University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach

(USC Thesis Other)

Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY 1

Improving Student Achievement at a Restructured High School Academy of Health Sciences
Using an Innovation Gap Analysis Approach

by

Camille Ramos-Beal

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 Camille Ramos-Beal

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

2
Abstract

This case study used the Gap Analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) framework, a six-step problem
solving approach to identify goals, determine performance gaps, diagnose causes, recommend
research-based solutions, and evaluate the results to examine student achievement of a
Restructured Health Sciences High School Ac a de m y ’s E xpected Student Learning Results/21st
Century outcomes. The purpose of this study was to (a) identify the underlying skills required in
order for students to achieve the outcomes, (b) determine the degree to which these skills are
being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identify appropriate assessments to measure student
achievement of these skills, and (d) determine the degree to which students are achieving these
skills. In this qualitative case study, document analysis, classroom observations, and interviews
were conducted to collect data from six high school Project Period teachers. Findings from this
study indicate that teachers like teaching the Project Period, but lack knowledge and skills about
expected student learning outcomes and how to transition their roles from lecturer to facilitator.
This study also found that teachers lack value and structured time to plan for the Project Period.
This study recommends solutions, drawn from the literature, to help the stakeholders within the
organization to address these challenges. This case study demonstrates how the Gap Analysis
framework is used to identify performance gaps, evaluate current practices, and address
performance issues when implementing the Project Period.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

3
Dedication

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my family because they have sacrificed and
endured alongside me these past three years. Thank you to my parents, Gene and Nanes Ramos,
my siblings, Jayvee, Donna, Charley, and Joyce, and my husband, John. You all have been so
patient with me. I continue to grow and learn from you. Thank you for being so understanding.
I love you all very much.
In my life, there was always a strong woman who helped me along and inspired me to be
better. I would also like to dedicate my dissertation to the following women:
 To my mom, Mary Agnes Ramos, who was my first and lifelong example of a kind,
generous, forgiving, and hard-working woman of integrity. Thank you for teaching me
that it isn’t wha t y ou do whe n other s se e y ou that c ounts , but ra ther wh a t y ou do whe n
other s don’t.
 To Ms. Donna Ramos, my eldest sister. Thank you for taking care of me. You took on
great responsibility at an early age and you have always tried to lead by example. You
have such a strong moral compass and you try to help others whenever you can. Thank
you for your advice and your care.
 To Mrs. Nancy Gonzalez, my high school counselor. Thank you for checking in on the
students and taking the time to write letters of recommendation and seeking out
scholarships for us. Your guidance was integral in getting into college.
 To Mrs. Berthilde Bernard. I miss you terribly. Thank you for your love, your support,
and your spunk! You really looked after me all four years of college and the short time
after you had left here on earth. Work- stud y in t he P rovost’ s off ice wa s a blast. I mi ss
your stories.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

4
 To Reedy Glasper Wade. You are an inspiring leader. I have grown so much through
your guidance. We weathered the storm and have come out even stronger! Thank you
for your support and your friendship. #Steelmagnolias #Unstoppable

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

5
Acknowledgements
I give praise and thanks to the Lord who has been so generous with me. He has blessed
me by giving me opportunities and loving people in my life. He has carved out pathways for me
to achieve my dreams.
There are many people who I would like to acknowledge because without them, this
success would not have been possible.
Thank you, mom, for your unwavering support and for setting the example for integrity
and work ethic.
Thank you, dad, for taking a risk and moving to the United States. You are an example
of fearlessness.
Thank you to my siblings, Jayvee, Donna, Charley, Joyce (and Jonathan) for your
support, patience, kindness, and encouragement.
Tha nk y o u to m y nie c e , F ra n c e s, fo r e nter t a ini ng me f or “ g ivi n g ” me m y v e r y own r oom
in the house during the weekends I needed to stay in Orange County.
Thank you to my in-laws, the Beal family for your constant support.
Thank you, Aneesah Williams, for your friendship and love.
Thank you, Dr. Mary Ellen Storm, for believing in me, hiring me into Pomona Unified,
and inspiring me to pursue a doctoral degree.
Thank you Reedy Glasper Wade for your mentorship and friendship.
Thank you to Pomona Unified for the development opportunities and for your faith in
me.
Thank you to the district in which this study was conducted and to the teachers who
welcomed me into their classrooms and participated in the study.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

6
Thank you to the amazing faculty and administration at John Muir High School during
my time there (Class of 2000).
Tha nk y o u to m y pro fe ss or s at Mt. S t. Mar y ’s Col lege .
Tha nk y o u to m y pro fe ss or s at the Unive rsit y of S outher n Cali for nia, both a t t he master ’s
and doctoral level.
Thank you, Dr. Robert Rueda and Dr. Jennifer Wagner, for serving on my committee and
sharing your feedback in order to improve my study.
Thank you, Dr. Yates, for teaching me and guiding me through the dissertation process.
I t w a s a ve r y posi ti ve e x pe rie nc e a nd I ’m so a ppreciative of your patience and the time you spent
working with me.
To my fellow Trojans, we did it!! Thank you for the joy and laughter. Your friendship
has made this journey memorable. I look forward to many more years! Fight On! #All I do is
win!
To Teddy and Olive: Part of this dissertation belongs to you. Olive, you kept me
c ompan y a t all hours of t he nig ht. I f I w a sn’t in bed, ne it he r w e re y ou. I f I w a s wor kin g , y ou
were right at my feet. You are so loyal and loving. Your kisses after a long day or night gave
me invaluable comfort.
Finally, to my husband, John, we have made many sacrifices. This was a challenging
process for both of us. Thank you for your patience, support, and your love.
Looking at this long list of people to whom I feel so much gratitude, I truly feel blessed.
Ea c h of y ou h a s con tribu ted in m y journe y tow a rd s thi s g oa l. I t’s onl y r i g h t t ha t y ou sha r e the
credit for my doctorate at the University of Southern California. Fight On!

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

7
Table of Contents

Abstract ................................................................................................................................2
Dedication ............................................................................................................................3
Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................5
List of Tables .....................................................................................................................15
List of Figures ....................................................................................................................16

Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................16
Statement of Problem .............................................................................................16
Importance of the Problem.....................................................................................18
Context of the Problem ..........................................................................................19
Limitation of the Study ..........................................................................................24

Chapter 2: Review of the Literature ...................................................................................26
Process of Reviewing Literature ............................................................................26
No Child Left Behind Sanctions ............................................................................26
The National Academy Foundation .......................................................................32
21st Century Skills and Project Based Learning (PBL).........................................34
21st Century Skills and Learning ..................................................................34
Project Based Learning .................................................................................37
The Positive Impact of 21st Century Skills and PBL on
Standardized Testing ............................................................................38
Teacher Knowledge and Skills ..............................................................................39
Teacher Efficacy & Motivation .............................................................................41
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

8
Teacher Efficacy ...........................................................................................41
Teacher Motivation .......................................................................................43
Teacher Values and Beliefs ...................................................................................44
Organizational Culture and Resources/Policies .....................................................45
Organizational Culture ..................................................................................46
Resources/Policies ........................................................................................48
Conclusion .............................................................................................................49

Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................52
Methodology Framework.......................................................................................53
Stage 1: Identify Multilevel Goals .........................................................................56
Stage 2: Quantify the Current Performance ...........................................................57
Stage 3: Determine the Gap in the Current Performance ......................................57
Stage 4: Hypothesize and Empirically Validate Causes ........................................57
Scanning Interviews ......................................................................................58
Informal Conversations with the Site Principal ...................................58
Informal Conversations with Staff Members who Teach
Project Period ..............................................................................59
Observations as the Academy Facilitator ............................................60
Theory ....................................................................................................................62
Knowledge and Skills ...................................................................................62
Motivation .....................................................................................................63
Organization ..................................................................................................64
Assumed Causes from the Review of the Literature .............................................64
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

9
Knowledge and Skills ...................................................................................64
Efficacy and Motivation ...............................................................................65
Organization ..................................................................................................65
Summary ................................................................................................................66
Stage 5: Validated Causes ......................................................................................67
Sample and Population ..........................................................................................69
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................69
Document Analysis .......................................................................................69
Observation ...................................................................................................69
Interviews ......................................................................................................70
Standardized Open-Ended Interviews ...........................................................70
Data Collection ......................................................................................................70
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................70

Chapter 4: Results ..............................................................................................................72
Demographic Data .................................................................................................72
Data Collection ......................................................................................................75
Document Analysis .......................................................................................75
Classroom Observation .................................................................................75
Interviews ...............................................................................................................75
Report of the Findings ...........................................................................................76
Study Question 1 ...........................................................................................76
Knowledge and Skills Conceptual Framework.............................................76
Knowledge and Skills Assumed Causes .......................................................76
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

10
Factual ...............................................................................................77
Conceptual ........................................................................................77
Procedural .........................................................................................77
Metacognitive ...................................................................................77
Results for Knowledge and Skills ..........................................................................77
Interviews ......................................................................................................77
Summary of Interviews .................................................................................77
Factual ...............................................................................................78
Conceptual ........................................................................................78
Procedural .........................................................................................79
Metacognitive ...................................................................................80
Classroom Observations ...............................................................................81
Collaborative Workers ......................................................................82
Effective Communicators .................................................................82
Critical Thinkers ...............................................................................82
Productive Learners ......................................................................................82
Summary of Observation ..............................................................................85
Document Analysis .......................................................................................86
Summary of Document Analysis ...........................................................................87
Factual ...........................................................................................................87
Conceptual ....................................................................................................87
Summary of the Knowledge and Skills Data .........................................................88
Motivation Theoretical Framework .......................................................................89
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

11
Motivation Assumed Causes..................................................................................89
Results for Motivation ...........................................................................................90
Interviews ......................................................................................................90
Observations .................................................................................................92
Document Analysis .......................................................................................93
Summary of the Motivation Data ..........................................................................93
Validated Causes of the Motivation Gap ...............................................................94
Organization Theoretical Framework ....................................................................96
Organization Assumed Causes ..............................................................................96
Results for Organization ........................................................................................96
Interviews ......................................................................................................96
Observations ...............................................................................................100
Document Analysis .....................................................................................100
Summary of the Organization Data .....................................................................101
Validated Causes of the Gap in the Organization ................................................101

Chapter 5: Solutions and Implementation........................................................................103
Knowledge and Skills Solutions ..........................................................................103
Factual Knowledge: Lack of Knowledge of Student Learning
Outcomes from the Aggregate 21st Century/PBL List ...................104
Conceptual Knowledge: Lack of Knowledge of Planning and
Implementing Teaching Strategies that Support 21st
Century Learning and PBL .............................................................105

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

12
Procedural Knowledge: Lack of Knowledge of How to Shift from
Theory to Practice because Teachers Have Limited
Experience with PBL ......................................................................106
Metacognitive Knowledge: Lack of Self-Awareness of
Pedagogical Stance/Teaching Style ................................................108
Motivation Solutions ............................................................................................110
Lack of T e a c h e r E ff ica c y : Tea c he r’ s B e li e f tha t H e /S he C a n
Motivate or Sustain Motivation among Challenging/
Struggling Learners .........................................................................110
L a c k of T e a c h e r’ s Va lue for P lanning for P roje c t P e riod:
Teachers Know How to Lesson Plan; However, Teachers
Find it Difficult to Prioritize Planning for Project Period when
They Also Have to Plan for Other Classes They Teach .................112
Organization Solutions.........................................................................................114
Lack of Systematic Training and Professional Development on
21st Century Skills, PBL, and Project Period to Refresh
Teachers on a Regular Basis and to Orient New Teachers
Into PBL ..........................................................................................114
Lack of Structured Time for Ongoing Teacher Collaboration
and Lesson Planning for Project Period ..........................................115
Lack of Access to Technology Resources to Support the
Project Period Curriculum ..............................................................117
Implementation ....................................................................................................118
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

13
Knowledge and Skills ..........................................................................................119
Information .................................................................................................119
Ongoing Training ........................................................................................119
Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) .................................................................120
Sequenced Training ....................................................................................120
Collaboration Planning and Feedback ........................................................120
Increase Awareness of Pedagogical Stance ................................................121
Motivation ............................................................................................................121
Building Individual and Team Confidence .................................................121
Increase Value for Lesson Planning for Project Period ..............................121
Build Relatedness and Collaboration ..........................................................122
Organization .........................................................................................................123
Create a System of Professional Development that Supports PBL
for the Project Period ......................................................................123
Time for Ongoing Professional Development and Teacher
Collaboration...................................................................................123
Align Resources via Candid Collaborative Conversations and
Value Streaming..............................................................................123
Stakeholder Cascading and Performance Goals ..................................................125

Chapter 6: Discussion ......................................................................................................130
Synthesis of the Results .......................................................................................130
Knowledge and Skills .................................................................................131
Motivation ...................................................................................................131
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

14
Organization ................................................................................................132
Recommendations and Implications ....................................................................132
Evaluation ............................................................................................................133
Level 1: Reactions.......................................................................................134
Level 2: Learning ........................................................................................134
Level 3: Transfer .........................................................................................135
Level 4: Impact ...........................................................................................136
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ........................................................136
Limitations ...........................................................................................................137
Future Research ...................................................................................................138
Conclusion and Implications................................................................................139

References ........................................................................................................................141

Appendices

Appendix A: Partnership for 21st Century Learning: 21st Century

Definitions...................................................................................................150
Appendix B: Expected Student Learning Results at Restructured
Health Sciences Academy...........................................................................155
Appendix C: Aggregate 21st Century Skills, PBL Skills, and ESLRs
List .............................................................................................................156
Appendix D: Document Analysis Checklist ........................................................159
Appendix E: Classroom Observation Checklist ..................................................162
Appendix F: Interview Questions ........................................................................165
Appe ndix G: 6 A’ s R ubric ...................................................................................168
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

15
List of Tables

Table 1 Summary of Assumed Causes in Knowledge & Skill, Motivation,
and in the Organization ....................................................................................66
Table 2 Summary of Causes, Solutions, and Implementation of the Solutions ..........124
Table 3 S umm a r y of the Or g a niz a ti on’s Ma in Goa l, S hort -Term Goals,
and Performance Goals ..................................................................................126
Table 4 Summary of Performance Goals, Timeline, and Measurement of
Performance Goals .........................................................................................128
List of Figures

Figure 1 The gap Analysis Model ..................................................................................55
Figure 2 Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for
Collaborative Workers .....................................................................................83
Figure 3 Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for
Effective Communicators ................................................................................84
Figure 4 Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for
Critical Thinkers ..............................................................................................84
Figure 5 Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for
Productive Learners .........................................................................................85
Figure 6 Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Knowledge
and Skills ..........................................................................................................89
Figure 7 Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Motivation ........................95
Figure 8 Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Organization ..................102

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

16
Chapter 1

Introduction

Statement of the Problem

In 2001, the federal government passed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), due to the
lack of student achievement in schools nationwide. No Child Left Behind is an inducement,
used to monitor the progress of students in schools receiving Title I funds. NCLB requires that
schools receiving Title I funds show student academic achievement through the federal level
scores: adequate yearly progress (AYP) and the state level scores: academic performance index
(API) scores. When schools do not meet their AYP or API goals, the school is labeled a program
improvement (PI) school (Jennings & Rentner, 2006). A school that has been in program
improvement status faces federal sanctions. During the first two years of not making adequate
growth, the school will be designated program improvement status. A school in program
improvement (PI) Year Three must offer their students choice and provide transportation to
attend a non-PI school; schools risk losing their students to higher performing schools.
Additionally, schools must use their Title I funds to provide tutoring. If schools continue to PI
Year Five, they must restructure. Beyond that, the federal sanction could escalate to a school
closure, take-over or loss of Title I funds (Hoff, 2008). Unfortunately, public schools serving
urban communities are often failing schools (Meyers & Murphy, 2007). According to Meyers
a nd Murph y , “ F a il ing s c ho ols s e rve a dispropor ti ona te numbe r of mi norit y students” (2007 , p.
638).
According to Hoff (2008), during the 2007-2008 academic school year, almost 30,000
schools nationwide failed to make AYP. Low academic achievement is a common problem in
urban public schools in states like California, often occurring in low-income communities where
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

17
there are large populations of English learners (Schwartz & Soifer, 2012). California has the
largest and still increasing percentage of English learners. Currently 4.4 million English learners
attend California schools (Gandara, Rumberger, Maxwell-Jolly & Callahan, 2003). California
teaches one- thi rd of the n a ti on’s E ng li sh l e a rne rs a nd the ma jorit y of th e se s tudents a re not
proficient in English. According to CBEDS 2003, the English language learner population will
represent the majority of our students. Research estimates that there will be three million
students wit hin C a li for ni a ’s public sc hools whose fir st l a ng u a g e is no t En g li sh (CB EDS 2003 as
cited in Gandara et al., 2003).
Nationwide, schools struggle with raising student achievement. Underperforming
schools in program improvement status for five consecutive years or more are required to
restructure (Jennings & Rentner, 2006) or face heavy sanctions. NCLB (2001 as cited in
Jennings & Rentner, 2006) provides several restructuring reform options: (a) vacating staff and
administrative positions; (b) appointing a new principal; (c) establishing a new school team, with
some rehired teachers and some new teachers; (d) dismantling of the organizational
infrastructure (Meyers & Murphy, 2007). Other restructuring reform offers include the school
(e) reopening as a charter school, (f) contracting with a private entity or private management
company, (g) pair with a higher performing school (h) reconstituting into smaller learning
communities, (i) closing and sending the students to another school/district, (j) reopening as a
specialized school and in the process dismiss the entire staff and required them to re-apply as a
skil led staf f in the scho ol’s ne w f o c us ar e a . If school restructuring does not result in
improvement, the state and the district could face serious consequences.
One such instance was an urban middle school in southern California that was selected to
reconfigure to a specialized health science academy serving grades 7-12. This solution complied
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

18
with NCLB (as cited in Jennings & Rentner, 2006) requirements to implement an organizational
restructure after PI Year Five. This school, which will be called the Health Sciences Academy,
wa s assi g ne d a n e w a dmi nist ra tor to l e a d the r e c on fig ur a ti on of the sc hool’s infr a struc tur e ;; none
of the staff members were dismissed.
The challenge at the Health Sciences Academy is to increase student achievement. After
the middl e scho ol’s restructure to an academy, the adoption of instructional initiatives created an
additional challenge: teachers must have additional knowledge and skills, motivation and
organizational support to implement academy initiatives. Therefore, in addition to the initial
ne e d to i nc re a se student a c hieve m e nt, a se c ond a r y pr oblem is the sc hool ’s suc c e ssful
implementation of programs and curriculum in order to meet benchmarks and goals for the
a c a d e m y ’ s ex pe c ted stud e nt l e a rnin g r e sult s (E S L R s).
Importance of the Problem

Low-income, minority students do not have the minimum literacy level to join the labor
market. Most jobs today require skills beyond a high school education; however, less than 30%
of high school students earn a college degree. Lack of education is a predictor of crime and
welfare dependency (Darling-Hammond, 2007). According to Darling-Hammond, between
1997-2000 ther e w a s a “ 300% incr e a se in m iddl e scho ol drop outs” (p. 325) . After the high
school exit exam was implemented in 2003, a majority of Latino and African American students
did not pass and the testing resulted in mass dropouts (2007). ELL students are more likely to
perform poorly on standardized tests and drop out than other students (Verdugo & Flores, 2007).
Low academic achievement among underrepresented students is endemic. It is important that
this problem be addressed because the effects of uneducated citizens will cause further strain on
the economic future of our country (Schwartz & Soifer, 2012).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

