aspirations and limitations: the role of educational ideologies and
funds of knowledge in Mexican American families. American Educational Research
Journal, 47(2), 330-356.
Kurland, M. (2013). A capstone gap analysis project on closing the college readiness gap for
Latino English language learners: A focus on college affordability and student grades
(Unpublished Dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Lau v. Nichols. 414 U.S. 563 (1974). Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/lau.html
Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity?
Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3-12.
Lindholm-Leary, K., & Hernandez, A. (2011). Achievement and language proficiency of Latino
students in dual language programmes: Native English speakers, fluent English/previous
ELLs, and current ELLs. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32(6),
531-545.
Lochner, L., & Moretti, E. (2003). The effect of education on crime: Evidence from prison
inmates, arrests, and self-reports. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/
download?doi=10.1.1.195.6965&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Locke, E., & Latham, G. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task
motivation. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 121
Lopez, G. (2001). The value of hard work: Lessons on parental involvement from an immigrant
household. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 416-437.
Lopez, M. H., & Velasco, G. (2011). Childhood poverty among Hispanics sets record, leads
nation. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center, September. Retrieved from http://www.
pewhispanic.org/2011/09/28/childhood-poverty-among-hispanics-setsrecord-leads-
nation.
McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D’Emilio, T. (2005).
Learning disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning
Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 1-5.
McEwan, P., & McEwan, J. (2003). Making sense of research: What's good, what's not, and how
to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc.
McManus, W., Gould, W., & Welch, F. (1983). Earnings of Hispanic men: The role of English
language proficiency. Journal of Labor Economics, 1(2), 101-130
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2011a). The nation’s report card. Mathematics 2011:
National Assessment of Educational Progress at grades 4 and 8 (NCES 2012-458).
Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012458.pdf
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2011b). The nation’s report card. Reading 2011:
National Assessment of Educational Progress at grades 4 and 8 (NCES 2012-457).
Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012457.pdf
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 122
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational
Programs (NCELA). (2011). The growing numbers of Limited English proficient
students. Washington DC: US Department of Education. Retrieved from
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/9/growing_EL_0910.pdf
National High School Center. (2009). Educating English-language learners at the high school
level: A coherent approach to district-and-school-level-support. Retrieved from
American Institute for Research website:
http://www.betterhighschools.org/docs/EducatingELLsattheHSLevel_042209.pdf
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115, Stat. 1425
(2002).
Obama, B. (2010). Remarks by the President on education reform at the National Urban League.
Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/07
Ogbu, J., & Simons, H. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological
theory of school performance and some implications for education. Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 29(2), 155-188.
Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept promise of educational opportunity for
California’s long term English learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians Together.
Retrieved from Californians Together website: http://www.californianstogether.org/
Ong, A., Phinney, J., & Dennis, J. (2006). Competence under challenge: Exploring the protective
influence of parental support and ethnic identity in Latino college students. Journal of
Adolescence, 29, 961-979.
Osorio-O’Dea, P. (2001). Bilingual education: An overview. Washington D.C.: Congressional
Research Service.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 123
Parent Institute for Quality Education (2012). Parent Engagement Education Program. Retrieved
from http://www.piqe.org/prog_parentengage.php
Parrish, T. B., Merickel, A., Perez, M, Linquanti, R., Socias, M., Spain, A., . . . Delancey, D.
(2006). Effects of the implementation of Proposition 227 on the education of English
learners, K-12: Findings from a five-year evaluation. Washington, DC: American
Institutes for Research. Retrieved from American Institutes for Research website:
http://www.air.org/files/227Report.pdf
Pascale, R., Sternin, J., & Sternin, M. (2010). The power of positive deviance: How unlikely
innovators solve the world’s toughest problems. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Passel, J. S., Cohn, D., & Lopez, M. H. (2011). Hispanics account for more than half of the
Nation’s growth in past decade. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. Retrieved from
http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/reports/140.pdf
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Payan, R. M., & Nettles, M. T. (2008). Current state of English-Language learners in the U.S.
K-12 student population. English Language Learner Symposium, Princeton, NJ.
Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Conferences_and_Events/pdf/
ELLsympsium/ELL_factsheet.pdf
Perez, P., & McDonough, P. (2008). Understanding Latina and Latino college choice: A social
capital and chain migration analysis. Journal of Hispanic Higher education, 7(3), 249-
265.