19
Context of the Problem

A middle school in an urban setting in southern California had been an underperforming
school for several years. It was designated a PI school in 2004. After reaching PI status Year
Five, the superintendent of the school district conducted a listening campaign to determine the
needs of the community. The listening campaign provided feedback from parents and concerned
community members. They expressed their desires for better schools, smaller schools, schools
that would prepare students for post-secondary education.
Using the results from the listening campaign, the school district considered the different
types of academies: business academies, hospitality and tourism academies, engineering
academies, academy of information and technology. The school district recognized the urgent
need for healthcare professionals and took advantage of the surrounding resources: a university
medical school and a city hospital. The restructured a c a de m y ’s c u rr icula r f oc us wa s sele c ted to
be Health Sciences. The Health Sciences Academy is one of fifteen schools nationwide to pilot
the Health Sciences curriculum for Project Lead the Way (PLTW) and for the National Academy
Foundation (NAF). The school reconfigured from a traditional 6-8 middle school to a 7-12
Health Sciences High School Academy. The Health Science Academy is part of a pipeline
designed to increase the number of well-qualified applicants/well-qualified minorities in the
Health Sciences field (Fincher, Sykes-Brown, & Allen-Noble, 2002).
Once the academy focus was selected, the district considered the structural reform
options delineated in the NCLB policy. Meyers and Murphy (2007) asserted that dismissing the
existing teaching staff during restructuring would result in an opportunity to hire strong teachers
that would in effect, bring a new culture, energy, and commitment to the organization. Studies
conducted by Scott, Duffrin, and Kelleher and Neuman-Sheldon (2009) for the Center on
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

20
Education Policy found that the drawback of hiring a completely new team is not having enough
time to train the new teachers and lacking qualified staff to fill vacancies. After the plans to
re c onfi g ur e the or ga niz a ti on’s inf ra struc tur e we re in pl a c e , a n e w a dmi nist r a tor w a s assi g ne d to
lead the acad e m y ’s reconfiguration; however, none of the teachers at the school were removed
and asked to reapply for positions in the new academy. All tenured teachers stayed at the site. A
few teachers were reassigned because of the reduction of students and the NCLB (YEAR) single-
subject credential requirements to teach grades 7-12.
The mission statement of the Health Sciences Ac a de m y is t o “ wo rk c oll a bo ra ti ve l y to
provide students with high-quality learning experiences via a highly-qualified staff of educators
and support personnel who practice professionalism, enthusiasm, and care in their work with
students” ( School Accountability Report Card, SARC, 2011). The Health Sciences Academy is
beginning its

third year of reconfiguration, adding its first 11th grade cohort in 2012-2013. It is
now recognized as a high school and completed its initial visit for accreditation by Western
Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The restructured Academy of Health Sciences
recently earned permanent status as a National Academy Foundation (NAF) school.
In preparation for its WASC accreditation visit, members of the leadership team revisited
principles of 21st Century Learning (see Appendix A), Project Based Learning, prior trainings,
and professional development to discuss expected student outcomes for the Health Sciences
Academy students. According to the conditions for eligibility for the WASC accreditation
process, the academic institution must have an overall plan of objectives for student achievement
and assessment plans to measure progress towards meeting the objectives (WASC, 2012). These
requirements lead to the discussion and development of the Expected Student Learning Results
(ESLRs) that are included in Appendix B. In addition, the a c a de m y ’s work with NAF facilitated
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

21
discussion around specific outcomes for future academy graduates that would result in college-
and career-ready students. As a result, academy teachers developed a combined aggregate
Health Science 21st century skills list.
The restructured Academy of Health Sciences is a public high school entering its fourth
year of academy implementation. Formerly a middle school, the school was restructured after
reaching PI status year 5. The scho ol’s r e struc ture wa s a po li c y a dopted b y the school district in
order to comply with NCLB requirements. The a c a de m y ’s g oa l i s to i nc re a se student
achievement in order to exit PI status; however, since its transformation, the school has not
experienced significant gains in student achievement scores. The goal of the school is to move
out from program improvement by increasing standardized test scores. Restructuring as a Health
Science Academy is a cascading goal set by the district and school, which they hope will achieve
the organizational goal, if implemented correctly.
Therefore, the goal for the restructured Academy of Health Science students is that upon
graduation they demonstrate 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st century skills as
represented by combined/aggregate 21st century outcomes listed below.
The ESLR/21st Century outcomes for the Health Sciences Academy students are:

 Work collaboratively with others in formal and informal settings to complete group and
individual projects.
 Research, organize and synthesize ideas across various electronic and physical media.
 Communicate effectively through written, oral, and visual presentations and reports using
a variety of media.
 Read, analyze, and comprehend complex material.
 Frame, analyze, and solve complex problems in a variety of subject areas.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

22
 Reflect critically on learning experiences and processes.
 Make connections between curriculum and real world applications in preparation for
competition in a global society.
 Evaluate priorities, set goals, and create a plan for post-secondary education and careers.
 Monitor own understanding and needs, locating appropriate resources, and transferring
learning from one domain to another.
 Demonstrate self-motivation and self-discipline.
 Act responsibly with the interests of the larger/global community in mind.
 Demonstrate ethical behavior in personal, workplace, and community contexts
 Demonstrate respect and appreciation of individual differences, cultures and beliefs.
 Set high standards for on e ’s self and others and work diligently to meet defined
standards.
These outcomes are achievable through an academy curriculum that teaches 21st Century
Skills. According to The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2009), 21st Century Curriculum
and Instruction should include the following components:
 Teaches 21st Century skills discretely in the context of core subjects and 21st century
interdisciplinary themes
 Focuses on providing opportunities for applying 21st century skills across content areas
and for a competency-based approach to learning
 Enables innovative learning methods that integrate the use of supportive technologies,
inquiry and problem-based approaches, and higher order thinking skills.
 Encourages the integration of community resources beyond school walls.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

23
To conform to the d ist ric t’s manda te a nd b a se d on the r e quire m e nts t o tea c h the
combined health sciences and 21st Century skills curriculum, the Health Sciences Academy has
incorporated a 75-minute applied problem/project based learning class called Project Period into
the bell schedule on Fridays. Currently, there is no assessment to measure student achievement
of the ESLR/21st Century skills. Additionally, the skills required to teach ESLRs have not been
identified; therefore, teachers may not be teaching an effective Project Period curriculum.
The purpose of this study is to (a) identify the underlying skills required in order for
students to achieve the Health Sciences A c a d e m y ’ s ES L R /21st C e ntur y out c omes, ( b) de t e rmine the degree to which these skills are being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identify
appropriate assessments to measure student achievement of these skills, and (d) determine the
degree to which students are achieving these skills.
Further, this study examined the challenges in knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization teachers may encounter to provide the Health Sciences Academy students with the
instruction in the ESLR/21st Century Skills outcomes.
The questions that guided this study were:

1. What are the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
culture, which may affect the successful achievement of the organizational goal for the
Health Sciences Academy students to achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st
Century Skills as represented by combined/aggregate 21st Century Skills document?
2. What are potential solutions to address the gaps in faculty knowledge, skills, motivation,
a nd or g a niz a ti ona l cultur e to ac hiev e the or g a niz a t ion’s g oa l o f suc c e ssful a c hieve ment
of combined aggregate 21st Century skills and ESLRs by Health Sciences Academy
students?
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

24
The framework that guided this study is the innovative model of the gap analysis (Clark
& Estes, 2008). The gap analysis is a systematic approach for investigating causes for the
problem, targeted data collection and analysis, developing solutions and evaluation
measurements that address the o rga niz a ti on’s long -term and short-term goals (Rueda, 2011).
The re is a 100 % g a p be t we e n the or ga niz a ti ona l g oa l a nd the f a c ult y ’ s ex ist ing s y st e ms and
practices. Health Sciences Academy does not have a systematic curriculum and assessment for
the Project Period. Using qualitative research methods, this study gathered information and
made recommendations based on barriers in knowledge and skills, motivation, and organization
that Health Sciences Academy faculty face to effectively instruct and implement an evaluation
system to measure student achievement of the aggregate ESLRs and 21st Century outcomes.
Limitation of the Study
The implementation of this academy is one of many possible solutions that can increase
student achievement. The value in this study is that it will be able to identify the best practices
and areas of improvement at Health Sciences Academy. The Academy restructure complies with
NCLB requirements of making structural changes in efforts to transition out of PI status. This
effort may not solve the PI problem, but before any final judgments can be made on the
re struc tur e ’s e f fe c ti ve ne s s, im pleme ntation m ust b e e na c ted w it h 100% a c c ur a c y . This study
used the framework of the gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008); however, due to real world
circumstances, it does not have three levels of cascading goals and therefore deviates from the
traditional gap analysis. Limited research is available to make exact comparisons between the
systems at Health Sciences Academy and successfully restructured high school health sciences
academies. In this study, exemplar research and data were gathered from restructured schools
and academy schools. The author of this study is the academy coordinator of the organization;
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

25
ther e for e , the a utho r’ s da ta was excluded to reduce bias. Additionally, because the author of the
study collected the data in the environment where she is well known, it must be noted that the
participants could have been more self-conscious about their behaviors and the participants could
have been more candid during the observations and the interviews.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

26
Chapter 2

Review of the Literature

Process of Reviewing Literature

Google Scholar, USC Libraries, JStor, ERIC, Proquest, and Psycinfo were search
databases used to conduct advanced searches of successful student achievement data resulting
from high school restructure to academies. The review of the literature should present positive
achievement data from restructured schools that are similar in context to Health Sciences
Academy. Th e r e sult s fr om t he sea rc h e s usi ng k e y w o rds: “ succ e ss,” “ stud e nt ac hiev e ment,” “ incr e a se d st ude nt a c hiev e ment,” “ g ro wth in s c or e s,” “ re stru c ture , ” “ r e c onf ig ur a ti on,” “ a c a de m y ,” “ hig h s c hool,” “ a ssessment, ” “ e v a luat ion,” a nd, “ e ff e c ti ve ne ss, ” pre se nt e d limited
research, indicating a need for more studies quantifying student success using standardized
achievement test data.
No Child Left Behind Sanctions

Under NCLB schools that do not meet their adequate yearly progress (AYP) will be
identified for school improvement or program improvement (PI) status (Bathon & Spradlin,
2007). B a thon a nd S pr a dli n’ s (2007) research discusses the sanctions for schools identified as
needing improvement and provides data from 2005 about the percentages of schools facing
sanctions due to lack of student achievement. The sanctions for schools identified as needing
improvement:
 Level 1: The school did not meet AYP for a second consecutive year; the school must
provide public school choice – the district will make available and fund transportation for
students to attend a high performing school.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

27
 Level 2: The school did not meet AYP for the third consecutive year; the district must
provide school choice, expenses, and supplemental education services.
 Level 3: The school did not meet AYP for four consecutive years; the district may use an
outside expert, implement a new curriculum, modify the school schedule, replace staff
members, or decrease site decision-making power.
 Level 4: The school did not meet AYP for five consecutive years; the district will begin
planning for restructuring and continue applying Level 3 sanctions.
 Level 5: The school did not meet AYP for six consecutive years; the school can reopen as
a charter, be managed by an outside entity, or implement its restructuring plan.
The da ta pr e se nted in B ri nson a nd Mora ndo’s (2009) study indicate that, of the 2,330
schools identified for corrective action in 2006, approximately 42% of those schools had been
failing for over five years and approximately 53% of those schools were in their sixth year of PI
and implementing their restructuring plans. According to Brinson and Morando, many schools
select the option to restructure the school because it is the least restrictive. Their study shared
the percentage of schools in five states choosing to implement a restructure plan during their
sixth year of PI status:
 California - 90%.
 Georgia - 94%
 Maryland - 86%
 Michigan – 96%
 Ohio – 93%
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

28
As the goal to achieve 100% proficiency draws near, more schools have been identified
as needs improvement (Bathon & Spradlin, 2007) and identified for school restructure (Brinson
& Morando, 2009).
Research conducted in the states Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, California,
Florida, New York, and Texas to evaluate the effects of school restructuring have yielded
inconsistent results. Mintrop and Trujillo (2005) examined different models for school
reconstitution: educational management organizations (EMO), external partners, charters, district
takeovers, and intervention teams. Their study, comparing the results of the 2003 National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Assessment to state tests, revealed inconsistent
results. They calculated the difference between the percent of students who scored proficient on
the NAEP and the percent of students who scored proficient on the state assessments. Mintrop
and Trujillo found that among the school restructure models, scores from California schools
demonstrated less discrepancies in the percent of students scoring proficient on both exams than
schools in other states that demonstrated a wider discrepancy. From these results, Mintrop and
Trujillo identified the limitation of these data in measuring student achievement. Mintrop and
Trujillo also analyzed district and site assessments; some schools showed an unspecified increase
in test scores; Mintrop and Trujillo attributed those positive results to the quality and content of
interventions. The process of restructure looks vastly different among schools and districts,
making it difficult to make a conclusive statement about the effectiveness of school restructure
(Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005).
In their study of the achievement effects of restructuring disadvantaged schools, Shouse
and Mussoline (2000) asserted that there is no significant difference in academic achievement
between restructured and non-restructured schools. A study examining the effects of
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

29
reconstitution in Chicago High Schools after three years of implementation found that although
there were notable increases in student reading scores and passing rates, researcher Alfred Hess,
would not attribute them to reconstitution (Hess, 2003).
Fleischman and Heppen (2009) also studied different models of restructure to find
evidence of improvement. Fleischman and Heppen examined the instruction, structure, and
governance within the school and rated the school restructure model based on the restructured
sc hool’s a bil it y to m e e t five outcomes:
 Creating a personalized learning environment
 Capability to assist incoming high school students with poor academic skills
 Improved instructional content and practice
 Capability to prepare students for college or careers
 Positive change in high schools,
A restructure model that Fleischman and Heppen (2009) rated positively was the
specialty academies restructure model. They defined the specialty academy as having a
curricular focus committed to a theme. Career academies, which have been in existence since
1969 in over 2,500 schools in the United States, partner with local businesses to provide
internship opportunities (Fleischman & Heppen, 2009). Fleischman and Heppen share results
from studies conducted between 1985 and 2000. In those studies, students in academies
outperformed non-academy students, were more likely to enroll in post-secondary education, less
li ke l y to nee d c oll e g e r e media ti on, ha ve hi g he r ra tes of ba c h e lor’ s de gr e e c ompl e ti on, e a rn mor e credits, better grades, and better attendance rates. According to Fleischman and Heppen,
specialty academies have positive short-term and long-term effects on students. Fleischman and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

30
Heppen (2009) reported increased attendance rates and tardies, while referrals and discipline
rates decreased after the first year of career academy implementation.
C a nnon a nd Ree d’ s (199 9) r e se a rc h on foc used c a re e r a c a de mi e s shar e d pr og r a m
e va luation re sult s that ar e sim il a r to F leisch man a nd He ppe n’ s (2009) findings. In the program
evaluation, Cannon and Reed found that career focused academies increased attendance rates and
decreased tardy and discipline infractions.
B rinson a nd Mor a ndo’s ( 2009) r e se a rc h e x a mi ne d five successfully restructured schools.
Four out of the five schools from the study implemented restructure model Option 5 – to “e ngage
in ot he r ma jor r e stru c turi ng ” ( p. 5). One of the four schools was a K-7 restructured elementary
academy, one was a restructured high school, and two were restructured middle schools.
In their analysis, Brinson and Morando (2009) shared evidence of increased student
achievement after the schools restructured. Holabird Academy in Baltimore, Maryland
restructured from a traditional K-5 elementary school to a restructured K-7 academy school. The
restructure process included placing a restructuring officer at the site and replacing the principal.
The r e sult s fr om t he scho ol’s a ssessments found tha t b y 2008, 81.1 % of stu de nts s c or e d
pr of icie nt on t he state ’s math exam and 78.3% of students were proficient on the state reading
exam (Brinson & Morando, 2009). Hola bird’ s st ude nt ac hiev e ment sc or e s beg a n it s incli ne in
2003-2004. By 2008, the school exited restructuring status (Brinson & Morando, 2009).
Box Elder is a K-6, middle school, and high school in Montana. Box Elder selected the
academics as their restructure focus (Brinson & Morando, 2009). By focusing on providing
strong classroom instruction, targeted professional development, developing a strong leadership
team, and improving school culture, the transformed self-contained middle school classrooms
created a more orderly school climate. According to Brinson and Morando (2009), the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

31
standardized assessment scores for Montana began its steady incline in 2005-2006. By the 2007-
2008 school year, 87% of students were proficient or better in reading and 61% proficient or
better in math; with these results, Box Elder met their AYP goal and exited program
improvement (Brinson & Morando, 2009).
MacArthur Middle-School in Berkeley, Illinois implemented data-driven planning
focused on improving classroom using aligned curriculum and standards, targeted teacher
professional development, and changing the school climate (Brinson & Morando, 2009). The
school ’s test scores began growing in 2004-2005. The research presented by Brinson and
Morando (2009) showed that the most significant gains occurred in 2005-2006 when the math
proficiency percentages spiked from 36.6% to 75.8%. In 2007-2008, 81.7% of students scored
proficient or higher in reading and 85.5% scored proficient or better in math. These
improvements resulted in the school meeting their AYP goals and exiting restructuring status
(Brinson & Morando, 2009).
The fourth school in the study that selected the restructure option was Westwood High
School in Memphis, Tennessee which hired a new high school principal, focused on building
relationships, created a renewed focus on academics, identified talented leaders, and built a
strong te a m during th e ir sc hool’s r e struc tu ring p r oc e ss ( B rinson & Mo ra n do, 2009) . Like the
other schools from the study, Westwood High School began experiencing gains in student
achievement in 2003-2004; in 2007, the school met its AYP when 95% of students scored
proficient or higher in reading and 88% or higher in math (Brinson & Morando, 2009).
Research supporting the implementation of academies is inconclusive. The latter of the
research shared examples of restructured schools with promising data. Although four schools in
Brinson a nd Mor a ndo’s (2009) study selected the option to restructure, none of the examples
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

32
took an identical pathway. Many schools have taken similar paths and failed; it is important to
conduct an analysis in order to understand what is happening in restructuring schools.
The National Academy Foundation
Fincher et al. (2002) asserted that the purpose of a Health Science Academy is to increase
student achievement scores and to increase student enrollment in college and health professions
schools. Fincher et al., presented positive data in support of health sciences academies. Their
research shared high rates of students enrolling in four-year colleges and higher average SAT
scores for students who attended the health sciences academy.
Fleischman and Heppen (2009) described the purpose of specialty academies is to create
strong partnerships to provide internship and work experiences. According to Maxwell and
Rubin (2002), the purpose of school-work opportunities is to provide students with work-based
skills that will prepare students for post-secondary college or careers. This definition of the
a c a d e m y ’ s purpose re fle c ts t he mi ssi on of Health Sciences Academy and the path that led to
pursuing academy certification by the National Academy Foundation (NAF).
The National Academy Foundation (NAF) is an organization that provides guidelines and
support to schools when restructuring or building an academy that incorporates work-based
learning opportunities. NAF was established 30 years ago in 1982. Currently, NAF academies
support 60,000 students in 469 academies from 162 school districts in 39 states, the District of
Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (Naf.org, 2012). Copied directly from the website are
positive outcomes for NAF academy graduates (Kemple & Willner, C., 2008):
 “In 2011, 97% of NAF seniors graduated from high school – compared to 50%
g r a dua ti on ra t e in t he c it ies w he r e most NA F a c a d e mi e s ar e lo c a ted”
 “ 4 out of 5 N A F students g o on to colle ge or othe r post - se c onda r y e duc a ti on”
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

33
 “ 52% of NA F g r a dua tes e a rn ba c he lor ’s de g r e e s i n fou r years-compared with 32%
na ti ona ll y ”
 “ 85% of 5 a nd 10 y e a r a l umni a re wor kin g in a pr of e ssi ona l field”
 “ C a re e r-academy graduates sustained $16,704 more in total earnings over the 8 years
following high school than non-academy group members who were also studied – 11%
more pe r y e a r ”
 “ Youn g me n from career-academies experienced increased earnings over 8 years totaling
$30,000 – 17% more per year than non-academy group members studied – thanks to a
c ombi na ti on of incr e a se d wa g e s, hours wo rke d, a n d e mpl o y ment st a bil it y ”

The Academy of Health Sciences is the first of fifteen schools nationwide, to pilot the
health sciences academy for NAF. Currently, in the 2012-2013 academic school year it houses
7th-11th graders and will graduate its first senior class in 2014. Health Sciences Academy has
been awarded a three-year accreditation term after its initial WASC accreditation visit and it has
earned permanent status in the National Academy Foundation. Beyond these initial
certifications, Health Sciences Academy must build and maintain systems to support teachers in
providing 21st century and Project Based Learning (PBL) instruction to result in the ESLR/21st
Century Student Outcomes. Although the academy structure has allocated instructional time
(through Project Period) to support expected student outcomes for the academy, the reality at
Health Sciences Academy is that not all students are exposed to a rigorous 21st Century
curriculum and Project Based Learning (PBL). Rigor and innovative teaching is evident in some
classes, but not all classes. There are no measurements to assess whether or not students are
learning 21st century skills. This study will focus on the faculty at Health Sciences Academy
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