Perkins-Gough, D. (2007). Responding to changing demographics: Focus on adolescent English
language learners. Educational Leadership, 64(6), 90-91.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 124
Pew Research Center (2006). From 200 million to 300 million: the numbers behind population
growth. Retrieved from http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/25.pdf
Portes, A. (2000). Two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum, 15(1), 1-12.
Proposition 227. Cal. Educ. Code §§ 300-340 (1998). Retrieved from http://law.onecle.com
/california/education/index.html
Reardon, S. F., & Galindo, C. (2009). The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading
in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 853-891.
Roemer, A. (2011). An invisible minority: Mexican English-Language Leaners. College and
University, (January), 1-12.
Robinson, J. P. (2011). Evaluating criteria for english learner reclassification: A causal-effects
approach using a binding-score regression discontinuity design with instrumental
variables. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 267-292.
Rogers, M., Theule, J., Ryan, B., Adams, G., & Keating, L. (2009). Parental involvement and
children's school achievement: Evidence for mediating processes. Canadian Journal of
School Psychology, 24(1), 34-57.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Rueda, R., Monzo, L., & Arzubiaga, A. (2003). Academic instrumental knowledge:
Deconstructing cultural capital theory for strategic intervention approaches. Current
Issues in Education, 6(14), 1-18.
Rumberger, R. W., Gandara, P., & Merino, B. (2006). Where California’s English
learners attend school and why it matters. UC Linguistic Minority Research
Institute Newsletter, 15(2), 1-2.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 125
Solano-Flores, G., & Li, M. (2006). The use of Generalizability (G) Theory in the testing of
linguistic minorities. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(1), 13-22.
Solórzano, D., Rivas, M., & Velez, V. (2005). Community college as a pathway to Chicana/o
doctorate production. Latino Policy & Issues Brief, 11
Stock, J., & Cervone, D. (1990). Proximal goal-setting and self-regulatory processes. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 14(5), 483-498.
Stringer, E. (1999). Action research (2
nd
ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stritikus, T. T. (2003). The interrelationship of beliefs, context, and learning: The case of a
teacher reacting to language policy. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2(1),
29-52.
Suarez-Orozco, C., & Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (2009). Educating Latino immigrant students in the
twenty-first century: Principles for the Obama administration. Harvard Educational
Review, 79(2), 327-340.
Thomas, J. Y., & Brady, K. P. (2005). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act at 40:
Equity, accountability, and the evolving federal role in public education. Review of
Research in Education, 29, 51-67.
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2001). A national study of school effectiveness for language
minority students' long-term academic achievement. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington,
DC: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence. Retrieved from
http://www.crede.ucsc.edu/research/llaa/1.1_final.html
Tierney, W. (2009). Applying to college. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(1), 79-95.
Torrez, N. M. (2001). Incoherent English immersion and California Proposition 227. The Urban
Review, 33(3), 207-220.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 126
U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). The Hispanic Origin Population in the United States: 2008.
Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hispanic/cps2008.html
U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. Washington,
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Overview: Four pillars of NCLB. Retrieved from U.S.
Department of Education website: http://ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/4pillars.html
Vidano, G., & Sahafi, M. (2004). Organization Special Report on PIQE's Performance
Evaluation. San Diego State University.
Walpole, M., McDonough, P., Bauer, C., Gibson, C., Kanyi, K., & Toliver, R. (2005). This test
is unfair: Urban African American and Latino high school students' perceptions of
standardized college admission tests. Urban Education, 40(3), 321-349.
Zarate, E., & Burciaga, R. (2010). Latinos and college access: Trends and future directions.
Journal of College Admission, Fall, 25-29.
Zellman, G., Stecher, B., Klein, S., McCaffrey, D., Gutierrez, S., Madison, R.,…Suarez, L.
(1998). Findings from an evaluation of the Parent Institute for Quality Education parent
involvement program. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 127
Appendix A
Scanning Questions
We are doctoral students looking to help the school. We are here to listen to opinions and
concerns. Anyone who wants to be heard will be. This is an opportunity to be heard. Make it
conversational. Use these questions as guideposts. Generally, interview for about 15-20 minutes,
on their time.
Background
What it is like to be at the school?
I. Who are the stakeholders? Who are the influential people?
II. Who are the informal leaders? Who gets listen to and who doesn’t?
III. What formal committees exist?
IV. What are the informal and formal structures of the school/organization?
A. Does the current structure get accomplished what it wants to get done?
B. How long has this structure been in place?
C. What changes in the organization have taken place here?
1. What is the evolution of the structure?
V. How are policies made?
A. Implemented?
VI. How receptive/open is the school to change/input?
VII. Who are the ones that implement/create change?
VIII. What is the current school climate?
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 128
Appendix A (continued)
IX. What is the relationship between the school and the community?
X. What are your perceptions of the neighborhood?
How do your students live?