34
and analyze the motivation, knowledge, skills, values, and resource gaps that contribute to the
lack of rigorous instruction.
21st Century Skills, and Project Based Learning (PBL)

21st century skills and learning. Before examining the gap in knowledge, skills, and
motivation, a common working definition of 21st Century Skills and learning must be
established. According to the Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21, 2009), the 21st

Century framework for teaching 21st Century skills should engage students in the learning
process and result in graduates who are better prepared for the global economy. Twenty First
Century Learning is a result of teaching: (a) core subjects, (b) 21st Century content, (c) learning
and thinking skills, (d) information and communications technology literacy, (e) life skills, and
(f) 21st Century assessments (Partnership for 21st Century Learning Skills, P21 Framework,
2009).
P21 (2009) asserted that knowledge and learning must be rooted in core subjects to
provide students with a context; however, these core subjects must be taught in concert with 21st
Century interdisciplinary themes to foster deeper learning. These five interdisciplinary themes
are taken directly from the 21st Century Student Outcomes:
(a) Global awareness – understanding and addressing global issues, working with and
learning from people of diverse backgrounds, understanding other nations and
cultures
(b) Financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial literacy – making sound personal
economic choices, understanding the role of economy in society, increasing
productivity and improving career options by applying entrepreneurial skills,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

35
(c) Civic literacy – staying informed and participating in local, national, and global civic
life, understanding the local and global implications of civic decisions
(d) Health literacy – obtaining, interpreting and understanding basic health information
and services, preventive physical and mental health measures, making informed and
appropriate health decisions, establishing and monitoring health goals , and
understanding national and international public health and safety issues
(e) Environmental literacy – knowledge and understanding the issues, circumstances, and
conditions that affect the environment, understanding the impact of society on the
natural world, investigate and formulate effective solutions, take individual and
collective action towards addressing environmental problems. (P21, 2009).
In addition to interdisciplinary themes, research compiled by the P21 support the
initiative to increase instruction of learning and innovation skills, critical thinking and problem
solving, and communication and collaboration with others (P21, 2009). P21 shared the report
conducted by the National Commission on the NAEP 12th Grade Assessment and Reporting that
up to 55 percent of college freshmen must enroll in remedial reading, writing, and mathematics
courses (as cited in Jennings & Rentner, 2006). P21 also shared the survey conducted by the
National Association of Manufacturers. In this survey,
84 percent of employers say K-12 schools are not doing a good job of preparing students
for the workplace; 55 percent say schools are deficient in preparing students with basic
employability skills (such as attendance, timeliness and work ethic); 51 percent cite math
and science deficiencies; and 38 percent cite reading and comprehension deficiencies (as
cited in Jennings & Rentner, 2006).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

36
These percentages are significant because they evidence the qualities that employers seek
in hiring candidates. In addition to core subject knowledge, employers are looking for critical
thinkers, problem solvers, and effective communicators (Silva, 2009).
A 21st century learner must master learning and innovation skills and promote creative
and collaborative thinking (P21 Framework, 2009). Critical thinking and problem solving
promote effective reasoning, decision-making, problem solving and a broad perspective to
analyze parts of a complex system. Communication and collaboration skills are the ability to
communicate ideas clearly using a variety of media and collaborate effectively and respectfully
in diverse contexts.
Communication and information are integral pieces to meet the responsibilities of the
employment market. Information, media, and technology skills, (P21 Framework, 2009) include
information and media literacy. Information literacy is the ability to access and evaluate
information and then to use the information to address an issue at hand (P21 Framework, 2009).
People today have access to research, but they are less prepared to find pertinent information
(Breivik, 2005). Students rely on search engines of which only six percent are educational or
scientific content and 83% contain commercial content (Breivik, 2005). Students must know
where to find information and be able to evaluate its relevance. Media literacy is the ability to
understand and use media messages to communicate effectively using the appropriate media
tools (P21 Framework, 2009). The use of technology to communicate through media extends to
mastery of Information, Communications, and Technology (ICT), (P21 Framework, 2009). ICT
is the use of technology to research, organize, and communicate information. This area
encompasses different technological tools, e.g., computers, PDAs, media players, GPS, etc.,
(P21, 2009).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

37
Beyond the use of technology and media to acquire and communicate information,
employers look for candidates who have life and career skills, (P21 Framework, 2009). Life and
career skills are discreet interpersonal and intrapersonal skills that deal with self-management,
flexibility, goal setting, productivity, accountability (the ability to work collaboratively with
others), and maintain a sense of responsibility to others/considering how actions will affect the
larger community.
Twenty First Century Skills are important, and have in many articles been described as
something that is not new, but rather newly important (Larson & Miller, 2011). All of the 21st
Century Skills described above are crucial to attaining success in the workforce; however, many
companies believe that the K-12 education system in the United States is doing a poor job of
preparing college- and career-ready graduates (P21, 2006). According to Breivik (2005), the
effort to teach information literacy should begin at the K-12 level. P21 recommends that in
addition to emphasizing 21st century skills in education, a system of assessments must be
established to monitor student progress towards achieving 21st Century learning goals, (P21
Framework, 2009). Thus far at Health Sciences Academy, a systematized curriculum to teach
21st century skills and assessment system are not in place.
Project based learning. The framework for 21st C e ntur y S kil ls m e nti ons t he students’
need for authentic opportunities to apply learning and make deeper connections. Health Sciences
Academy, using the designated Project Period, uses an applied problem/project based learning
approach thus creating opportunities for students to apply content knowledge to a relevant
problem. Before examining the challenges in knowledge, skills, and motivation of Health
Sciences Academy faculty in teaching applied project/problem-based learning, a common
working definition of project/problem-based learning must be established.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

38
Project based learning (PBL) is an inquiry based, teacher facilitated teaching and learning
model (Bell, 2010). It was originally designed for the medical field in order for students to apply
and integrate content knowledge to complex patient cases (Allen, Donham, Bernhardt, 2011). In
PBL, students develop a question about the curriculum content. This question guides the
student’s research, information, and solutions proposal. The teacher shifts roles from presenter
of information to discussion facilitator (Allen et al., 2011). The teacher oversees each step of the
process and encourages making mistakes, planning next steps, and reflection to deepen the
student’s le a rnin g ( B e ll , 2010) .
The positive impact of 21st century skills and PBL on standardized testing.
According to Geier et al. (2008) there has been an increase in positive results in standardized
testing among students engaged in PBL exceeding the scores of non-PBL/traditional course
students. According to Allen et al. (2011 ), the re is evidenc e of P B L ’s e ff e c ti ve ne ss i n medic a l
school settings. PBL supports 21st century skills because it develops research skills, negotiation
and teamwork, and communication (Allen et al., 2011).
Project Based Learning and 21st Century Skills were introduced as part of Project Period
in 2009; however, implementation has looked different in every class, every year. Factors that
could affect the implementation of 21st Century Skills and PBL in Project Period a re te a c h e rs’ self-efficacy and motivation. Self- e ff ic a c y c onsi de rs the tea c he r ’s know led g e a nd ski ll s of a subject and their perceived capability (Bandura, 2007). Motivation considers the tea c he r ’s
competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Lam, Cheng & Choy, 2010). This literature review will
synthesize current research and discuss how existing research informs this case study about
faculty knowledge, skills, motivation, and organizational culture, which may affect the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

39
successful achievement of the organizational goal for Health Sciences Academy students to
achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st Century Student Outcomes.
Teacher Knowledge and Skills

Teachers must have a sense of their pedagogical stance so that they can transition from
traditional classroom teaching to problem-based learning (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000). PBL
is i nquir y ba se d in which the te a c h e r is not t he “ g i ve r” of inf o rma ti on, ra th e r the tea c he r is the
facilitator of questions that lead to the learning (Wells, Warelow, & Jackson, 2009). Pedagogical
stance is defined in Murray and Savin- B a de n ’s (2000) article as cognition of the teaching
a pproa c h, ho w te a c he rs ’ pr ior e x pe rie nc e a nd tea c hing phil osoph y influ e nc e th eir classroom
practices. The pedagogical stance has four domains:
 Reproductive pedagogy, a top-down, teacher-centered approach, traditional
 Strategic pedagogy, questioning, some flexibility, mostly traditional
 Pedagogical autonomy, students have choice, staff create learning opportunities
 Reflective pedagogy, student-centered, flexible, students construct their learning

These domains are not mutually exclusive and operate like a continuum. Once a teacher
is aware of his/her pedagogical stance, a goal and benchmarks towards teaching PBL can be
created because a clear starting point will have been established.
Murray and Savin-Baden (2000) asserted that in addition to knowing his/her pedagogical
stance, teachers should also engage in conversations about assessment methods and how to
transition PBL lessons into practice. These conversations and follow-up conversations are
crucial to support program implementation. After professional development sessions, teachers
sometimes fail to implement strategies and initiatives introduced or reviewed during the training.
Fallik, Eylon, Rosenfeld (2008) suggested that part of the lack of curriculum integration could be
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

40
because of a lack of knowledge and skills. Fallik et al.’s stud y on mot ivati ng te a c he rs to
implement PBL began by providing teacher professional development on PBL. It was not
enough to tell teachers about PBL, the teachers were engaged in activities that practiced asking
guiding questions (Fallik et al., 2008). The teachers practiced asking driving questions at their
proficiency level and then they were guided through the process of planning, organizing, and
enacting PBL in their classrooms. Teachers practiced creating lessons and were encouraged to
engage in dialogue to troubleshoot problems they encountered (Fallik et al., 2008). The
oppor tuni t y f or te a c h e rs t o e nga g e in di a lo g ue p ro vides a n oppor tuni t y to i nc re a s e the te a c he r’ s
understanding of an initiative that could be brand new to them.
Rogers, Cross, Gresalfi, Trauth-Nare, B uc k ’s (2011) study on teacher implementation of
the PBL approach highlights specific knowledge and skills that teachers need in order to engage
students in PBL. According to Rogers et al., teachers must be able to collect appropriate data to
measure student learning (not limited to standardized assessments), teachers must know how to
analyze data, teachers must know how to adjust their classroom management to support
collaborative groups and independent learning, teachers must develop inquiry questions that lead
to appropriate and authentic projects, and teachers must facilitate the use of technology to
support student learning needs. These specific skills are not ubiquitous in traditional classrooms.
Teachers learning to teach PBL must consistently try to embed these into their classroom
practices. In order to teach PBL, teachers must switch roles from lecturer to facilitator.
Teachers must help students adjust to a new, more accountable way of learning and be proficient
enough in technology to support the student and class needs for technology integration (Rogers
et al., 2011). A ba rr ier th a t i mpede s im pleme ntation of ini ti a ti ve s is a tea c he r’ s lac k o f
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

41
knowledge in a target area e.g., technology implementation; therefore, it is important to identify
the areas which teachers need more training and support (Hew & Brush, 2007).
Teacher Efficacy & Motivation

Teacher efficacy. The extents to which teachers will implement innovations are
de pe nde nt upon t he te a c h e r’ s pe rc e pti on of the inn ova ti on’s importa nc e a nd difficulty of
implementation (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997). According to Ghaith and Yaghi (1997), teacher
efficacy is a strong predictor for persistent implementation of innovation. Teacher efficacy is the
tea c he r’ s belie f in the ir a bil it y to su c c e ssfull y incr ease student learning (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997).
If teachers believe that the innovation is similar to their own teaching practices and does not
require additional work, teachers are more likely to implement the innovation (Ghaith & Yaghi,
1997). Conversely, if teachers do not find that the innovation is congruent with their teaching
practices and perceives that it requires additional time and effort to implement, teachers are less
likely to implement the innovation (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997). This is consistent with Tshcannen-
Mora n a nd Ho y ’s (2000) assertion that teacher efficacy influences teacher resilience when faced
with obstacles. Tschannen-Moran and Hoy also assert that teacher efficacy affects student
achievement because it determines the effort teachers make in teaching, their beliefs in what is
achievable, and the goals that they set for students and for themselves. Neves de Jesus and Lens
(2005) presented interesting research that teachers learn helplessness over time. The teaching
profession demonstrates higher levels of stress than other professions (Neves de Jesus & Lens,
2005). When teachers experience failure to teach and motivate students, the locus of control, or
sense of control decreases; teachers begin believing that they are ineffective and the cycle of
setting low expectations for themselves and their students begins (Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005).
The degrees to which someone will attempt and persist innovations depends on the te a c he r’ s
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

42
belief in his/her capability (Bandura, 2007). These articles present a cohesive argument that
im pleme ntation of innova ti ons de pe nd on the te a c he r’ s pe rc e iv e d c a p a bil it y a nd p e rc e pti on of the innovation and are important to understanding how teacher efficacy, values, and beliefs can
support or negate efforts towards innovation.
Mumtaz (2006) discussed causes and effects of the organizational and personal factors
that influence teacher use of information and communications technology (ICT). ICT is a 21st
Century skill and for the purpose of this study, is considered an innovation. According to
Mumtaz (2006), the list of causes for poor implementation of ICT/innovations is:
 Lack of experience teaching ICT
 Lack of technology support at the school site
 Lack of help with student supervision
 Lack of ICT specialists to teach desired ICT skills
 Lack of time to integrate ICT into the curriculum
 Lack of resources
As a result of the factors influencing ICT innovation implementation, teachers can
respond through avoidance, integration, or technical specialization (Mumtaz, 2006). Avoidance
is when teachers make little or no attempts to implement the innovation; integration is the
a ppli c a ti on of the innova ti on;; t e c hnica l spec ializ a ti on is whe n the te a c h e r’ s int e re st deve lops
beyond application and continues with self-directed learning (Mumtaz, 2006).
Mumtaz (2006) attributed a voidanc e b e ha vior to t he or g a niz a ti on’s ina bil it y to cle a rl y communicate implementation expectations of innovations and how they relate to the vision for
educational change. These result in resistance to change and teachers question the rationale that
se lec ted the innovation a s “suitable c ha n ge ” ( Mumtaz, 2006). Mumtaz also attributed
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

43
avoidance behavior to the lack of teacher efficacy. Teachers are afraid of being incapable of the
skill or being less capable in comparison to their technology proficient students and therefore
avoid implementing innovations (Mumtaz, 2006).
Teacher motivation. Factors that result in innovation integration and technical
specialization are related to t he tea c he r’ s ex posure , use, a nd a tt it ude towa rds tec hnolog y (Mumtaz, 2006). Mum taz ’s (2006) research showed that teachers who used technology on a
regular basis before the ICT innovation were more likely to integrate ICT into their lessons.
Mumtaz further asserted that personal factors outweighed the organizational factors that
influence innovation implementation. P e rsona l fa c tors include ( a ) the te a c he r’ s mot ivation and
commitment to student learning and professional growth/development; (b) collegial support;
and (c) access to support/resources. Mum taz ’s r e s e a rc h was congruent with motivation research
conducted by Abrami, Poulsen, and Chambers (2010).
Abrami et al.’s study (2010) on teacher motivation to implement education identified four
factors that affect implementation of another type of innovation: cooperative learning. Abrami
et al. examined teacher motivation that affects implementation of innovation. Their findings
li ke Mum taz ’s (2006) research, identified factors that affect the innova ti on’ s im pleme ntation: (a) quality of training, (b) encouragement, (c) commitment, and (d) support (Abrami et al.,
2010). The tea c he r ’s qua li t y o f tr a ini n g in an inno va ti on include s the sc a f f oldi ng a nd
instruction that would leave the teacher feeling capable of teaching the innovation.
Enc oura ge ment, li ke Mum taz ’s f indi ng s, enc omp a sses c oll e g ial support . Teacher commitment
is the extent to which the teacher recognizes and accepts the change/innovation as worthy and
useful. Support encompasses the administration and organizational systems that provide other
personal factors that are discussed in Abrami et al. ’s research as personal factors that limit
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

44
innovation implementation: (a) the perceived value of the innovation, (b) expectancy –expected
level of success and (c) access to resources and support services. These themes are connected to
self-efficacy and the organizational and personal factors that influence motivation.
Lam, Cheng, and Choy (2010) asserted that competence, autonomy, and relatedness are
key factors that influence teacher motivation. Competence, autonomy, relatedness are personal
fa c tors that c a n a ff e c t a t e a c h e r’ s lev e l of de te rmina ti on whe n im pleme nti ng a n innov a ti on .
Lam, Cheng, and Choy discussed the importance of feeling competent and efficacious with new
initiatives. Self-efficacy will promote intrinsic motivation, a pursuit of personal excellence
rather than an external inducement, the effects of which might not last long-term (Lam et al.,
2010). Autonomy is important for teacher motivation because excessive pressure can result in
compliance-based implementation, a means of meeting minimal requirements to implement
rather than building teacher commitment and intrinsic motivation (Lam et al., 2010). The
pressure to implement innovations from the administrators or the organization not only
influences a t e a c h e r’ s s e nse o f e f fic a c y , it a lso af f e c ts t he f e e li ng o f r e lat e d ne ss . Relatedness is
the collegial support that creates a feeling of belonging, connection, and team unity (Lam et al.,
2010). Like Mumtaz (2006), Abrami, et al. (2010), Lam et al. (2010), acknowledged the
importance of providing support and access to resources. Support systems facilitate
int e rna li z a ti on of a n innovation’s im porta nc e . All of these factors contribute to t he innovation’s
perceived utility.
Teacher Values and Beliefs

Teacher values and beliefs play an integral role in program implementation. According
to Smith (1994), institutional change is unlikely unless teachers believe in their ability to support
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

45
student a c hieve ment re g a rdle ss of the stude nt’s ba c kgrou nd . S mi th’s st ud y on pr e pa rin g teachers to restructure schools identified five key characteristics of successful programs:
 Teacher commitment and sense of responsibility towards student success
 Teacher personalization of program based on student needs
 Teacher openness to observations, experimenting with new concepts, reflection about
practices
 Teacher ownership for seeking out personal and financial support
 Teachers evaluate student performance

These key characteristics cannot be acquired by applying external pressure on teachers;
these a r e int e rna ll y mot ivate d a c ti ons ba s e d on the tea c he r’ s value o f a nd b e li e f in a phil osoph y or program. The level of program implementation depends upon the te a c he r’ s atti tude towa rds
the program. In their study about technology integration, Hew and Brush (2007) asserted that
teacher attitudes, or their likes and dislikes, affect the integration of technology. Teachers who
viewed technology as useful were more likely to use it in their lessons, whereas teachers who
pe rc e iv e d it a s a “ wa y to ke e p kids bus y ” did not . A teacher who does not value a particular
program would not go to the extent of the five characteristics listed above. A teacher who does
not value a program might attempt some aspects of a program out of compliance; however, a
teacher who believes in a program would implement it and demonstrate characteristics from the
list above out of commitment.
Organizational Culture and Resources/Policies

Career academy restructure is a systemic process that includes several layers of change.
Among the changes are considerations for facilities allocation, staff development, curriculum
development, and program evaluation (Cannon & Reed, 1999). The purpose of career academies
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