XI. Tell me about the ELL population here?
A. Who are your ELL students?
Goals
I. What are the missions or goals of the school?
A. What are your views of the missions/goals?
B. Are they important? Are they important to everyone?
C. How do you implement them?
D. Do these goals get completed?
II. What are the formal goals with respect to ELLs?
III. What are the informal goals?
IV. What gets rewarded or punished?
V. What are the schools goals for improving ELL four-year College attainment and
academic achievement?
VI. Give them the goals that the school thinks they have:
A. How important are they?
B. Are these the right goals? (missing/additions?)
C. Practical?
D. How do they impact you?
E. How do they impact the day to day/teaching and learning?
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 129
Appendix A (continued)
F. How are the goals communicated to everyone?
Perceptions of the Problem
I. Our interest is in English language learners, what issues do you see?
II. The school has identified ELL achievement, Reclassification, and four-year college
attainment as a priority,
A. What do you think about them?
B. What problems/issues do you see?
C. Is this an important issue to focus on?
III. Outside of the problems the leadership identified, are there other issues that need to be
addressed?
IV. Do you feel you are reaching these goals?
A. How so?
V. What would you rank these issues for importance?
VI. What has been done to solve these issues?
A. What (not) worked and why?
VII. What do you think should be done to solve these issues?
VIII. Are you aware of any organizational barriers that would prevent you from addressing the
problems?
IX. How do you view the role of the X (parents, teachers, community, students, admin) for
this issue?
A. Parents
B. Teachers
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 130
Appendix A (continued)
C. Community
D. Students
E. Admin
X. What do you think perpetuates the problem? (contributing factors)
XI. What do you think about us coming in to help tackle this issue?
Do you have any other comments or ideas?
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 131
Appendix B
In-Depth Teacher Interview Questions
Client’s Name:
Position:
Date:
Interviewer:
1. Tell us about yourself.
2. What is it like to be a teacher at NHS?
3. Do you receive support from administration?
4. How receptive is the school to change?
5. Have there been changes with the ELL population?
6. What is your understanding of goals in regards to ELLs?
7. What are your perceptions of why Latino ELLs are not performing?
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 132
Appendix C
Student Survey for Trojan High School
Circle your ethnicity (Circle all that apply): White Latino Asian
African American/Black Native American
Other: Please specify _____________________
Circle your grade level: 9 10 11 12
What is your country of birth? __________________________
What is your spoken home language? ________________________
What middle school did you attend? _________________________
Circle your current English Language Learner (ELL) level?
1 2 3 4 5
Circle your parent’s level of education:
Father: No formal schooling, some schooling, graduated high school, some college,
graduated college, graduate degree, don’t know.
Mother: No formal schooling, some schooling, graduated high school, some college,
graduated college, graduate degree, don’t know.
What is your cumulative GPA? _____
What is your grade in English class? _____
Do you know about the following:
Requirements to get into a 4-year university? YES NO
SATs? YES NO
ACTs? YES NO
A-G Courses? YES NO
California High School Exit Exam? YES NO
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 133
Appendix C (continued)
Do you expect the following:
To get B’s or better in your classes: YES NO
To pass the California High School Exit Exam: YES NO
To graduate from Trojan High school: YES NO
To do well on your SATs: YES NO
To attend a 4-year university: YES NO
I have a fair shot at getting into a 4-year university: YES NO
My friends expect me to attend a 4-year university after high school YES NO
My family expects me to attend a 4-year university after high school YES NO
My teachers expect me to attend a 4-year university after high school YES NO
Getting B’s or higher in my classes is important to me: YES NO
Passing the California High School Exit Exam is important to me: YES NO
Graduating from high school is important to me: YES NO
Doing well on the SATs is important to me: YES NO
Attending a 4 year university is important to me: YES NO
My teachers support me to be successful in my classes: YES NO
My teachers provide me enough feedback and help: YES NO
Trojan High School has provided me the support I need
to get into a 4-year university: YES NO
My counselor has informed me of the requirements
to get into a 4-year university: YES NO
I feel the system will allow me to go to a 4-year university: YES NO
I feel money is not an obstacle for me to go to a 4-year university: YES NO
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 134
Appendix C (continued)
If I want to go to a 4-year university my family encourages
me to pursue it: YES NO
I can afford to apply to 4-year university: YES NO
I can afford to attend 4-year university: YES NO
I have access to enroll AP courses if I want to: YES NO
My family expects me to stay close to home after I graduate: YES NO
My friends expect me to stay close to home after I graduate: YES NO
(Finished, Please Return to Surveyor.)