46
is to increase student achievement and to develop career ready students. S c he in’s ( 1990) a rticle about organizational culture discussed the p re mi se that dis e quil ibrium to an or ga niz a ti on’s
construct will affect its organizational culture. The orga niz a ti on’s me mber s will lea rn to c ope with change that its members consider valid (Schein, 1999), or reject what is not perceived to be
of importance (Hew & Brush, 2007). The way in which the staff will react to organizational
change will dep e nd upon “ th e anxiety that results from the inability to understand or predict
e ve nts happe nin g a round the g rou p,” ( S c h e in, 1990 , p. 111); therefore it is important to support
and monitor the implementation of programs and innovations.
Organizational culture. Kaplan and Evans (1997) described school restructuring as
school-wide change that increases student learning. As we explore organizational culture, we
find that there are varied levels of transformation within a school site. According to Schein
(1990), culture is a common pattern of assumptions, feelings, values, and behaviors that are
shared and accepted by the organization as a whole. W he n e x a mi ning the de pth of a scho ol’s
transformation, Schein asserted that there are three fundamental levels of culture: (a) observable
artifacts, (b) values, and (c) basic underlying assumptions. Observable artifacts are physical
evidence of organizational change, e.g., dress code, bell schedule, and statements of philosophy
(Schein, 1990). Values are attitudes and feelings toward the change and assumptions are
unconscious feelings and perceptions that inform behavior (Schein, 1990). School restructure is
a systemic change (Cannon & Reed, 1999). Since He a lt h S c ienc e Ac a de m y ’ s reconstitution in
2009, observable artifacts at Health Science Academy include an additional class called Project
Period to teach 21st century and PBL, additional instructional minutes to the school day, and the
addition of staff members to teach high school courses.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

47
The addition of instructional minutes to the bell schedule supported the addition of the
Project Period. Project Period is a class that supports the health sciences academy focus. All
high school teachers who have a first period/advisory class teach the 75-minute Project Period
class on Fridays. The purpose of Project Period is to build 21st Century skills by implementing
PBL. At the end of each year, small groups of students create and present capstone projects that
demonstrate the inquiry-based research, concept application, and community outreach they
conducted. Each year, although the course objective remains the same, the instructional delivery
is modified and instruction varies from classroom to classroom. Artifacts are easily observable,
but can sometimes be superficial. Studying patterns of behavior is equally important because
they are manifestations of values and assumptions held by members of the group.
School restructure requires systemic change. The army nurse, leader-academy restructure
discussed by Dunemn, Hopkins-Chadwick, Connally, and Bramley (2011) identified components
that are important to the process. In the army nurse, leader-academy restructure, staff members
reviewed the curriculum to align them to their expected outcomes or desired competencies
(Dunemn et al., 2011). The curriculum mapping steps used to create the academy courses were:
 Determine expected student outcomes
 Identify the skills and capabilities
 Develop and align performance objectives
 Select and align course content
 Select teaching/learning strategies, assessment methods, and course outcomes.
The process above contrasts the process at Health Science Academy as all army nursing
academy staff members were involved in determining student outcomes, identifying
corresponding skills and performance objectives, selecting course content and teaching
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

48
strategies, and creating assessments to evaluate student achievement and monitor the restructure
process. At Health Sciences Academy, not all the work has been collaborative, student outcomes
are not yet completely defined, and there are no assessment methods to measure student
progress, and monitor/evaluate the a c a de m y ’s r estructure progress.
Resources/Policies. According to Murray and Savin-Baden (2000), the curricular
transition to PBL needs to involve all staff members. Staff members must take an active role in
exploring their pedagogical stance before implementing PBL (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000).
Murray and Savin-Baden recommended one year of preparation before beginning a PBL
program; new teachers must also be given time to become familiar with the principles of PBL
and time to develop lessons. Both Rogers, Cross, Gresalfi, Trauth-Nare, and Buck (2011) and
Fallik et al. (2008) agreed that teachers must be provided with extended professional
development in PBL to develop a rich understanding of the program, on-going support with
technology and classroom management to support the collaborative environment, and
opportunities to collaborate with colleagues in order to discuss and troubleshoot implementation
challenges. Additionally, Hew and Brush (2007) recommended that schools ensure teachers
access to technology and other resources as that can become a barrier to program
implementation.
As the teaching staff at Health Sciences Academy grows, incoming staff members must
be introduced to and trained in teaching 21st Century skills and PBL. Cannon and Reed (1999)
supported the need to provide ongoing staff training to help affirm the commitment of the
school community and engage in dialogue about opportunities for improvement. As the
academy develops, veteran staff members must also continue calibrating to adjust to the
changes in the culture (Schein, 1990).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

49
Classroom teachers most directly impact student learning (Darling-Hammond, 2000) and
because they are responsible for creating higher learning for our students, teacher learning must
be a central focus for school improvement (Sykes, 1996). According to Sykes (1996), apart
from attending professional development training, teachers should have input about the areas
they would like to receive professional development. Teacher input on the selection of
professional development topics require an awareness of pedagogical needs. This awareness
results from teacher participation in classroom walkthroughs and peer feedback (Kaplan &
Evans, 1997). This practice leads to open dialogue that supports a collaborative culture (Fallik
et al., 2008).
Kaplan and Evans (1997) asserted that, “ e ff e c ti ve re struc turin g must ha ve a posi ti ve im pa c t on cla ssroom i nstruc ti on a nd lea rning” (p. 8). The concept of effectiveness requires a
process for evaluation. Program evaluation as se ss e s the pr o g ra m ’s e f fe c ti v e ne ss at ke y sta ge s
of implementation (Cannon & Reed, 1999). A system of measurement to assess the positive
impact of restructuring must be established at Health Sciences Academy. The metrics of
measurement must match the program objectives. Data collection and analysis should also be
included in teacher collaboration (Rogers et al., 2011), thus contributing to the discussion about
site and instructional needs.
Conclusion

Career focused academies have positive short- and long-term effects on student
achievement (Fleischman & Heppen, 2009). They have increased student achievement in
secondary schools and increased post-secondary enrollment (Fincher et al., 2002) when proper
systems and policies are in place (Cannon & Reed, 1999).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

50
Health Sciences Academy is a health sciences academy in its fourth year implementing
its restructure plan. The academy will increase student achievement through successful
implementation of the academy program. The goal of the academy is for 100% of all high
school Project Period teachers to teach 100% of the methods that will result in the aggregate
21st Century and PBL student outcomes.
Using the gap analysis model (Clark & Estes, 2008), data will be collected and analyzed
to determine the faculty challenges in knowledge and skill, efficacy and motivation, values and
beliefs, and organization and resources that affect the Project Period process at Health Sciences
Academy.
The guiding questions for the project are:

 What are the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational culture,
which may affect the successful achievement of the organizational goal for Health
Sciences Academy students to achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st
Century skills as represented by combined/aggregate 21st Century skills document?
 What are potential solutions to address the gaps in faculty knowledge, skills, motivation,
a nd or g a niz a ti ona l cultur e to ac hiev e the or g a niz a t ion’s g oa l o f suc c e ssful achievement
of combined aggregate 21st Century skills and ESLRs by Health Sciences Academy
students?
This literature review identified organizational and personal factors that impede
successful program implementation:
 Te a c h e r’ s la c k of k nowle dg e a nd ski l ls
 Te a c h e r’ s mot ivation and e ff ic a c y
 Te a c h e r’ s v a lues a nd be li e fs
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

51
 Organizational and resource factors
The commitment and effort exerted when implementing a program affect expected
student learning outcomes. Health Sciences Academy has demonstrated observable artifacts of
restructure; however, the academy has not shown significant change in student achievement.
The analysis of school data will illuminate systemic gaps in program implementation.
Kirkp a trick’ s four levels of evaluation will be used to measure the effectiveness of the program
implementation at Health Sciences Academy (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Chapter 3 describes the methodology that will be used for this inquiry.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

52
Chapter 3

Methodology

The restructured Academy of Health Sciences is a public high school entering its fourth
year of academy implementation. Formerly a middle school, Health Sciences Academy was
restructured after reaching PI status year five. Th e scho ol’s r e stru c ture wa s a po li c y a dopt ed by
the school district in order to comply with NCLB (as cited in Jennings & Rentner, 2006)
requirements. Th e a c a de m y ’s g oa l i s to i nc r e a se s tudent a c hieve me nt i n ord e r to e x it P I status;; however, since its transformation, the school has not experienced significant gains in student
achievement scores.
During the restructure process, Health Sciences Academy added instructional minutes to
the bell schedule. Health Sciences Academy expanded its course offerings to meet high school
graduation and A-G requirements. The academy also allocated 75 instructional minutes on
Fridays to Project Period, a course dedicated to teaching 21st Century skills using applied
project/problem based learning. Each year since its restructure, Health Sciences Academy has
hired faculty members with secondary credentials to fulfill requirements for a highly qualified
teaching staff. Most of the Health Sciences Academy teaching staff has not received formalized
training in teaching 21st Century skills or PBL. There has been little training to review and
discuss 21st Century skills, PBL, or Project Period curriculum. A small group co-constructed the
aggregate list of expected 21st century/PBL learning outcomes during the summer of 2012. The
list has not been tiered to specify outcomes by high school grade level, and it has not yet been
shared with the entire staff.
The purpose of this study was to (a) identify the underlying skills required in order for
students to achieve Health Science A c a de m y ’s ES L R /21st C e ntur y out c omes, (b) determine the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

53
degree to which these skills are being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identify appropriate
assessments to measure student achievement of these skills, and (d) determine the degree to
which students are achieving these skills.
Further, this study examined the challenges in knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization teachers may encounter to provide Health Sciences Academy ’s students with the
instruction in the ESLR/21st Century skills outcomes.
The questions that guided this study are:

 What are the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational culture,
which may affect the successful achievement of the organizational goal for Health
Sciences Academy students to achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st
Century skills as represented by combined/aggregate 21st Century skills document?
 What are potential solutions to address the gaps in faculty knowledge, skills, motivation,
a nd or g a niz a ti ona l cultur e to ac hiev e the or g a niz a t ion’s g oa l o f s uccessful achievement
of combined aggregate 21st Century skills and ESLRs by Health Sciences Academy
students?
Methodology Framework

The Gap Analysis Model provides research-based guidelines to identify causes of
performance gaps and select the appropriate solutions (Clark & Estes, 2008). The gap analysis
identifie s orga niz a ti ona l g oa ls, an a l y z e s th e or g a n iz a ti on’s pe rf or manc e , a n d identifie s and validates the causes of performance gaps, not relying solely on assumed causes of gaps, in order
to formulate recommendations and solutions that will result in performance improvement and
goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). The gap analysis uses a systematic
process to examine knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational factors that contribute to
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

54
the or ga niz a ti on’s pe rf o r manc e g a p a nd c r e a te m e a sure s b y whic h to m onit or the e ff e c ti ve n e ss of
the recommended solutions (Rueda, 2011).
Researchers have found that school restructure does not consistently increase student
achievement (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005; Hess, 2003). School reform results have varied in
success because recommended solutions were based on assumed causes rather than validated
causes derived through a systematic analysis of the organization (Rueda, 2011). This study used
systematic problem- solvi ng a pp roa c h to i de nti f y o rga niz a ti ona l g oa ls, a na l y z e the or ga niz a ti on’s
performance, identify the gap in knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational factors at
Health Sciences Academy, and formulated solutions that focus on Health Sciences Academy ’s
organizational needs.
To increase student achievement and move Health Sciences Academy out of Program
Improvement, the district has restructured the school as a Health Sciences Academy. Although,
as noted previously, studies have shown mixed results for school restructuring, Health Sciences
Academy must first demonstrate that the curriculum has been implemented correctly and
completely to eliminate this type of restructuring as an assumed cause of the lack of progress
toward student achievement. The Academy has not yet completed its restructure process; the
100% gap qualifies this study as an innovative gap analysis. This qualitative study was a
formative evaluation, the purpose of which was to improve a program (Patton, 2002). The unit
of analysis for this study on which the data focused was high school faculty members who teach
Project Period. The evaluation fieldwork gathered were different types of data: documents,
int e rvie ws, a nd obse rva ti ons t o de sc ribe in deta il , “ What happened, when, to whom, and with
wha t conse qu e nc e s, ” ( P a tt on, 2002) in orde r to pr opose tar g e ted solut ions, a nd c re a te a s y stem o f
evaluation (Clark & Estes, 2008).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

55

Figure 1: The Gap Analysis Model (Clark & Estes, 2008)

The six stages of the gap analysis are (Clark & Estes, 2008):

Stage 1: Identify the cascading goals for the organization and the stakeholders

S tag e 2: Qu a nti f y th e c ur re nt ac hiev e ment;; def ine the or ga niz a ti on’s pe rf o r manc e

Stage 3: Determine the performance gap by analyzing the difference between the
organizational goal and the current achievement.

Stage 4: Identify assumed causes in order to identify perceptions and conditions within
the organization.

Stage 5: Validate causes; use research to prove the cause of the performance gap in
order to make informed recommendations.

Stage 6: In the gap analysis, stage 6 recommends an evaluation system.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

56
For this study, the evaluation system will be addressed in the results section. This study
addressed the first five stages of the gap analysis and addressed stage 6 in the results section
where there is a recommendation for an evaluation to measure the results of implementing
proposed solutions.
Stage 1: Identify Multilevel Goals

The organizational goal for Health Sciences Academy is to increase student achievement
and transition out of PI status. The District has restructured the School as an Academy as a
means to increase student achievement. In a full gap analysis, stakeholders would be assigned a
clear and specific description of their performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). For this study,
because the classroom instruction delivered by the faculty most directly impacts students
(Darling-Hammond, 2000), the unit of study and focus was on high school teachers that teach
Project Period at Health Sciences Academy.
The review of the literature indicated characteristics of successful career academies.
These characteristics include: (a) a formalized system for teacher professional development on
instructional implementation of 21st Century skills/PBL (Cannon & Reed, 1999); (b) teacher
collaboration (Fallik et al., 2008); (c) teacher feedback (Kaplan & Evans, 1997); and
(d) program evaluation (Cannon & Reed, 1999).
Based on the premise that 21st Century skills, PBL, and career-focused academies can
increase student achievement (Kemple & Willner, 2008), the stakeholder goal was for 100% of
9th, 10th, 11th grade Project Period faculty to teach 100% of the skills and concepts designated
for PBL/21st Century outcomes (see Appendix C) using 100% of the appropriate methods.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

57
Stage 2: Quantify the Current Performance

Health Sciences Academy has been in program improvement every year since 2004.
Student achievement has not been consistent or significant enough for the school to be
transitioned out of PI status. At Health Sciences Academy, all high school teachers who taught
Project Period engaged students in inquiry-based projects that require research, concept synthesis
and analysis, application, and presentation. Project period, student created websites, projects,
and PowerPoint presentations were some observable artifacts of program implementation;
however, the curriculum implementation and quality of student work varied among classrooms.
After three years of teaching 21st Century skills and applied project/problem based learning,
student achievement scores have not increased significantly and no other metrics have been
e stabli shed to m e a sure th e pro g ra m’s e ff e c ti ve n e ss on s tudent lea rning .
Stage 3: Determine the Gap in the Current Performance
Health Sciences Academy sought to have 100% of high school Project Period teachers
teach 100% of the 21st Century/PBL curriculum in order to achieve 21st Century/PBL outcomes
that will result in increased student achievement. The school has not experienced consistent nor
significant gains in student achievement. Th e sch ool’s mos t re c e nt AYP a nd AP I f rom the 2011-
2012 school year qualified the school as needs improvement. The lack of student achievement
on the California Standards Test (CSTs) and 21st Century/PBL skills attainment and skills
measurement demonstrated a 100% gap.
Stage 4: Hypothesize and Empirically Validate Causes

Ac c or din g to C lar k a nd Estes, ( 2008) “ the B i g T hr e e c a uses of p e rf o rma n c e g a ps a re :
pe ople’ s knowle d ge a nd skil ls;; their mot ivation to a c hieve th e g oa l;; a nd a l a c k of n e c e ssa r y equipment and missing or inadequate work process e s.” Efforts to improve organizational
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

58
performance sometimes yield ineffective results because interventions are implemented based on
assumed causes of the performance gap rather than validated causes (Rueda, 2011). Rueda
(2011) warned against the dangers and consequences of acting upon assumed causes without
analysis and validation. The implementation of intervention without validating causes for the
performance gaps often produce futile results; however, Rueda does not discount the value of
identifying assumed causes in order to understand the perceptions of the organizational staff.
The assumed causes of the performance gap at Health Sciences Academy were
established based on informal conversations, learning, motivation, and organization/culture
theory, and a review of the literature based on the specific topic.
Scanning interviews. The sources for the interviews were the site principal and faculty
at Health Sciences Academy.
Informal conversations with the site principal. Over the course of th e a c a de m y ’s
development, informal conversations with the site principal have revealed concerns she had
developed based on her observations during Project Period walk-throughs, project showcases,
and professional development. The first major concern was that when visiting classrooms during
Project Period, the instruction and Project Period implementation quality varied among teachers.
She described three scenarios:
1. The teacher engaged students in inquiry-based research, group activities, and
collaborative work that resembled the framework for 21st Century skills and PBL.
2. The teacher attempted to engage students in inquiry-based research, group activities, and
collaborative work. There were materials and resources in the classroom that evidenced
preparation for Project Period, but the delivery of lessons needed refinement.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

59
3. The teacher was using Project Period as an extension of his or her instruction in
subject/content matter, i.e., the teacher was c onti n uing his/ he r le sson f rom y e ste rda y ’s
English class.
The sit e princ ipal’s se c o nd c onc e rn is that the qu a li t y a nd ri g o r of som e of the studen t
projects did not meet program expectations. In comparison to projects she has seen on visits to
other PBL schools, the level of quality and rigor of some of the student projects could be
improved.
A third concern is that members of the teaching staff had varied skills and proficiencies
in 21st Century skills and varied levels of willingness to try to learn and implement strategies.
For example, whereas some teachers with low technology proficiency would attend professional
development to improve, others would not.
Informal conversations with staff members who teach Project Period. Informal
conversations with veteran, first-year veteran, and newly hired teachers provided insight on
challenges and reservations teachers experienced when preparing for and implementing Project
Period.
Veteran and first-year veteran teachers did not feel that their initial training was sufficient
in providing information about PBL and the Project Period overall. They also felt that although
there had been some follow-up professional development trainings since the initial training, the
training was brief, the pacing quick, and the timeline for implementation gave little time to
prepare for Project Period. Veteran teachers also expressed strong concerns about the limited
access to resources and technology required to teach their Project Period classes; for example,
there were two computer labs available for 14 Project Period classes during first semester in
2011-2012. Lastly, veteran teachers expressed concern for new staff members who had not
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

60
received any training on 21st Century skills, PBL, or Project Period, but were expected to teach
the class.
Informal interviews of newly hired staff members revealed that new teachers lacked
clarity about the structure, purpose, and implementation of Project Period. Additionally, new
teachers expressed a desire to have time to collaborate with other teachers to receive support in
Project Period.
Observations as the academy facilitator. The researcher was a teacher at Health
Sciences Ac a de m y a nd t he scho ol’s a c a de m y f a c i li tator . As such, the researcher wrote the
proposal that was accepted for admission into the NAF academy. She developed and facilitated
the professional development for Project Period, provided teachers with lessons and resources to
use during Project Period, and coordinated th e students’ pr ojec t show c a se s c he dule . This
position grew out of the need for someone to develop materials and provide resources for Project
Period. To prepare for 21st Century skills and PBL instructional integration, the researcher
a long with t he “ or i g inal” a c a d e m y sta ff engaged in a weeklong professional development and
received training and PBL materials the summer before restructure implementation. Since then,
the teacher has attended three NAF academy conferences (two of which were held this past
summer).
The r e se a r c he r ’s r ole a s a c a de my facilitator required her to coordinate resources and
provide professional development to support teachers; however, few professional development
sessions have been held to review PBL and 21st Century skills. After the initial PBL training to
prepare fo r th e scho ol’s r e struc ture , the researcher facilitated a two-day professional
development session to review 21st Century and PBL skills and collaborated with staff members
about expected student outcomes and lesson plans. For that training, out of 17 staff members,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

61
only seven attended the paid-voluntary (not mandatory) professional development. Teachers,
who did not attend, were not able to collaborate and understand the decision-making and
rationale behind instructional initiatives, but they were given access to the resources and lessons
developed.
The professional development for teachers in Project Period has also been limited due to
a lack of funding to pay for teachers (furlough days reduced contracted teacher professional
development days) and because of an already impacted professional development calendar to
support other site and district-wide initiatives.
Since 2009, the school has hired additional teachers to meet the demand for high school
course instruction; although all staff members have been given some literature about PBL and
21st Century skills and engaged in conversations about rigor and curriculum and assessment, not
all staff members have received formalized professional development about PBL, 21st Century
skills, or Project Period. In the summer of 2012, a team of three Health Sciences Academy
teachers attended a NAF summer institute. The team worked collaboratively to develop student
outcomes for the academy program. The outcome of the work from the summer NAF institute
was the aggregate 21st Century ESLRs list. Of the three teachers that collaborated on the
aggregate student outcomes, two teachers remained to teach at Health Sciences Academy for the
2012-2013 academic school year. During the 2012-2013 school year, Health Sciences Academy
gained five new certificated staff members. Except for the two remaining teachers who worked
collaboratively to create the student outcomes, the staff at Health Sciences Academy is not yet
acquainted with the outcomes list.
B a se d on th e r e s e a r c he r ’ s Project Period observations, experience co-teaching with
teachers during Project Period, providing resources, and facilitating professional development,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