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 135
Appendix D
Parent Survey
Table E1
Parent Survey for Parents of THS Latino ELL Students (English Version)
Circle the number that best
reflects your view of your
son’s/daughter’s progress at
Trojan High School
1
Strongly
Disagree
2
Disagree
3
Somewhat
Disagree
4
Somewhat
Agree
5
Agree
6
Strongly
Agree
1. Trojan High School keeps
me well informed about my
son’s/daughter’s progress
with schoolwork
1 2 3 4 5 6
2. I use the internet to access
either the “Naviance” or
“Parent Connect” program(s)
at Trojan High School
1 2 3 4 5 6
3. I have been invited to meet
with Trojan High School
officials to discuss my
son’s/daughter’s progress
with schoolwork
1 2 3 4 5 6
4. Within the last six months I
have met with Trojan High
School officials to discuss
my son’s/daughter’s
progress with schoolwork
1 2 3 4 5 6
5. I am familiar with English
Language Multi-Cultural
Advancement Committee
meetings (ELMAC)
1 2 3 4 5 6
6. I want my son/daughter to
become a skilled
professional
1 2 3 4 5 6
7. I want my son/daughter to
get a college degree
1 2 3 4 5 6
8. I expect my son/daughter to
go to college upon
graduation from Trojan High
School
1 2 3 4 5 6
9. I expect my son/daughter to
get a job upon graduation
from Trojan High School
1 2 3 4 5 6
10. Money will be a problem for
my son/daughter attending
college
1 2 3 4 5 6
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 136
Appendix D(continued)
Table E2.
Parent Survey for Parents of THS Latino ELL Students (Spanish Version)
Encierre el número que mejor refleje
su impresión acerca del progreso de
su hijo(a) en Trojan High School
1
En total
desacuer
do
2
En
desacuer
do
3
En
desacuer
do con
reservas
4
De
acuerdo,
con
reservas
5
De
acuerdo
6
Total-
mente de
acuerdo
1. Trojan High School me
mantiene bien informado acerca
del progreso escolar de mi
hijo(a)
1 2 3 4 5 6
2. Uso la Internet para tener
acceso a los programas
“Naviance” o a “Parent
Connect” en Trojan High
1 2 3 4 5 6
3. Me han invitado a reunirme con
oficiales de Trojan High School
para conversar acerca del
progreso escolar de mi hijo(a)
1 2 3 4 5 6
4. En los últimos seis meses me he
reunido con oficiales de Trojan
High School para conversar
acerca del progreso escolar de
mi hijo(a)
1 2 3 4 5 6
5. Estoy familiarizado con las
reuniones de English Language
Multi-Cultural Advancement
(ELMAC)
1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Quiero que mi hijo(a) llegue a
ser un profesional competente
1 2 3 4 5 6
7. Quiero que mi hijo(a) obtenga
un título universitario
1 2 3 4 5 6
8. Espero que mi hijo(a) vaya a la
universidad una vez que se
gradúe de Trojan High School
1 2 3 4 5 6
9. Espero que mi hijo(a) obtenga
un empleo una vez que se
gradúe de Trojan High School
1 2 3 4 5 6
10. El dinero va a ser un problema
para que mi hijo(a) vaya a la
universidad
1 2 3 4 5 6
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 137
Appendix E
Gap Analysis Activity Log
Date Activity Location
2/1/12 Interview – THS Leadership THS
4/5/12 Interviews THS
4/19/12 Interviews THS
4/23/12 Observation – AC* Meeting THS
5/1/12 Interviews THS
5/25/12 Interviews THS
6/4/12 – 6/14/12 Surveys – Students THS
6/11/12 – 6/14/12 Surveys – Parents THS
8/16/12 Interview – Principal THS
9/12/12 Focus Group – Parents THS
10/19/12 Root Cause Brief – Principal USC
3/1/13 Solutions Brief – THS Leadership THS
*Note: Abbreviation: AC = Administrative Chairs.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 138
Appendix F
Student Survey Results
Figure G1. Cumulative GPA and Gr41e grades for Latino ELL students at THS for the
2010-2011 school year.