62
the teacher observed varied levels of commitment among teachers to attend professional
development, varied commitment to teach/apply concepts from trainings, and turnover of
teachers whereby current teachers may not be competent in 21st Century/PBL skills, difficulty
scheduling a common planning time for ongoing collaboration, and challenges with access to
resources e.g., although Health Sciences Academy could theoretically provide one computer per
student, the majority of computers had slow processing speed, inconsistent Internet connectivity,
and the district filters that limited or blocked sites that provide instructional resources.
Theory
Learning, motivation, and organization theories provide valuable information that could
inform the cause. Ande r son a nd Kr a thwohl’s (20 01) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and
Assessing is used in the discussion about knowledge and skills theory; Mayer (2011), Bandura
(2007) , a nd P int ric h’ s (2003) publications contributed to the discussion about motivational
theor ies, a nd Cl a rk a nd E stes ( 2008) a nd Ru e d a ’s ( 2011) ga p a na l y sis f ra me wor ks were used to
examine organizational theories that inform the cause of performance gaps at Health Sciences
Academy.
Knowledge and skills. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) presented a framework that
described four types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Each
knowle dge t y pe g r a dua ll y de e pe ns i n a le a rn e r’ s l e ve l of unde rsta nding . According to Anderson
and Krathwohl factual knowledge is declarative knowledge, the state of knowing or when the
learner knows facts associated with a concept. The cognitive functions related to factual
knowledge are recalling, recognizing, and remembering (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).
Anderson and Krathwohl described conceptual knowledge as knowledge and understanding of
how things work as a system in complex and organized forms, a macro oriented perspective.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

63
Conceptual knowledge of how systems work, cognitively support the ability to categorize, and
c ontra st fa c tual knowle d g e ’s “ small bit s” or micr o foc us on i nf or mation ( Ande rson & Krathwohl, 2001). Procedural knowledge is knowledge of how to do something and being able
to appl y it a nd meta c o g nit ive know ledge is kn owle dge of the c onc e pt, t he l e a rne r’ s pro c e ss of
acquiring that knowledge (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Understanding, assessing, and
monitoring learner knowledge based on these four types of knowledge will help to inform
performance gap causes.
Motivation. Mayer (2011) defined motivation as an internal force that maintains effort
towards achieving a goal. Mayer described motivation as the amount of effort students make in
order to learn and asserted that a c a d e mi c mot ivation i s base d upon the le a r ne r’ s int e r e st, beli e fs,
attributions, goals, and partnership. These five conceptions of how motivation works touch upon
why students would want to learn, what they believe about their skills and abilities, how
successful they want to be, and the value of relationships/partnerships and feeling that they have
support. Pintrich (2003) identified three key factors of motivation: competence, autonomy, and
relatedness. These three factors resemble parts of the five conceptions of motivation.
C ompete nc e is t he de sir e to l e a rn the c on c e pt, aut onom y is t he de sire to h a ve c ontrol of one ’s
behavior, and relatedness is feeling belonging and attachment to a group (Pintrich, 2003).
Bandura (2007) presented an important concept about addressing low self-efficacy that affects
learner success. Bandura (2007) provided sample self-efficacy measurements and asserted that
low motivation caused by low efficacy can be transformed by creating opportunities and
powerful experiences of success. The motivational theories that Mayer (2011), Bandura (2007),
and Pintrich (2003) presented can inform causes of performance gaps.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

64
Organization. Clark and Estes (2008) discussed the possibility that the organizational
culture, structure, and resources contribute to the performance gap. Clark and Estes mentioned
the importance of school culture, the collective belief or sense of efficacy as an important factor
to consider when analyzing performance gaps. Clark and Estes also identify barriers to
motivation. According to Clark and Estes, the five elements that destroy work motivation are
vague and changing performance goals, unfairness/hypocrisy, unnecessary rules and work
barriers, constant competition, and biased feedback. The performance gap at Health Sciences
Academy might not include all of these factors, but the descriptors will help to inform the
performance gaps.
Assumed Causes from the Review of the Literature
A review of the literature was conducted. The causes from the literature that were
validated are:
Knowledge and skills. The gap in knowledge and clarity of 21st Century/PBL student
outcomes, knowledge of 21st Century skills/PBL, and knowledge in planning and implementing
teaching strategies and methods to support 21st Century skills and PBL could be affecting the
teacher implementation of Project Period. According to Rogers, Cross, Gresalfi, Trauth-Nare,
Buck (2011), teachers who are new to PBL find the transition from their role as a lecturer to a
facilitator challenging. Teachers also find it difficult to apply PBL principles; the transition from
theory to practice is difficult when teachers have had limited experience to the concept; therefore
they must be given time to plan, practice, and collaborate in order to build proficiency, (Rogers,
et al., 2011). According to Murray and Savin-Baden (2008), teachers may also have an
inaccurate sense of self-awareness and pedagogical stance. This is problematic because a
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

65
wa rpe d s e nse o f p e da g o gica l st a nc e c ould l im it a tea c h e r’ s abili t y to re c o gn iz e a re a s fo r
development (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2008).
Efficacy and motivation. When a program is not aligned with te a c h e r’ s be li e fs, a teacher will not value its utility and they are less likely to implement it (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997).
The internal push to implement something in the classroom in the absence of external monitoring
is motivation. Factors that affect motivation are low self-efficacy and sense of ability to be
successful (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000). I f tea c he rs don’ t believe th e y will be succ e ss ful,
they will avoid implementation. A lack of successful experiences compounds low self-efficacy.
The inability to motivate students affects teacher motivation and the extent to which the teacher
believes he/she can be effective (Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005). In order to be motivated or
sustain motivation, teachers must feel relatedness, a sense of support and collegiality (Lam,
Cheng, & Choy, 2010).
Organization. The collegial relationships and systems of support that are established are
important because they affect both teacher motivation and organizational culture (Lam, Cheng,
& Choy, 2010). Cannon and Reed (1999) stressed the importance of providing time for teachers
to plan their curriculum. Tied to the gaps in knowledge, teachers must be provided ongoing
support via professional development (Sykes, 1996). Professional development, planning time,
and opportunities to practice pedagogical concepts and engage in collaborative conversations
would support the te a c h e r’ s succ e ssful i mpl e menta ti on of pro g ra ms ( F a ll ik et al., 2008). These
collaborative conversations will lead to teacher autonomy over goals, curriculum, and
assessment and the collaborative effort to establish an evaluation system (Kaplan & Evans,
1997).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

66
When successful program implementation is expected, teachers must also be equipped
with the appropriate materials, resources, and access to technology (Hew & Brush, 2007). These
organizational supports, resources, and evaluation systems are all crucial ingredients that will
promote or curtail effective program implementation.
Summary
Table 1 presents the assumed causes in knowledge and skill, motivation, and in the
organization.

Table 1
Summary of Assumed Causes in Knowledge & Skill, Motivation, and in the Organization
Causes

Sources:

Knowledge

Motivation
Organizational
Processes
Interviews
(Site
Administrator)

 Varied quality of
instruction and
Project Period
implementation
varies among
teachers
 The quality and
rigor of some
student projects
need improvement.
 Different
proficiencies in 21st
century skills

 Varied levels of
willingness to learn
and implement
strategies

(Teachers)

 Newer staff members
have not received
adequate training
 Past trainings were
insufficient
 Newly hired staff
members are unclear
about structure, purpose,
and implementation of
Project Period.

 Follow up trainings
are few and rushed
 Not enough time to
meet/collaborate
 Difficult to access to
resources for Project
Period
 Desire for time to
collaborate about
Project Period

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

67

Ta ble 1 ( C ont’d.)

Causes

Sources:

Knowledge

Motivation
Organizational
Processes

(Academy
Facilitator)
 Varied levels of
commitment to
attend PD
 Varied levels of
commitment to
apply concepts
from PD
 Resources are
sometimes
difficult to access
 Difficult to find
time to
meet/facilitate PD
 Not enough
collaboration

Theory

 Staff members have
limited knowledge of
PBL/21st century
pedagogy. Their
understanding might
be more factual and
conceptual than
procedural and
metacognitive.

 Teacher lack of
interest, belief,
attribution, goals, and
partnerships
 Lack of teacher
competence,
autonomy, &
relatedness
 Vague and changing
performance goals
 Unfairness/hypocrisy
unnecessary rules
and work barriers
 Constant
competition
 Biased feedback
Literature  Lack of clarity in 21st
Century/PBL student
outcomes
 Lack of knowledge in
21st Century Skills,
PBL
 Lack of knowledge in
planning and
implementing
teaching strategies
and methods to
support 21st century
skills and PBL
 Inaccurate self-
awareness of
pedagogical stance

 Program is not
alig n ed w i th teac h er ’ s beliefs
 Low self-efficacy and
sense of ability to be
successful
 Teachers not
experiencing enough
success; lack of
student motivation is
affecting teacher
motivation
 Low sense of
relatedness/sense of
support

 Not enough training
 Staff members do not feel
supported
 Goals, curriculum, and
assessment are not created
collaboratively
 Need for collaborative
evaluation process
 Lack of time
 Limited access to
resources

Stage 5: Validated Causes

The study used observations, interviews, and document analysis in order to validate
assumed causes.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

68
What are the knowledge and skills causes for teacher performance gap?
In order to discover the knowledge and skills causes for the teacher performance gap, a
review and analysis of Project Period lesson planning and resources were conducted in order to
unde rsta nd the te a c he r’ s pe da g o g ica l st a n c e a nd p re pa r a ti on fo r 21 st Century/PBL
implementation. Standardized open-ended interview questions with carefully prepared and fully
structured questions were conducted in order to determine teacher knowledge and skills about
21st Century skills, PBL, relevant pedagogy, and expected 21st Century/PBL student outcomes.
Classroom observations were c onduc ted to g a th e r infor mation about the le sson pl a n’ s ex e c uti on
and implementation.
What are the motivation causes for the teacher performance gap?
In order to discover the motivation causes for the teacher performance gap, standardized
open-ended interview questions with carefully prepared and fully structured questions were
conducted. Standardized open-ended interview questions are questions that are carefully worded
questions that are created prior to the interview. According to Patton (2002), wording the
questions in advance reduces variation among interviewers, makes responses easy to compare,
and makes time usage more efficient by using focused questions. These open-ended questions
were asked in the interview in order to determine teacher efficacy, values, beliefs,
competence/desire for mastery, interest, autonomy and sense of relatedness.
What are the organizational causes for the teacher gap?
Standardized open-ended interview questions with carefully prepared and fully structured
questions were conducted in order to determine organizational and resource structures that
contribute to the teacher performance gap.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

69
Sample and Population
Criterion sampling was used to select high school Project Period teachers at Health
Sciences Academy as the focus stakeholder of this study. High school Project Period teachers
were selected because the 21st Century/PBL student outcomes should be achieved upon high
sc hool g r a dua ti on a nd c e rtifie d with a N A F sea l o n the stude nt’s hig h sch o ol di plom a ( P a tt on,
2002). A sampling issue is that not all high school Project Period teachers were included in the
study. One high school Project Period teacher who was on maternity leave, was not included in
the study. Six teachers are in this case study. The majority had experience teaching at least one
year of Project Period, one is a newly hired teacher, and one is a substitute teacher for a vacant
position. The teachers are of Caucasian, Latino, Asian, and Multi-Ethnic Caucasian and Asian
backgrounds and both genders are represented. Identifying information was removed in order to
respect participant anonymity.
Instrumentation
Document analysis. A review of teacher lesson plans, materials, and resources for
Project Period provided data that cannot be observable and can sometimes lead to focus areas to
explore during interviews and observations (Patton, 2002, p. 294). Document analysis elucidated
teacher pedagogical stance and knowledge and skills in 21st Century and PBL pedagogy.
Observation. The observer participated and conducted the observations in the setting
being studied. This is the Full Participant Observation (Patton, 2002, p. 265.). The advantage of
participant observation is that the observer can give authentic, first-hand accounts of the
environment (Patton, 2005, p. 266). The observations helped to identify teacher implementation
vs. teacher perception of competency in 21st Century/PBL.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

70
Interviews. Each of the six high school teachers who teach Project Period was
interviewed using a structured set of open-ended questions that were created prior to the
interview. The interview was conducted at a mutually selected time in a neutral location, i.e.,
room 3 – the professional development room, the library conference room, or a classroom that
was mutually agreed upon.
Standardized open-ended interviews. Teachers were asked 25 standard open-ended
questions that were carefully ordered and carefully worded. Opinion and values, feeling,
knowledge, and sensory questions were asked during the interview. Conducting interviews with
a uniform set of questions among participants maximized time with the participant, and made
comparing responses easier (Patton, 2002, p. 346). The responses to the interview questions
illustrated teacher knowledge and skills, level of motivation, and values and beliefs of the
participants.
Data Collection
Following University Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the researcher
requested Project Period lesson plans and resources in order to conduct a document analysis.
After the document analysis, the researcher engaged in classroom observations of the Project
Period. After completing the classroom observations, the researcher scheduled one-on-one
interviews with each of the six teachers. The researcher reassured participants that their
identities would be protected. The triangulation of these three sources of data created a detailed
snapshot of the existing systems and practices at Health Sciences Academy.
Data Analysis
This section explains the techniques and programs used to analyze the document analysis,
interview responses, and classroom observations. The unit of analysis for this qualitative study
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

71
was the faculty at Health Sciences Academy, specifically the high school Project Period teachers.
Health Sciences Academy is one of two 7-12 academies in its district. The value of knowing
more about this organization and the faculty is that it will provide insight to improving program
implementation. A deeper understanding of the academy restructuring process at Health
Sciences Academy will improve student achievement through the identification of the challenges
that teachers face when teaching Project Period.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

72
Chapter 4
Results
Health Sciences Academy of Health Sciences is a restructured program improvement
school. Since the s c hool ’s r e struc tur e three years ago, the academy API has increased a total of
19 API points overall. The scho ol’s r e stru c ture was an attempt to increase student achievement
at a school that has been in program improvement for five years or more. The purpose of this
study wa s to ex a mi ne the e ff e c ti ve ne ss of the s c ho ol’s r e struc tur e b y ( a ) ide nti f y in g the
underlying skills required in order for students to achieve Health Sciences Ac a de m y ’s
ESLR/21st Century outcomes, (b) determining the degree to which these skills are being taught
in the Friday Project Period, (c) identifying appropriate assessments to measure student
achievement of these skills, and (d) determining the degree to which students are achieving these
skills.
Qualitative data collected through classroom observations, document analysis, and
interviews captured data to identify and measure the possible implementation gaps in the Project
Period for Health Sciences Academy. Data analysis from this study suggested the perceived
gaps of knowledge, motivation, and organizational culture that must be closed in order to
improve the implementation of the Project Period, thus, Health Sciences Academy students to
achieve the goal of 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st Century skills as represented by
the combined/aggregate 21st Century skills document. The gaps were identified and potential
solutions based on research are presented in Chapter 5.
Demographic Data
The document analysis, classroom observation, and interview data were collected from
six high school teachers at Health Sciences Academy. These high school teachers were selected
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

73
because each one taught a Period One class. The students from the Period One classes were also
their advisory class and Project Period students. Health Sciences Academy was a small school
that had 11 high school teachers, some of whom also flexed and taught middle school classes. In
order to protect the identity of the six teachers who participated in the study, their genders were
withheld and their names were changed to aliases.
Teacher A has just begun year two of teaching English at Health Sciences Academy.
Te a c h e r A ’s Project Period was observed once for approximately 70 minutes. Te a c he r A ’s
Project Period class had Honors 11th grade students; students whose proficiency level in English
language arts were at grade-level or advanced according to the California Standards Test (CSTs).
Teacher A was interviewed once the interview lasted 35 minutes. Teacher A did not provide a
copy of the Project Period Lesson plan for the document analysis.
Teacher B taught science and science electives at Health Sciences Academy for five
years. Te a c h e r B ’s Project Period was observed once for approximately 70 minutes. Teacher
B ’s c lass room was comprised of 9th grade students; many of whom were considered behavior
problems based on their Zangle (student information database) behavior portfolio. Teacher B
was interviewed once; the interview lasted 28 minutes. Teacher B did not provide a copy of the
Project Period Lesson plan for the document analysis.
Teacher C was a new teacher at Health Sciences Academy, though not new to teaching.
Teacher C began teaching English and history in August. Te a c h e r C’s Project Period was
observed once for approximately 70 minutes. Te a c he r C’s Project Period were the average and
struggling set of 11th grade students according to English language arts CST data. There were
students in this class who were in the Special Education program and had an Individualized
Education Plan (IEP). Teacher C was interviewed once and the interview with Teacher C lasted
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

74
22 minutes. Teacher C did not provide a copy of the Project Period Lesson plan for the
document analysis.
Teacher D taught science at Health Sciences Academy. This was Te a c he r D’ s first y e a r
at Health Sciences Academy. Teacher D was hired to fill a vacant position in the middle of
semester one and had only been at the school a few months during the data collection process.
Te a c h e r D ’s Project Period was observed once for approximately 70 minutes. Tenth grade
honors students we re in Te a c h e r D ’s Proje c t P e ri od c lass . Teacher D was interviewed once; the
interview lasted 55 minutes. Teacher D was the only teacher to provide a copy of a Project
Period Lesson plan for the document analysis.
Teacher E has taught science, science electives, and physical education at Health
Sciences Academy for six years. Te a c h e r E ’s Project Period was observed once for
approximately 70 minutes. Te a c h e r E ’s c lass was comprised of students whose proficiency
scores for English language arts were in the lower proficiency range according to CST data; it
was a class mixed with academically motivated and behaviorally challenged students. There
were students in this class in the Special Education program and had Individualized Education
Plans (IEP). Teacher E was interviewed once; the interview lasted 42 minutes. Teacher E did
not provide a copy of the Project Period Lesson plan for the document analysis.
Teacher F has taught mathematics for one year and began year two of teaching at Health
Sciences Academy. T e a c he r F ’s Project Period was observed once for approximately 70
minutes. Te a c he r F’s P roje c t P e riod students were tenth grade students of average proficiency
and average motivation. Teacher F was interviewed once, and the interview lasted 38 minutes.
Teacher F did not provide a copy of the Project Period Lesson plan for the document analysis.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

75
A notable limitation for the document analysis data collection is that not all teachers
submitted a lesson plan. Teachers were asked to submit a copy of the lesson plan when they
were given their consent forms to participate in the study. Three emails requesting lesson plans
were sent to teachers; additionally, informal oral reminders were made to teachers. However,
only one lesson plan was submitted for document analysis by the end of the data collection.
Data Collection
Six high school faculty members at Health Sciences Academy who teach Project Period
were asked to submit a lesson plan for document analysis prior to the classroom observation.
Document analysis. The document analysis was conducted using the document analysis
checklist as a guide, checking off observable traits from the checklist that were present in the
submitted lesson plan (see Appendix D). The author of the study requested lesson plans for the
document analysis. Three requests were made via electronic mail, followed by brief oral
reminders to participating teachers. One out of the six participating teachers submitted a lesson
plan.
Classroom observation. The Project Period class of each of the six participating
teachers was observed for one Project Period session. Notes were taken during the designated
Project Period observation and the observation checklist was referenced periodically. Upon
completion of the observation, the checklist was reviewed and observable evidence of
outcomes from the checklist was checked off. A copy of the observation checklist is available
in Appendix E.
Interviews
Each high school Project Period teacher was interviewed after his or her Project Period
classroom observation. Each participant was asked 25 questions. The duration of the interviews
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

76
ranged between 22 to 25 minutes. The interview questions are available in Appendix F. Any
supporting quotes from the interview used to report findings were cited using an alias in order to
protect the identity of the participants.
Report of the Findings
Study question 1. What are the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational culture which may affect the successful achievement of the organizational goal for
Health Sciences Academy students to achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st Century
skills as represented by combined/aggregate 21st Century skills document?
Knowledge and skills conceptual framework. The ga ps i n tea c he r ’s know ledge and
skills is presented below using Ande rson & Kr a th wohl’ s (2001) Knowledge Dimension, a
taxonomy for learning that can be used to identify the depth of the gap in knowledge and skills.
The four levels of knowledge in the Knowledge Dimension are:
 Factual Knowledge – basic knowledge, i.e., terminology and details
 Conceptual Knowledge – interrelationships among the elements, the way in which the
parts comprise the whole
 Procedural Knowledge – knowledge of step-by-step procedures
 Metacognitive Knowledge – self-awareness of learning
Knowledge and skills assumed causes. The assumed causes are reviewed in this section
to lead the reader through the process of validating the causes through collected data. The
assumed causes for gaps in teacher knowledge and skills identified in the Methodology were that
teachers do not know the expected student learning outcomes for the Project Period as delineated
by the aggregate 21st Century/PBL outcomes list. Other assumed causes for gaps in teacher
knowledge and skills were that teachers lacked knowledge in planning and implementing a
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

77
Project Period curriculum, specifically that teachers had difficulty shifting form their role as
lecturer to facilitator, shifting from PBL theory to practice because teachers had limited
experience with PBL, and that teachers were not aware of their pedagogical stance or teaching
stance.
Factual. Gaps in knowledge of 21st Century/PBL student learning outcomes.
Conceptual. Gaps in knowledge of how to take theory into practice – ensuring rigor in
the curriculum and teaching via project-based learning because teachers had limited experience
with the concept.
Procedural. Gaps in knowledge of how to plan and implement strategies that support
21st Century learning and project based learning, i.e., shifting from lecturer to facilitator.
Metacognitive. Gaps in awareness of pedagogical stance or teaching style (knowing
his/her teaching style and the extent to which it aligned with PBL).
Results for Knowledge and Skills
Interviews. Six high school teachers who taught a Project Period class were interviewed
once, individually. The interview questions were a uniform set of 25 pre-constructed open-
ended questions. The gaps in teacher knowledge and skill became apparent in the questions
a sking te a c he r’ s a wa r e ne ss of the o utcome s on t he a ggre g a t e 21 st Century Skills/ESLRs list, his
or her awareness of pedagogical stance/teaching style, ensuring rigor in the Project Period, how
to plan for the Project Period, and how to motivate challenging students.
Summary of interviews. The interview responses among the six high school teacher
participants revealed that the Health Sciences Academy teachers lack the necessary knowledge
and skills to successfully implement the Project Period.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

78
Factual. (Knowledge that is easy to research/recall; a basic understanding of the
organization and its goals for student achievement): What are the 21st Century skills and ESLRs
student outcomes? For this interview question, teachers responded by listing general 21st
Century outcomes rather than specific skills outlined in the aggregate 21st Century/PBL
outcomes list. Most teachers cited students learning technology, working collaboratively, and
critical thinking for problem solving. One teacher was not sure a nd re spond e d, “ You me a n, wha t
have I been doing? Or what do you mean? I guess hands-on learning. I do n’ t know if tha t’s
wha t y ou ’r e a skin g me.” Overall, teachers did not know the specific grade-level expectations
and outcomes.
Conceptual. (Concepts, Principles of PBL/21st Century Learning): The interviews
sought to learn the teachers ’ understanding of the Project Period. The Project Period was a class
that integrated 21st Century learning and project-based learning in order to teach the
competencies listed in the aggregate 21st Century/PBL student outcomes list.
During the interviews, teachers were asked to identify the 21st Century skills and applied
project based learning outcomes. Some teachers were able to list some of the 21st Century skills,
some teacher responses were task oriented and listed specific student-work products; other
responses were uncertain of the question and unable to fully address the question. The first gap
is i n the te a c he rs ’ a w a re n e ss of the e x pe c ted le a rni ng outc omes for Health Sciences Academy
students.
The responses from this interview question revealed that teachers varied in their
understanding of the Project Period. For example, Teacher C described Project Period as a slice
of time where students were active participants and exercised problem solving skills. Another
response, from Teacher E stated that Project Period was a time for group work where students
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

79
came up with questions, problems, and research to find solutions. Students created products,
brochures, public service announcements, and a map of the city. These responses revealed the
short-term task focus of the response rather than the long-term mastery of goals, e.g., global
awareness, civic literacy, health literacy, etc.
The gap in teacher ’s a w a re ne ss of the 2 1 st Century skills/ESLRs aggregate outcomes list
is important because it affected the curriculum content of Project Period. Teachers who did not
understand the expected student outcomes did not have a goal in mind when lesson planning and
therefore taught Project Period lessons in piece meal. Therefore, the entirety of the lessons
taught may have gaps in content. Teachers cannot teach what they do not know they are
expected to teach (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Procedural. From these interviews a procedural gap is revealed. The procedural gap is
that teachers found planning, teaching, and implementing strategies that support 21st Century
learning and PBL challenging. When asked how teachers ensured rigor in the PBL, the
procedural gap of how they would implement strategies that support 21st Century learning and
PBL surfaced.
Teachers had different ways of communicating expectations to their students. In the
interviews, three of the teachers shared that they ensured rigor in the Project Period by sharing
rubrics. Teacher F admitted that sharing rubrics is a way to ensure rigor, but that Teacher F had
not yet done so (Teacher F, personal communication, December 17, 2012). The other three
teachers said that they ensured rigor in Project Period by repeatedly telling students their
expectations. Two teachers mentioned sharing previous student work as examples of
expectations, and two other teachers benchmarked and stopped frequently at activity checkpoints
in order to monitor student progress and provide feedback. Two of the teachers in Project Period
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

80
were new to the school and they admit they were not completely certain of the expected student
outcomes. Not having a common rubric and a common practice of sharing rubrics with students
was problematic because expectations of excellence were not defined nor are they uniform. The
expectations were unclear and subjective.
Metacognitive. Metacognitive knowledge about teaching style is crucial to
understanding what teachers can contribute to collaborative conversations and how to ask the
questions that will propel teachers closer to their goals. In order to meet the needs of a PBL
classroom, teachers will need to know how to adjust their approach. This is imperative.
Learning by doing, through trial and error is a teacher facilitated, not teacher directed experience
(Fallik et al., 2008). It is important that teachers know and understand their proficiency with
teaching, asking driving questions, recognizing, and learning how to become more proficient
PBL facilitators.
When teachers were asked if their teaching philosophy aligned the tenets of 21st Century
learning and PBL, all six teachers agreed. However, when the teachers were asked about their
pedagogical stance and teaching style for Project Period, teacher responses were vague and
teachers were unable to provide specificity. Teacher A was able to show some pedagogical
a wa r e ne ss wit h the r e spo nse, “ S tudent c e nte re d,” (T e a c he r A , p e rsona l c o mm unica ti on,
December 12, 2012). T e a c he r A’ s tea c hin g st y l e was to challenge students. Teacher A allowed
them to struggle in order to facilitate thinking. Te a c he r B ’s re sponse was s im il a r to Te a c he r A ’s
response and believed that the students were the focus of the class and students were expected to
explore in order to find answers (Teacher B, personal communication, December 14, 2012).
Four out of the six teachers were able to articulate their teaching approach/style; however, the
other two teachers responded by providing examples of past assignments and activities.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

81
Although four of the teachers were able to articulate some information about their teaching
styles, the lack of detail called to question their level of cognition. Murray and Savin-Baden
(2000) argued that the cognition of pedagogical stance influences the transition from traditional
classroom teaching to problem-based learning. Without self-awareness, it might be difficult for
the teacher to set personal goals to improve his or her instruction.
Overall, the interviews revealed knowledge and skill gaps in knowing the expected
student outcomes delineated in the aggregate 21st Century/ESLRs list; knowing how to plan and
implement teacher strategies that support 21st Century learning and PBL; knowing how to shift
fr om “ g iver o f inf or mati on” to i nquir y f a c il it a tor;; a nd knowing th e ir ow n pe da g o g ica l
stance/teaching approach.
Classroom observations. The purpose of the classroom observations was to examine
the different ways that Project Period is taught. Six high school Project Period classes were
observed at Health Sciences Academy to determine the extent to which the discreet skills from
the expected student outcomes list are being addressed. While lesson plans and interviews
provided teacher-reported data, classroom observations offered a unique perspective of how
Project Period is implemented. Observations demonstrated what the lesson plan and interviews
described in a limited fashion. The observations took place on Friday mornings, the day that
Project Period is always held. The observations were approximately 60-70 minutes. The
purpose of the Project Period observations was no t t o e va luate the te a c he r’ s c lassro om pra c ti c e s,
but rather to look for 21st Century or PBL activities that support the aggregate 21st Century/PBL
student outcomes. In addition to taking field notes, an observation checklist was used to check
off observable characteristics of 21st Century/PBL from the aggregate student outcomes list.
The aggregate student outcomes list was divided into four categories: collaborative workers,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

82
effective communicators, critical thinkers, and productive learners. The results of the classroom
observation follow.
Collaborative workers. One class addressed 0 of the 7 items listed under Collaborative
Workers, one class addressed 1 of the 7 criteria, two classes addressed 4 of the 7 criteria listed,
and two classes addressed 6 of the 7 criteria listed. An average of the total number of criteria
addressed divided by the total possible criteria indicate 50% of the criteria under Collaborative
Workers were addressed among the six Project Period classes observed.
Effective communicators. The next category in the 21st Century skills/ESLRs student
outcomes list was the Effective Communicators category. All of the Project Period classes
observed were able to address at least some of the criteria in this category. The class with the
least criteria addressed met 3 out of 10 items, followed by two classes that met 4 out of 10 items,
one that met 5 out of 10, another class met 6 out of 10, and one class met 7 out of 10 items listed
under Effective Communicators. The classroom observation checklist indicated that the average
of the criteria addressed in the Effective Communicators category was 50%.
Critical thinkers. The third category in the 21st Century Skills/ESLRs student outcomes
list was Critical Thinkers. This category had 20 competencies. Not all Project Period classes
were able to exhibit evidence of this category. One class did not address any of the criteria.
Two classes addressed 1 out of the 20 criteria. Two classes addressed 3 out of the 20 criteria and
one class addressed 5 out of the 20 criteria. The average percentage of addressed criteria in this
category was 10%. Compared to the other 3 categories, this category had the lowest average of
competencies demonstrated in the Project Period.
Productive learners. The last category in the 21st Century skills/ESLRs student
outcomes list was Productive Learners. This ca t e gor y ’ s ave ra g e was slightly better than the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

83
Critical Thinkers category. Not all Project Period classes addressed the competencies listed in
this category. One class addressed 0 out of 22 competencies. Two classes addressed 1 out of 22
competencies. One class addressed 4 out of 22 competencies. Another class addressed 5 out of
22 competencies, and one class addressed 7 out of 22 competencies. The average percentage of
the competencies addressed in Productive Learners among the six Project Period classes was
approximately 14%. This was the second lowest average among the four categories.
Figures 2-5 illustrate the findings described above. Each figure displays a graph that
shows the number of observed competency skills per teacher during their classroom
observations. There is one figure/bar graph for each of the competency categories:
(a) Collaborative Workers; (b) Effective Communicators; (c) Critical Thinkers; (d) Productive
Learners.

Figure 2: Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for Collaborative Workers
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

84

Figure 3: Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for Effective Communicators

Figure 4: Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for Critical Thinkers
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

85

Figure 5: Visual Representation of Classroom Observation Data for Productive Learners

Summary of observation. Recognizing the limitation of only one observation per
teacher, the results suggested that based on the classroom observations, the observable
knowledge gap may lie in the implementation of teacher strategies that support 21st Century
learning and PBL. Much like a ripple effect, the knowledge and skills gaps were interrelated and
spanned across all four knowledge types. The lack of factual knowledge about the expected
student outcomes affected the extent to which the teachers were able to create lesson plans that
addressed the skills on the student outcomes list. The insufficient lesson planning affected the
implementation of the Project Period curriculum and there was little observable evidence from
the classroom observation of a strong sense of how to teach 21st Century skills and PBL.
In three of the classes observed, the teacher lectured for more than half of the classroom
observation. In the other three classes observed, students were working individually and in
teams to complete the tasks that were assigned.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

86
Using And e rson a nd K ra thwohl’s (2001) the Cognitive Process Dimension to measure
the rigor of the activities during the Project Period observations, one finds that the activities were
not rigorous and would fall between level two and three – understanding and applying concepts.
None of the activities observed involved evaluation or creation; however, during the interviews,
all teachers mentioned that they would address higher order cognitive skills later on in the
curriculum.
Document analysis. The purpose of the document analysis was to frame the classroom
observations and to have a basis from which the content of the lesson could be compared.
Teachers were asked to submit a copy of their Project Period lesson plans. The document
analysis was conducted in order to determine the extent to which the knowledge and skills for
preparing a 21st Century/PBL lesson plan were represented in the plan. Teachers were given
approximately one month to submit a lesson plan. As described in the limitations at the
beginning of Chapter 4, only one out of the six teachers submitted a lesson plan for document
analysis; therefore, the information in the document analysis results will focus on the one lesson
that was submitted.
The document analysis and observation checklists were organized into four categories:
Collaborative Workers, Effective Communicators, Critical Thinkers, and Productive Learners.
Each category listed competencies/criteria. The number of competencies under each category
varied. The Collaborative Workers category had seven competencies/criteria. The Effective
Communicators category had 10 competencies. The Critical Thinkers category had 20
competencies and the Productive Learners category had 22 competencies.
The subm it ted le sson pl a n’ s obj e c ti ve wa s to t e a c h the Mode rn L a n g u a g e Assoc iation
(MLA) format for citing sources. This lesson was taken from the Project Period resource file on
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

87
Dr opbox a nd a da pted to f it that pa rticula r Proje c t P e riod c lass’ ne e ds . Using the document
analysis checklist, the lesson plan analysis did not find aspects/criteria of the Collaborative
Workers category. The submitted lesson plan contained three out of 10 aspects/criteria listed
under Effective Communicators, two out of 20 aspects/criteria listed under Critical Thinkers, and
five out of 22 competencies/criteria listed under Productive Learners. This lesson plan addressed
approximately 16% of the student outcomes list.
When the activities listed in the submitted lesson plan were compared to Anderson and
Kr a thwohl’s C o g nit ive Proc e ss Dim e nsion , the activities for the lesson were cognitively not
rigorous. The lesson met level two and three cognitively – understanding and applying concepts.
Summary of Document Analysis
The lack of lesson plan submissions and the lack of rigor in the submitted lesson plan
indicated a gap in the following teacher knowledge and skills:
Factual. Gap in knowledge of the skills and components that would make a rigorous
21st Century/PBL lesson plan and address the expected student learning outcomes.
Conceptual. Gap in knowledge of how to create lesson plans that incorporate strategies
that support 21st Century learning and PBL. Teacher D agreed that experience and examples of
past student projects would help support his/her development in teaching the Project Period
(Teacher D, personal communication, December 14, 2012).

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

88
Summary of the Knowledge and Skills Data
Out of the six teachers who participated in the study, only two had been at Health
Sciences Academy long enough to have received some training. The other four teachers had not
received sufficient professional development. Many of the teachers relied on resources that the
academy coordinator was supplying; however, additional planning for the Project Period was not
taking place, likely because the teachers did not have the knowledge and skills to transition from
theory to practice. A large gap in knowledge and skills was about the overall goal of the
program and the specific student outcomes. Based on the triangulated data, teachers did not have
enough factual and conceptual knowledge about the program, they did not have the procedural
knowledge of how to personalize and adjust Project Period lessons, and they lacked self-
awareness of their pedagogical stance and to what extent their teaching practices aligned with the
frame work of PBL (though their philosophies may be aligned). As such, the validated causes of
the knowledge and skills gap among teachers at Health Sciences Academy were:
 Lack of knowledge of student learning outcomes from the aggregate 21st Century/PBL
list.
 Lack of knowledge of planning and implementing teaching strategies that support 21st
Century learning and PBL, i.e., shifti n g tea c he r’ s role f rom lec tu re r to f a c il it a tor .
 Lack of knowledge of how to shift from theory to practice because teachers had limited
experience with PBL, i.e., how to ensure rigor in the Project Period
 Lack of self- awareness of pedagogical stance/teaching style.
Figure 6 is a graphic representation of the triangulation of data from the document analysis,
classroom observations, and teacher interviews that lead to the validation of the causes for the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

89
knowledge and skills gap. The proposed solutions for the knowledge and skills gaps are
discussed in Chapter 5.

Figure 6: Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Knowledge and Skills

The proposed solutions for the knowledge & skills gaps are discussed in Chapter Five.
Motivation Theoretical Framework
Several factors influence the extent to which a program will be implemented. According
to Mayer (2011), self-efficacy beliefs, interest, goal, attribution, and partnership/collegial support
influence effort towards achieving a goal. Teacher efficacy, values, and beliefs impacts teacher
motivation and a re c ruc ia l t o a prog ra m’s suc c e ss a nd sust a inabili t y be c a us e the te a c he rs a re the
agents that implement the strategies in the classroom.
Motivation Assumed Causes
The motivation assumed causes are reviewed in this section to lead the reader through the
process of validating the causes through collected data. Assumed causes for motivation gap at
Health Sciences Academy identified in Chapter 3 were that the Project Period did not align with
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

90
the te a c h e rs’ t eaching philosophy, teachers had low self-efficacy and a low sense of being able to
succeed, and teachers were unable to motivate students and, therefore, they perceived themselves
to be ineffective.
Results for Motivation
Interviews. The participant interviews provided insightful information about teacher
perceptions about the program. Each of the six teachers was interviewed individually. They
were interviewed once using a uniform set of 25 open-ended questions and they were asked not
to discuss or share any of the interview questions with other participants. During the interview,
all of the teachers said that they felt supported by their colleagues and felt confident to teach
Project Period based on the resources made available by the academy coordinator. This
information was important because according to Lam, Cheng and Choy (2010), in order to have
motivation, teachers must feel a sense of support and collegiality. Based on the interview
responses, teachers had a sense of partnership and relatedness with their colleagues.
All the teachers in the study found Project Period highly valuable because it was an
opportunity for students to be exposed to work-based expectations, it was an opportunity for
students to apply learning, it allowed students to collaborate, and it sharpened critical thinking.
Teacher A asserted that the value of the Project Period was that it brought back the sense of
“ wonde rme nt ” that st ude nts l ose w he n the y don’ t thi nk c ritica ll y ( T e a c he r A, pe rsona l
communication, December 12, 2012). Teacher B described Project Period as the class where
students were able to discover multiple ways of solving a problem (Teacher B, personal
communication, December 14, 2012). This interview data was important because Ghaith and
Yaghi (1997) stated that in order for a teacher to implement an innovation, the innovation must
a li g n with t he te a c he r’ s b e li e f . As an extension of this sentiment, all of the teachers also said that
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

91
they valued the 21st Century skills and PBL. Th e tea c he rs’ incorporated 21st Century skills and
PBL into their content areas varied from already incorporating PBL, working on increasing the
amount of PBL in content classes, and or planning to incorporate PBL into content area classes.
All six teachers declared a high comfort level in using and teaching technology. The interview
responses revealed that all six teachers had a high sense of efficacy when it came to teaching
technology; however, teachers also revealed the limitations of their knowledge with newer
technology, reservations about teaching writing, concerns about how to differentiate instruction
for students with special needs, motivating challenging students, and teaching students
metacognition – how to become self-regulating and productive learners were comments also
expressed. Teacher efficacy is important because it affects the effort that teachers make in
achieving their goals as well as affecting the expectations that teachers set for students
(Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2000).
The challenge for teachers at Health Sciences Academy was lesson planning for the
Project Period. Teacher B mentioned that lesson planning for the Project Period was difficult
given the other content classes that require lesson planning. The issue of prioritizing Project
Period among content classes was challenging for both teachers and students. Teacher E shared
that Project Period did not receive a grade; therefore, students sometimes challenged their
responsibility to work productively (Teacher E, personal communication, December 17, 2012).
Teacher B shared past experiences with Project Period classes at Health Sciences
Academy; some teachers felt that the students assigned to the Project Period class affected the
Project Period experience. Depending on the students, Project Period was really fun or really
challenging (Teacher B, personal communication, December 14, 2012). All six teachers felt that
motivating students who have difficulty staying motivated was challenging. The interview
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