Figure G2. THS Latino ELL student survey results for the “knowledge” domain.
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
Cumulative GPA English Gr41e
Average
Median
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Know
requirements to
get into 4 year:
Know SATs: Know ACTs: Know A-G
Courses:
Know CAHSEE:
Knowledge
% Yes
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 139
Appendix F (continued)
Figure G3. NHS Latino ELL student survey results for the “motivation” domain.
Figure G4. THS Latino ELL student survey results for the “organization” domain
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Motivation
% Yes
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Organization
% Yes
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 140
Appendix G
Parent Survey Results
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Mean
(Weighted)
Trojan High School
keeps me well informed
of my son’s/daughter’s
progress with school
work
0 0 0 2 6 5 5.2
I use the internet to
access either the
“Naviance” or “Parent
Connect” program(s) at
Trojan High School
2 0 0 1 5 5 4.6
I have been invited to
meet with Trojan High
School officials to
discuss my
son’s/daughter’s
progress with school
work
2 2 1 2 3 3 3.6
Within the past six
months I have met with
Trojan High School
officials to discuss my
son’s/daughter’s
progress with school
work
3 3 1 1 3 2 3.3
I am familiar with
English Language
Multi-Cultural
Advancement
Committee meetings
(ELMAC)
1 1 1 5 2 3 4.1
I want my son/daughter
to become a skilled
professional
0 0 0 0 2 11 5.8
I want my son/daughter
to get a college degree
0 0 0 0 0 13 6
I expect my
son/daughter to go to
college upon graduation
from High School
0 0 0 0 0 13 6
I expect my
son/daughter to get a job
upon graduation from
high school
2 1 2 2 2 4 4
Money will be a
problem for my
son/daughter attending
college
1 0 1 4 6 1 4.3
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 141
Appendix H
Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives
Figure I1. Annual measurable achievement objectives by ethnicity (AMAO 1, 2).
# of CELDT
Takers
# of Students
Meeting
AMAO 1
% Target
% Meeting
AMAO 1
Met Target
for AMAO 1
164 122 56.0% 74.8%
5 5 56.0% 100.0%
80 61 56.0% 76.2%
12 7 56.0% 58.3%
13 10 56.0% 83.3%
6 5 56.0% 83.3%
Report: AMAO 2 by Ethnicity and Language
# of
Students in
Cohort
# of Students
Meeting
AMAO 2
% Target
% Meeting
AMAO 2
Met Target
for AMAO 2
52 17 20.1% 32.7%
5 1 20.1% 20.0% X
11 3 20.1% 27.3%
5 1 20.1% 20.0% X
7 4 20.1% 57.1%
4 1 20.1% 25.0%
# of
Students in
Cohort
# of Students
Meeting
AMAO 2
% Target
% Meeting
AMAO 2
Met Target
for AMAO 2
122 90 45.1% 73.8%
2 2 45.1% 100.0%
74 54 45.1% 73.0%
7 5 45.1% 71.4%
6 6 45.1% 100.0%
3 2 45.1% 66.7% Vietnamese - Vietnamese
Vietnamese - Vietnamese
2011-2012
Ethnicity - Language
Schoolwide
5 Years or More Cohort
Chinese - Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese
Hispanic - Spanish
Japanese - Japanese
Korean - Korean
2011-2012
Ethnicity - Language
Less than 5 Years Cohort
Schoolwide
Japanese - Japanese
Korean - Korean
Hispanic - Spanish
Japanese - Japanese
Korean - Korean
Vietnamese - Vietnamese
Ethnicity - Language
Schoolwide
Hispanic - Spanish
Chinese - Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese
Chinese - Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 142
Appendix H (continued)
Figure I2. Annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAO 3).