92
responses revealed that each of the six teachers had a strategy to address struggling students with
low motivation. Some teachers tried to build relationships with the students and their family;
others scaffold the lesson by providing assistance, sharing ideas; one teacher tried to build
relevance while another adjusted the lesson activities to include more hands-on lab work. Of all
the strategies mentioned, a commonality among the teachers was the te a c he r’ s will ing ne ss t o
provide more resources, time, and support to the struggling student. Despite these efforts, many
teachers admitted that Project Period was “ a stru gg le ” whe n the c lass was comprised of difficult
students with low motivation. The tea c he r’ s sens e of e ff ic a c y wh e n tea c hin g stru gg li n g learners
influenced the goals and expectations set for their students (Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005).
Additionally, teachers discussed the challenge of enforcing accountability in the Project
Period since the class did not appe a r on the stud e n t’s c lass sc he dule a nd the re were no grades or
credits assigned at the end of the course. When compared to content area classes that require
lesson planning, grades, and credits towards graduation, the current structure of the Project
P e riod c ould be inf luenc i ng te a c he rs’ be li e fs in the accountability and could therefore be
affecting teacher motivation to prepare exemplary lesson plans that would meet several criteria
from each of aggregate 21st Century/ESLRs outcomes categories and the expectations teachers
have of their students.
Observations. Ea c h tea c he r’ s P roje c t P e riod c las s wa s obser ve d on ce for approximately
70 minutes. The observations provided a glimpse into the instructional activities in the Project
Period. In two of the Project Period classes, behaviorally challenging students and students with
low CST proficiency scores affected the flow of classroom instruction by being disruptive. The
level of inquiry and discourse in another Project Period was also limited to levels one and two of
Ande rson a nd K ra thwohl ’s (2001) Cognitive Process Dimension. The limitation of the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

93
observations was that only one class session out of a larger curriculum was observed. All
teachers during their interviews indicated plans to address competencies on the classroom
observation checklist that were not addressed. The lessons observed offered a limited scope of
what occurs in the Project Period. The activities observed, teacher centered instruction, level of
academic discourse evidenced the impact that struggling students posed to Project Period
teachers, examples of how pedagogical decisions made are based on a tea c he r’ s sens e of
efficacy, and how classroom activities are modified in order to address behavioral challenges
(Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005).
Document analysis. Only one out of the six participating teachers submitted a lesson
plan for the Project Period. The lack of lesson plan submissions among five out of six
participants brought to question the t e a c he rs’ lev e l of mot ivation whe n pre pa ring for the Proje c t
Period. A te a c h e r’ s s e nse o f se lf -efficacy will affect his/her ability to be successful (Tschannen-
Moran & Hoy, 2000). In this situation, the lack of knowledge and skills in 21st Century
skills/PBL and pressing needs of preparing lessons for other content area courses limited the
tea c he rs’ ti me a nd c ould ha ve a f fe c ted the ir mot ivation to plan and submit a Project Period
lesson plan.
Summary of the Motivation Data
Mayer (2011) defined motivation as an action in which an individual initiates and
maintains efforts towards a goal. A framework that describes the mechanism of sustained effort
towards a goal is what Mayer calls the Five Conceptions of How Motivation Works. The Five
Concept ions we ig h a n in divi dua l’s int e re st i n/purpose , va lue of , b e li e f a bo ut, desire f or maste r y ,
and having peers to provide a sense of support and relatedness with regard to an initiative or
goal. These factors influence whether or not people will initiate and sustain action towards a
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

94
goal. The qualitative data gathered presented interesting information about motivation factors
that might be influencing the implementation of the Project Period.
Validated Causes of the Motivation Gap
After analyzing the data, the data indicated that not all of the assumed causes were
validated. The teachers at Health Sciences Academy valued the Project Period and their teaching
philosophy aligns with 21st Century learning and PBL. All six of the teachers had high efficacy
in teaching technology and although some of the teachers expressed reservations about the
limitations of their knowledge and skill, they were willing to learn and open to participating in
professional development.
The first validated cause for teacher motivation to implement Project Period at Health
Sciences Academy was the lack of teacher efficacy in motivating challenging students. Teacher
expectations of students were influ e nc e d b y th e te a c he r ’s perception of their effectiveness when
motivating and sustaining motivation among struggling learners (Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005).
When the students were disruptive, teachers focused primarily on management rather than
enrichment. The expectation for student achievement fluctuated; it was not consistently high.
Low-teacher efficacy in motivating students with low motivation affected t he tea c h e r’ s
expectations for student outcomes and therefore affected the Project Period and student
achievement.
The second validated motivation cause was in the tea c he r’ s perceived value of lesson
planning for the Project Period. According to Ghaith and Yaghi (1997), program
implementation is affected when the teacher does not value its utility. One indicator that there
was a motivation gap for teachers to plan and teach Project Period is that five out of six
participating teachers did not submit a lesson plan for document analysis. Teachers had shared
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

95
access to the Project Period curriculum overview and the aggregate 21st Century/ESLRs
outcomes list; however only one out of the six participating teachers submitted a lesson plan for
document analysis. In summary, the validated motivational causes were the following:
 Lack of teacher efficacy – tea c he r’ s belie f tha t he/ she could motivate or sustain
motivation among challenging/struggling learners.
 L a c k of te a c h e r’ s value for planning the Project Period – teachers knew how to lesson
plan for the Project Period but teachers found it difficult to prioritize planning for Project
Period when they also have to plan for other classes they teach.
Figure 7 is a graphic representation of the triangulation of data from the document
analysis, classroom observations, and teacher interviews that lead to the validation of the causes
for the motivation gap. Solutions to the gaps in teacher motivation are discussed in Chapter 5.

Figure 7: Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Motivation

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

96
Organization Theoretical Framework
According to Cannon and Reed (1999), the organization should provide time for teachers
to plan curriculum. Fallik et al. (2008) stressed the importance of professional development
because it is the opportunity for teachers to plan their lessons collaboratively and engage in
conversations that discuss challenges and successes of program implementation; these
conversations help teachers discover possible solutions to challenges with program
implementation and contribute to the culture of collaboration.
Organization Assumed Causes
Assumed organization causes are reviewed in this section to lead the reader through the
process of validating the causes through collected data. Assumed causes for organization gap
was that teachers do not have enough time to plan and develop the Project Period curriculum
(Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000). The second assumed cause for the organizational gap was that
teachers had not received sufficient/ongoing professional development for support in Project
Period, a key system of support, that Rogers et al. (2011) and Fallik et al.(2008) agreed are
important to supporting teacher development. Another assumed organizational cause was that
teachers did not engage in collaborative conversations that allowed them to share ideas and
provide collegial support. The last assumed organization cause was that the limited access to
technology became a barrier to the change being implemented (Hew & Brush, 2007).
Results for Organization
Interviews. Six high school Project Period teachers were interviewed individually to
ascertain information about the organization. The interview data was important to identify the
gaps in organizational support; however, it is important to note that the author/data collector was
also the academy coordinator. Some of the questions in the interview asked participants to
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

97
evaluate the sense of support and resources. Many of the resources and support systems are
accessed via the academy coordinator; therefore, responses may have biased undertones.
All interviewed participants discussed feeling a sense of support from their peers.
Teachers felt comfortable asking their colleagues for ideas and insight about the Project Period.
Teachers shared that they felt supported by the availability of the academy coordinator to meet
their Project Period needs and that they felt equipped to teach Project Period given the lesson
planning resources and curriculum overview available on Dropbox. The source of concern for
some of the teachers with regard to resources was the access to technology.
All six participants said that they would like access to additional resources to support
their implementation of Project Period. For five of the participants, additional resources were
specified as access to technology e.g. computers, laptops, and Internet. Many shared the
challenge that they experience gaining access to computers, laptops, or the computer lab. Two of
the teachers taught science electives and had a class set of laptops for their students. The other
teachers had to share access to a computer lab with the middle-school Project Period teachers.
Additionally, there was a once-a-month limit to how many times a teacher could sign up for the
library computers. Teacher A shared that students needed the access to technology in order to
conduct their research (Teacher A, personal communication, December 12, 2012).
Teacher D was satisfied with the level of access to computers and technology and would
have liked additional professional development to learn how to use the technology that is already
available. All six teachers expressed confidence with current technology and openness to
professional development for new/current technologies and programs.
The interviews revealed that four out of the six participants had not received sufficient
and formalized training on the Project Period, 21st Century learning, and the Project Period.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

98
Sykes (1996) stressed the importance of providing teachers with ongoing professional
development. Interview responses from questions 16, 17, and 18 helped to build understanding
around t he or ga niz a ti on’s pr of e ssi ona l dev e lopm e nt t o support program implementation.
Questions 16 and 17 discuss professional development and training for the 21st Century skills,
PBL, and the Project Period. The teachers at Health Sciences Academy have received varied
amounts of training related to 21st Century skills, PBL, or Project Period.
Teacher E shared that the teachers who have been at Health Sciences Academy for five
years or more have received approximately 20 hours of professional development; teachers who
have been at Health Sciences Academy for three years or more might have participated in a two-
day professional development workshop (Teacher E, personal communication, December 17,
2012). Four teachers who have been at Health Sciences Academy two years or less (two of
whom are new to the school this 2012-2013 academic year) have received zero to minimal
training. Teacher E shared that since the original week-long training five years ago, there has not
been an in-depth review workshop (Teacher E, personal communication, December 17, 2012).
Teacher E did not believe that other teachers quite grasped the essence of Project Period. When
asked if Teacher E would be interested in attending professional development, Teacher E
re sponde d b y sa y in g , “ Y e a h, c a n we tak e our w ho le sta ff ? ” All six of the Project Period teachers
responded warmly to the idea of receiving additional professional development, depending upon
the time, duration, and the practicality and utility of the professional development.
When asked about preparedness to teach 21st Century skills and the Project Period,
novice participant responses were more task-oriented than mastery-oriented. Teachers were then
asked Question 18, regarding the time allotted for teacher collaboration. All six of the teachers
had at some point collaborated informally with a colleague; however, purposeful, in-depth
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

99
collaboration about the Project Period was said not to habitually occur. Collaboration was a part
of the teaching culture at Health Sciences Academy, but as Teacher A explained, although it
would be a great idea to collaborate about Project Period, it has not been a priority; content area
collaboration takes precedence over Project Period (Teacher A, personal communication,
December 12, 2012). Teacher B mentioned having received limited training in 21st Century
skills and Project Based Learning. Teacher B shared,
[W]e had a seminar on just Project Period and I know we have the information on the
Blackboard, so that I c a n se e wha t’s c omi ng up n e x t and w ha t, wha t l e ssons a re g o ing to
be coming up so that I can figure out how to start planning for it ahead of time. I t ’s not
always the most or the best way, just because o f, y ou’r e plannin g f o r other classes as
well, and e spe c iall y i f y o u’ re te a c hin g more than one subj e c t t ha t y ou ha ve to have a lesson plan for each subject, and then to try to plan for Project Period, then that’s where it
gets hard but, i t’s ther e , t he tra ini ng is t he re , the re sourc e s a re ther e , it ’s just a matter of
being able to do it ahead of time. (Teacher B, personal communication, December 14,
2012).
Te a c h e r B ’s inter vie w revealed that although teachers had resources to support lesson
planning for the Project Period, the challenge was finding time to plan for Project Period.
Structured teacher collaboration is important to build a sense of partnership and relatedness, but
also to discuss best practices, and pedagogy. Building in a system that facilitates ongoing
teacher collaboration can help teachers engage in problem-solving conversations and could foster
mentorship between newer and more experienced teachers. These collaborative conversations
are an important aspect of organizational support and will lead to successful program
implementation (Fallik et al., 2008).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

100
Observations. Ea c h of t he six tea c he r’ s P roje c t P e riod c lasse s w a s obser v e d onc e f o r
approximately 70 minutes. The observations were conducted on Fridays, the day of the week
when Project Period is scheduled. Only one class was observed per week. Alarming data during
the classroom observations was the low average percentage of competencies addressed in each of
the Project Period classes observed. The percentage data of competencies addressed during the
classroom observations that were presented in the knowledge and skills section. Only 50% of
the effective communicators and collaborative workers competencies were addressed in the
observed lessons; 10% of the critical thinking competencies were addressed in the observed
lessons; and 13% of the productive learners competencies were addressed in the observed
lessons. The percentages were calculated by dividing the number of observed competencies by
the number of competencies per category. Then, the percentage of all six teachers was averaged
to determine the percentage of skills observed in the Project Period classroom observation.
Although teachers had values that aligned with Project Period, many did not have the knowledge,
skills, or experience to effectively plan the Project Period lesson. Teachers had difficulty
shifting from theory to practice, knowing what PBL was in theory and putting it into action in the
classroom. According to Fallik et al. (2008), systems that provide time for teachers to lesson
plan, collaborate, and opportunity to practice pedagogical concepts together are important for
building systems of support that will help the program implementation
Document analysis. Only one teacher submitted a lesson plan for document analysis.
Using the classroom observation checklist to guide the observation, the data indicated a minimal
presence of the skills, competencies, and rigor necessary to teach PBL in the Project Period.
This might be due to the teach e r’ s lac k o f e x pe rie nc e plannin g a nd te a c hin g a P B L c lass . A
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

101
structured collaboration time and ongoing professional development could facilitate
conversations between veteran and novice teachers.
Summary of the Organization Data
The support provided by the organization is crucial to successful program
implementation. Successful program implementation is a bi-product of collaborative
conversations and ongoing professional development (Fallik et al., 2008). According to Hew &
Brush (2007), program implementation is successful when teachers have the appropriate
resources, materials, and access to technology. Health Sciences Academy is a growing academy
adding the 12th grade for the 2013-2014 school year. The growth of the academy has increased
the demand for resources. The school addressed some of its resource needs with the addition of
new teaching staff members. Increased staff members require an increase in materials. With the
growth of the teaching staff, the organizational system must be able to meet the needs of all staff
members who teach the Project Period. This includes a formalized professional development
system or process of on-boarding and acclimating teachers to the PBL culture. The gaps in the
organizational support system could be affecting the implementation of the Project Period.
Validated Causes of the Gap in the Organization
The qualitative data collected were helpful in identifying gaps in the organization. The
assumed validated causes were:
 Lack of systematic training and professional development on 21st Century skills, PBL,
and Project Period to refresh teachers on a regular basis and to orient new teachers into
PBL.
 Lack of structured time for ongoing teacher collaboration and lesson planning for Project
Period.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

102
 Lack of access to technology resources to support the Project Period curriculum.
Figure 8 is a graphic representation of the triangulation of data from the document
analysis, classroom observations, and teacher interviews that lead to the validation of the causes
for the organization gap.

Figure 8: Graphic Representation of Data Triangulation for Organization

These gaps could be adversely affecting the implementation of the Project Period and
limiting the student achievement at Health Sciences Academy. Teachers at Health Sciences
Academy were interested in receiving professional development. Teachers at Health Sciences
Academy cared about their students and were willing to try different strategies, offer additional
time and resources to support student learning. Teachers at Health Sciences Academy have also
reflected upon their Project Period experience, sharing ideas for possible improvements to the
system. Solutions to the gaps in the organizational culture are discussed in Chapter 5.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

103
Chapter 5
Solutions and Implementation
The purpose of this case study was to examine the transformation of a middle school to
an Academy of Health Sciences by (a) identifying the underlying skills required in order for
students to achieve Health Science A c a de m y ’s ES L R /21st C e ntur y out c omes, ( b) de te rmin ing
the degree to which these skills are being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identifying
appropriate assessments to measure student achievement of these skills, and (d) determining the
degree to which students are achieving these skills. This study examined the challenges in
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organization that teachers encountered when providing
Health Sciences Academy students with the instruction in the ESLR/21st Century Skills
outcomes during the Project Period class.
In Chapter 4, results of validation were that specific causes determined that there are
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organization gaps that support teacher implementation of
Project Period at Health Sciences Academy. In this Chapter 5, the recommended solutions for
these validated causes will be discussed. Thus, this chapter answers the second study question:
What are potential solutions to address the gaps in faculty knowledge, skills, motivation, and
or ga niz a ti ona l culture to ac hieve th e or g a niz a ti on’ s g oa l of su c c e ssful a c hie ve ment of c ombi ne d
aggregate 21st Century skills and ESLRs by Health Sciences Academy students?
Knowledge and Skills Solutions
The data collected in Chapter 4 validated the causes for the gap in teacher knowledge and
skills that are affecting Project Period implementation. The proposed solutions for these
knowledge and skills are discussed in the next section.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

104
Factual knowledge: Lack of knowledge of student learning outcomes from the
aggregate 21st Century/PBL list. The first validated cause for the teacher knowledge and skills
gap is the lack of knowledge around the expected student learning outcomes delineated on the
aggregate 21st Century skills and project based learning list. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001)
described factual knowledge as knowledge of specific information and details. Te a c h e rs’ la c k of
awareness of the aggregate 21st Century skills/ESLRs list and its outcomes represents a factual
knowledge gap. Fallik et al. (2008) asserted that poor program implementation is caused in part
by the te a c h e r’ s la c k of t e a c h e r kno wle d ge a nd sk il ls . Teachers cannot achieve student
achievement goals if they do not know the skills that require targeted teaching. A study by
Goodnough and Cashion (2006) used Collaborative Inquiry (CI) to engage and monitor a high
sc hool bi olog y tea c he r ’s tra nsfor mation fr om us in g tra dit ional pe d a g o g y to P B L . Goodnough
and Cashion (2006) described seven stages of the implementation process: (a) Unawareness;
(b) Informational; (c) Personal; (d) Management; (e) Consequence; (f) Collaboration;
(g) Refocusing. In the initial unawareness stage, the individual does not implement the
innovation because the user is unaware of the innovation (Goodnough & Cashion, 2006).
Addressing this lack of knowledge would allow the user to develop in his/her journey towards
program implementation; therefore, according to Goodnough and Cashion the second stage of
implementation is the Informational stage, providing the user with the information and
background about the innovation.
The school of dentistry at the University of Southern California (USC) began
implementing curriculum reform in 2003. Dalrymple, Wuenschell, and Shuler (2006) conducted
a study at the University of Southern California (USC) School of Dentistry examining the faculty
development program that was instituted in order to shift the pedagogical practices to PBL. The
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

105
faculty development program supported the curriculum reform at the school of dentistry; it was
designed to meet training needs for PBL certification. The faculty development at USC began
by defining the core skills that would be essential to understand and practice in PBL. The PBL
development courses began by sharing clear-learning objectives with participants in order to
clarify the workshop goals (Dalrymple et al., 2006). The outcome of the faculty PBL
development at USC was successful. Based on this empirical data, the aggregate list of 21st
Century skills and expected student outcomes should to be shared with the teaching staff at
Health Sciences Academy. Teachers need to know expected student learning outcomes
explicitly in order to select the core skills they must focus on when teaching the Project Period.
The recommendation for this knowledge and skills gap is to provide teachers information and an
opportunity to discuss PBL-related concerns. Any information would be available through a
common server storage, e.g., Blackboard, Dropbox.
Conceptual knowledge: Lack of knowledge of planning and implementing teaching
strategies that support 21st Century learning and PBL. The teacher interviews revealed that
motivation exists among teachers to teach 21st Century skills and PBL in the Project Period;
however, during the classroom observations, a variance in the quality of instruction during
Project Period and the extent to which teachers addressed expected student-learning outcomes
became apparent. The lessons observed in the classroom did not have what Anderson and
Krathwohl (2001) described as concept alignment. Concept alignment is the correspondence
between the objective, the instruction, and the assessment. Partly due to the fact that teachers
were unfamiliar with the aggregate 21st Century/ESLRs outcomes list; the lesson delivery
revealed that the lesson planning did not address the student learning objectives. Anderson and
Krathwohl stated that even the best instruction will not effectively increase student achievement
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