Report:
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
67 26 39% 56 14 25% 36 4 11%
n/a n/a n/a 1 0 0% 1 1 100%
25 8 32% 30 7 23% 16 2 13%
5 2 40% 1 0 0% 6 0 0%
8 2 25% 8 2 25% 6 0 0%
6 3 50% 2 2 100% 1 1 100%
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
# of EL
Students
#
Proficient
or Above
%
Proficient
or Above
67 27 40% 56 17 30% 36 16 44%
n/a n/a n/a 1 0 0% 1 1 100%
25 4 16% 30 7 23% 16 3 19%
5 2 40% 1 1 100% 6 3 50%
8 6 75% 8 5 63% 6 6 100%
6 4 67% 2 1 50% 1 1 100%
AMAO 3 by Ethnicity and Language
Japanese - Japanese
English - Language Arts 2009 2010
Chinese - Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese
Korean - Korean
Vietnamese - Vietnamese
2011
Mathematics (Grade Level Test) 2009 2010 2011
Ethnicity - Language
Schoolwide
Hispanic - Spanish
Chinese - Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese
Korean - Korean
Vietnamese - Vietnamese
Ethnicity - Language
Schoolwide
Hispanic - Spanish
Japanese - Japanese
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 143
Appendix I
Goal Planning Guides
Table J1
Goal Planning Guide (intermediate)
Global Goal: All Latino ELL students will be college-ready by graduation
Intermediate
Goal
Clear
Aligned
Measured
How
Achievable
Time
Frame
Priority
Table J2
Goal Planning Guide (performance)e
Intermediate Goal #1: Raise GPA for all Latino ELL students
Performance
Goal
Clear
Aligned
Measured
How
Achievable
Time
Frame
Priority
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 144
Appendix J
Parent Involvement Program Contacts and Resources
Table K1
Juntos program reference information
Contact
Resource Phone Email or Website
Andrew Behnke, PhD. (919) 515-9156 andrew_behnke@ncsu.edu
Cintia Aguilar (919) 513-0311 cintia_aguilar@ncsu.edu
All program materials http://ncfamilies.com/spanish/juntos
Table K2
Parent institute for quality education reference information
Contact
Resource Phone Email or Address
Maria Elena Meraz
(323) 255-2575
(323) 854-1990 (C)
mmeraz@piqe.org
3370 San Fernando Rd. #105 L.A. CA.
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 145
Appendix K
Letter From Westchester High School Principal
GOALS AND PARENT INVOLVEMENT 146
Appendix L
Letter From El Rancho High School Principal
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This project used a problem solving model to identify root causes and suggest researched based solutions specifically developed to increase the number of Latino English language learners qualified to be admitted to a four-year college upon graduation from a high school in Southern California. The approach used in this project was based upon a problem-solving model called gap analysis. A team of three doctoral students, acting as consultants to the leadership of the high school, reviewed relevant research, conducted interviews, reviewed achievement data, assisted school officials conducting surveys, and hosted a parent focus-group during the gap analysis process. The gap analysis process focused on three dimensions to identify root causes and suggest solutions: knowledge, motivation and organizational barriers. Using this process, each team member identified and studied root causes and made researched based recommendations. The findings addressed in this project were: achievement goals for ELLs were communicated in general form without the benefit of performance or intermediate goals to guide progress, and a lack of enhanced parental-involvement initiatives. The findings from this project are relevant to the unique context of the high school where the gap analysis project was conducted, and caution should be exercised in applying the findings in this project to other school sites.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on college affordability and student grades
PDF
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on school support and school counseling resources
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of english language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high school: a focus on teaching strategies and placement options
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English language learners at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
An alternative capstone project: closing the achievement gap for Latino English language learners in elementary school
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the achievement gap for Hispanic English language learners using the gap analysis model
PDF
An alternative capstone project: bridging the Latino English language learner academic achievement gap in elementary school
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the Hispanic English learners achievement gap in a high performing district
PDF
Increasing parent involvement at the high school level using the gap analysis framework
PDF
Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Evaluating the academic achievement gap for Latino English language learners in a high achieving school district
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high schol: a focus on teacher collaboration and cultural competence
PDF
Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis
PDF
Increasing college matriculation rate for minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged students by utilizing a gap analysis model
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: School site leadership factors
PDF
Using the gap analysis to examine Focus on Results districtwide reform implementation in Glendale USD: an alternative capstone project
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: central office leadership factors
PDF
Addressing the challenges for teachers of English learners in a California elementary school using the gap analysis approach
Asset Metadata
Creator
Morris, Brent A.
(author)
Core Title
A capstone project using the gap analysis model: closing the college readinesss gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on goals and parent involvement
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
03/22/2013
Defense Date
03/04/2013
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
college readiness,English language learners,gap analysis,goals,OAI-PMH Harvest,parent involvement
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Rueda, Robert (
committee chair
), Stowe, Kathy (
committee member
), Yates, Kenneth A. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
bamorris@usc.edu,brentmorr@cs.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-226592
Unique identifier
UC11294890
Identifier
usctheses-c3-226592 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-MorrisBren-1482.pdf
Dmrecord
226592
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Morris, Brent A.
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 a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
college readiness
English language learners
gap analysis
goals
parent involvement