106
if they are not aligned with the objectives and assessments. The tea c h e r’ s p ra c ti c e for P B L lesson plan delivery is a habit that can be developed. To address this knowledge and skills gap,
teachers will need professional development on PBL. Fallik et al. asserted that teachers need
time to plan, organize, and enact PBL (2008). Murray and Savin-Baden ’s (2000) study shared
the success of using a training program to transition teachers at the Medical University and
University of Nursing in the United Kingdom from implementing a traditional program to a PBL
program. In their study, Murray and Savin-Baden asserted the importance of reviewing skills
that are critical to this PBL. Throughout the training program, participants engaged in training
workshops that taught the principles of PBL, engaged in collaborative conversations expressing
concerns that were related to the implementation of PBL, opportunities to develop PBL lesson
plans, implement lessons, and receive feedback about the PBL lessons, and engage in dialogue
about challenges and successes of the lessons (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000). Like the
participants in Murray and Savin- B a d e n’ s st ud y , Health Sciences Academy teachers have the
willingness to teach PBL; however, additional opportunities and training must be provided to
support teachers who have limited experience and exposure to teaching PBL. Hitchcock and
Mylona (2009) suggested that faculty come together in tutorials, weekly meetings where
program participants can discuss upcoming cases and provide feedback. The recommendation
for this knowledge and skills gap is to provide ongoing training and opportunities to collaborate
and dialogue.
Procedural knowledge: Lack of knowledge of how to shift from theory to practice
because teachers have limited experience with PBL. Wells, Warelow, and Jackson (2009)
described the t e a c h e r’ s r ole in a PBL classroom as a student-centered discussion facilitator rather
than the traditional teacher-centered lecturer. The shift from traditional lecturer to student-
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

107
centered discussion facilitator can be difficult. When teachers understand the concept of PBL,
but cannot implement it, their challenge is in the procedural knowledge, knowing how to apply
theoretical concepts, moving from theory to practice. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) defined
procedural knowledge as the sequence of steps and decisions that must be made in order to
achieve the problem or learning objective. For this type of learning gap, teachers need to engage
in constructivist learning, engaging in activities that support the construction of meaning
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Mayer (2011) provided examples of constructivist/meaningful
learning that engages the learner in activities that take the learner through the step-by-step
process. The activities build upon what the learner already knows, and allows the learner to
build the new knowledge from existing knowledge. According to Fallik et al. (2008), additional
c oll a bora ti on a mon g tea c he rs must oc c ur in ord e r to sup port the te a c he r’ s p rof icie nc y with
teaching PBL. The study by Olmesdahl and Manning (1999) shared research findings about
their PBL facilitator-training program. This training program led small groups through the
pr oc e ss of shifti n g their p e da g o g ica l pr a c ti c e f rom “ tea c h e r” to “ fa c il it a tor .” Olmesdahl and
Mann ing ’s stud y f ound t ha t t he “ four 3 -hour facilitator skills training workshops which preceded
the implementation of a 4- we e k P B L modul e ” (p. 753) was able to address most of the needs of a
PBL pedagogical transformation. This training resulted in an increased knowledge, value, and
enthusiasm to teach PBL; however Olmesdahl and Manning reported that facilitators would have
liked to have had more in put i n modul e planning a nd that a t t he e nd of the modul e , “ will ing ne ss
to empower the student with the excitement of self-directed learning and independence of
thoug ht had dimi nished” (p. 755). The implication of this study is that opportunities to practice
shifti ng f rom “ t e a c h e r” t o “ fa c il it a tor” a r e im porta nt l e a rnin g e x pe rie nc e s, but t he leng th and
content of the training can be collaboratively constructed and ongoing. During Murray and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

108
Savin-Baden ’s (2000) study in the United Kingdom, participants participated in training where
they had to learn to create and deliver PBL lessons. Among the challenges was to know how to
adjust their approach in order to take on the role as facilitator rather than lecturer. According to
Murray and Savin-Baden a key aspect of the new PBL teacher training program was providing
teachers the opportunity to role play, discuss, and collaboratively problem-solve challenges they
faced implementing the new practice. In Goodno u g h a nd C a shion ’s ( 2006) stud y of te a c he r
development to implement PBL, the authors described levels of innovation usage. This study
guided the re a d e r thr ou gh the stud y ’s obse rva ti on of a tea c he r ’s g row th an d de ve lopm e nt i n
PBL. In her journey, Diedre progressed along the levels of usage. Relative to the lack of
procedural knowledge, shifting from the role of lecturer to facilitator is the Mechanical Use
level, which is mastering basic functions of the innovation, and the Routine level, the pattern of
usage. Goodnough and Cashion (2006) used the Collaborative Inquiry (CI) model to engage a
teacher in her PBL teacher development program. Goodnough and Cashion (2006) described CI
as a reflective model. In this study, Diedre played an active role in collaboratively planning
lessons with the researchers, engaging in reflections, and feedback. Di e dr e ’s te a c h e r
development was successful in teaching her the foundations of PBL, guiding and improving her
implementation of PBL, and engaging students in PBL activities (Goodnough & Cashion, 2006).
Based on the research presented, the recommendation to support this procedural knowledge gap
is to build in opportunities for teachers to practice shifting their pedagogy to a more student-
centered lecturer, engage in reflective models like CI where observations, feedback, and
reflective conversations are facilitated frequently.
Metacognitive knowledge: Lack of self-awareness of pedagogical stance/teaching
style. Murray and Savin-Baden (2000) defined p e da g o g ica l st a n c e a s th e tea c h e r’ s co g nit ion of
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

109
his/her teaching approach. Teacher pedagogical stance would fall into the category of
metacognitive knowledge based on And e rson a nd Kr a thwohl’s (2001) knowledge dimensions
because it required teachers to reflect and evaluate personal strengths and weaknesses.
Murray and Savin- B a de n ’s ( 2000) stud y conducted in the United Kingdom engaged
educators in training workshops to shift from the traditional authority-dependency epistemology
to PBL. Among many important findings that came out of this study, Murray and Savin-Baden
shared the importance of pedagogical stance. This self-awareness helps to benchmark the
starting point for teacher performance relative to the or g a niz a ti on’s g o a l . Dur ing th e pro g r a m’s
evaluation focus group, participants were interviewed and given questionnaires. A key finding
from the evaluation was the importance of reflection and dialogue and its effect on building
pedagogical stance (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000). The process of dialoguing with others
allowed participants to reflect on personal and pedagogical issues, learn with and through the
experience of others. Building pedagogical stance helped to quantify individual performance
against their PBL pedagogical goal, therefore identifying the areas that needed further
development (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000). According to Murray and Savin-Baden,
participants recognized the challenge of self-management and shifting to PBL and expressed
their value of the dialogical and reflective process.
Pedagogical stance is the metacognitive awareness that identifies a tea c h e r ’s c ur r e nt
performance and the alignment of their pedagogy towards the PBL learning objectives. Based
on the type of performance gap, the proposed solution for this knowledge and skills gap is to
conduct a training course using content captured through the conduct of the cognitive task
analysis (CTA, Clark & Estes, 2008). CTA-based training is an approach that uses observations,
interviews, and expert advice to share information (Clark & Estes, 2008). The expert would
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

110
provide information by sharing an explicit account of his/her process and sharing information
about past errors, common errors, and how to resolve those problems. The expert would also
engage teachers in opportunities to practice their lesson plans, observe lesson plan
implementation, provide feedback, provide opportunities for teachers to reflect, and engage in
dialogue about their questions, concerns, failures, and successes. To promote reflection of
growth in teacher practices, teachers would be encouraged to build and maintain a portfolio of
their work.
Motivation Solutions
Clark and Estes (2008) described motivation as a factor that influences a p e rson’ s a c ti ve choice, persistence, and mental effort. Mot ivatio n “ ini ti a tes a nd maintains g oa l di r e c ted
be ha vior” (Ma y e r, 201 1, p . 39). According to Ghaith and Yaghi (1997), th e tea c h e r’ s s e lf -
efficacy affects a n innov a ti on’s implementation. The extent of effort towards program
implementation depends on mot ivational f a c tors that a re b a se d on the te a c he r’ s value o f the strategy and how successful he/she expects to be (Abrami, et al, 2010). If the teacher does not
value an innovation, does not see himself/herself as succeeding at the task, and does not perceive
the cost and effort as advantageous, then the active choice, effort, and persistence towards the
goal is affected. Based on the validated causes for the motivation gap, the proposed solutions are
discussed in the next section.
Lack of teacher efficacy: T e ac h e r ’s belief t h at h e /sh e c an m o tivat e o r su stain motivation among challenging/struggling learners. Individual motivation is influenced by
self-efficacy or the extent to which we believe that we can be effective (Clark & Estes, 2008).
According to Wigfield and Eccles (2000), teacher beliefs about their own ability influence
performance, effort, and persistence towards a task/innovation. Bandura (2007) asserted that
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

111
self-efficacy influences the choice of activities, and expectancy of success determines the level
of sustained effort in the face of challenges; what teachers believe about themselves will
influence their beliefs about what they are capable of doing with regard to an innovation.
According to Clark and Estes (2008), when individuals do not believe they can be successful,
they will switch to less important tasks.
Swackhamer, Koellner, Basile, and Kimbrough (2009) asserted that teachers with higher
levels of efficacy have characteristics that influence their work ethic and pedagogical practice
that positively impact student achievement. In their study, Swackhamer et al. targeted middle
school teachers in seven Denver-area schools. The purpose of the study was to increase teacher
efficacy by increasing teacher math and science content knowledge. This was done through
content courses and providing ongoing support through collaborative conversations and an
instructor/expert to whom questions can be directed. The findings from this study revealed that
an increase in knowledge built the teachers ’ self-efficacy and belief that they could teach diverse
students and needs (Swackhamer, et al., 2009).
The data collected validated the first motivation cause at Health Sciences Academy, that
teachers sometimes find it challenging to motivate students with low motivation. The tea c he r’ s
expectations of students and the resulting activities and lessons planned are influenced by the
tea c he r’ s pe rc e pti on of hi s or he r a bil it y to m oti va t e strugg li n g le a rne rs ( Ne ve s de J e sus & L e ns,
2005). B a s e d on the la c k of te a c h e rs’ b e li e fs tha t t he y c a n mot ivate stru gg li ng le a rne rs, a
proposed solution is for teachers to engage in activities that increase individual and team
confidence (Clark & Estes, 2008). The study by Swackhamer et al (2009) demonstrated that
teacher efficacy can be built by building knowledge. The recommendation is to build knowledge
through PBL courses and to provide a system of ongoing support – a way to provide and receive
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

112
feedback to give teachers an opportunity to have collaborative conversations and dialogue with
each other on a regular basis (Clark & Estes, 2008). These activities promote individual and
team growth. These growth areas support competence and relatedness, two factors that Pintrich
(2003) described as essential to motivation.
L ac k of t e ac h e r ’s value for planning for Project Period: Teachers know how to
lesson plan; however, teachers find it difficult to prioritize planning for Project Period
when they also have to plan for other classes they teach. According to Wigfield and Eccles
(2000), the perceived utility and value of an activity determines the persistence, effort, and
quality of work that is invested by an individual. Ambrose (2010) referred to the subjective
value of an activity as the key feature that influences a n indi vidual’ s mot ivation t o pur sue
something.
Coenders, Terlouw, and Dijkstra (2010 asserted that when an innovation is not aligned
with t e a c he rs ’ ide a s a bou t conte nt and w he n mat e r ials did not matc h the te a c he rs’ p e rspe c ti ve ,
the innovation is not fully implemented. Coenders et al. (2010) presented a study that examined
the impac t of te a c he rs’ values and beliefs on their transition to a new chemistry curriculum. In
this study, the researchers began by asking teachers their opinion about the curriculum and then
asked them to define their ideal curriculum. The study interviewed the teachers about their ideas
on the curriculum reform. This study found that teachers had an idea of what they perceived
their roles were in the reform, and that most teachers wanted to support the innovation, but
would like more flexibility in the curriculum reform so that teachers can include their
preferences (Coenders et al., 2010). This study also found that the participating teachers found it
difficult to find time to develop new learning materials given their full teaching load (Coenders
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

113
et al., 2010). Coenders et al. asserted that teacher values and beliefs act as a filter, sieving the
knowledge that is retained or rejected.
Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) shared Guske y ’ s mod e l of the proc e ss fo r te a c h e r
change. Whereas other professional development models asserted that the in-service changes
tea c he rs’ knowledge and beliefs that then c h a n g e t he tea c h e rs’ c lassro om pr a c ti c e s and im pacts
student a c hieve ment, Gu ske y ’ s mod e l asse rt ed that the staff development influences the
classroom practice, thus impacting stu de nt l e a rnin g outcome s, a nd ove r tim e , c ha n ge s tea c h e rs’ beliefs and attitudes. Park and Ertmer (2008 ) studied the im pa c t of P B L on tea c he rs’ be li e fs
regarding the use of technology. This study engaged teachers in professional development,
lesson planning, ongoing collaboration, and reflections about teaching practices for two hours
once a week during the first eight weeks of the semester (Park & Ertmer, 2008). Park and
Ertmer used pre and post lesson plans and surveys to measure teachers ’ attitudes and classroom
practices. The results revealed that professional development works to change the teaching
practices, attitudes, and values of in-service teachers.
Teachers at Health Sciences Academy recognize the importance of lesson planning;
however, taking into consideration the needs of other classes being taught, teachers elected to
lesson plan for the other courses instead. Clark and Estes (2008) described utility value as the
motivation to do something because of the benefits that come when the task is completed. The
data collected suggests that teachers do not perceive value in lesson planning. A proposed
solution to address the motivation gap among teachers not to plan lessons for the Project Period
is to engage teachers in conversations that describe the benefits of lesson planning (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Ambrose (2010) suggested strategies that could build the perceived value of a task.
B a se d on Ambr ose’ s st r a teg ies, o ther proposed solutions include group lesson planning,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

114
engaging teachers in authentic activities that allow them to plan for the Project Period, non-
evaluative conversations where teachers give each other targeted feedback, and an opportunity to
reflect.
Organization Solutions
Clark and Estes (2008) stressed the importance of efficient and effective organizational
work processes and material resources in organizational gaps. According to Clark and Estes the
work process is the link between people, materials, and equipment that produce the desired
outcomes. The misalignment of people, materials, and equipment are what lead to failure (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Gaps within the organization must be addressed by examining the relationship
and workings between the people, materials, and the equipment. Based on the validated causes
for the organization gap, the proposed solutions are discussed in the next section.
Lack of systematic training and professional development on 21st Century skills,
PBL, and Project Period to refresh teachers on a regular basis and to orient new teachers
into PBL. Clark and Estes (2008) shared discouraging outcomes of efforts to downsize and
reengineer companies using the process called Total Quality Management (TQM): post TQM,
“two-thirds of the projects were abandoned due to a perceived lack of results ” and “only nine
percent of companies reported an increase in quality ,” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 116). The lesson
gleaned from the research shared by Clark and Estes is that change must be thoughtful and
systematic. Clark and Estes described features of effective organizational change. Clarke and
Hollingsworth (2002) combined empirical data from three studies in Melbourne to elaborate a
teacher model for professional development in PBL. A key finding was the importance of the
changed environment; within the organization, opportunities to participate in professional
development and systems of support via opportunities to engage in collaboration about PBL, and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

115
encouragement from leadership about PBL were available on an ongoing basis (Clarke &
Hollingsworth, 2002). Dalrymple et al. (2006) echoed the sentiment that support and
encouragement from department directors and the dean created a system of support that
promoted the participation in PBL professional development.
The data collected at Health Sciences Academy validate the organization ’s cause that
there is a lack of systematic training and professional development to support teacher
implementation of the Project Period. In order to provide ongoing support for teachers at Health
Sciences Academy to implement the Project Period and to support and acclimate new teachers to
the Project Period and PBL pedagogy, teachers must be engaged in ongoing collaboration, have
access to professional development materials, and have opportunities to attend professional
development. Teachers must plan, participate, and reflect upon activities to support the program
implementation of the Project Period. Teachers must engage in collaborative conversations
about the Project Period on a regular basis, and all professional development materials should be
organized and made available through a common storage e.g., Blackboard or Dropbox.
Lack of structured time for ongoing teacher collaboration and lesson planning for
Project Period. The classroom observations during the data collection showed variance among
teachers in the way that they planned for and taught the Project Period. Based on the data
collected, a validated cause of the organization gap is that teachers do not have ongoing
structured time for teacher collaboration and lesson planning. Clark and Estes (2008) discussed
the importance of aligning processes and resources with the organizational goal. The
or ga niz a ti on mus t “pr ovide a de qu a te know led ge , skil ls, and mot ivational s uppor t for e ve r y o ne ” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p 118). Avargil, Herscovitz, Dori (2012) stated, “ Te a c he rs, w ho
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

116
undermine a reform, refuse to be part of it, claim that shortage of time and resources are
re stricting fa c tors whic h a dve rse l y a ff e c t t he ir de c isi on to be a pa rt of the r e for m” ( p . 210).
The success of a change initiative and its sustainability depends on the systems of support
that have been put in place within the organization. Murtaza (2010) asserted that the systems
that are in place at a school play a crucial role when implementing and sustaining an innovation.
According to Murtaza, program success and sustainability entails building the capacity of
teachers to develop their leadership, increase responsibility, and promote ongoing professional
development.
Ketelhut and Schifter (2011) studied teacher implementation of game-based learning.
During seven years of research of over 100 teachers in Philadelphia, Ketelhut and Schifter found
that “ ti me to pr a c ti c e , to de ve lop i nter e st and kno wle dge , to see the technology used in another
c lassro om wit h a nother t e a c h e r, to e va lu a te use ful ne ss for one ’s ow n c lassr oom and students, to
try new skills with those students ” a re im porta nt f a c tors that support the su c c e ssful
implementation of an innovation (p. 540). Conversely, Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) found
that without ongoing local support, teachers who attended PBL training workshops but did not
collaborate with others about the ideas presented in the course resulted in little or no student
achievement gains. Staff development is something that should be personalized based on the
needs identified from a needs assessment (Murtaza, 2010). Murtaza declared that “ c h a n g e is a
slow proc e ss” a nd in ord e r f or it to occ u r a nd fo r t he de sire d r e sult s to b e c o me sustaina ble, the n
there must be a high degree of persistence applied (p. 221).
Based on the data collected and the findings from Ketelhut and Schi fte r ’s (2011)
research, a persistent system of support must be implemented at Health Sciences Academy.
Hitchcock and Mylona (2009) identified time for lesson planning and tutoring (shifting from
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

117
lecturer to facilitator) as crucial to the implementation of Project Period. This system of support
for the teachers at Health Sciences Academy would include ongoing teacher collaboration and
lesson planning, professional development, opportunities for teachers to observe PBL in other
classrooms, and opportunities to try out new skills and engage in reflective conversations that
provide mutually constructive feedback.
Lack of access to technology resources to support the Project Period curriculum.
Clark and Estes (2008) recognized the importance of access to material resources. Av a r g il ’s
(2012) article shared that “ Te a c he rs, w ho u nde rmi ne a r e for m, r e fuse to be pa rt of it , c laim t ha t
shortage of time and resources are restricting factors which adversely affect their decision to be a
pa rt of the r e for m” (p . 210). Without adequate access to supplies, materials, and equipment,
a nother ba rr ier is l a id t o i mpede the a c hieve ment o f the or g a niz a ti on’s g oa ls . Goodnough and
C a shion ’s ( 2006) stud y o n a hig h s c hool t e a c h e r’ s P B L t ra nsfor m a ti on noted tha t, “most of the resources (readings, guest speaker, videos) to support the PBL we re prov ide d” (p. 286). This
information is vital to understanding the impact access to resources and support systems play on
a pro g ra m’s im pleme nt a ti on a nd sust a inabili t y . The data collected indicated that the teachers at
Health Sciences Academy would like additional access to technology resources to support the
Project Period. Based on this validated cause for the organization gap, the recommendation is
for site support to communicate about existing technology inventory or acquire additional
resources for the improvement of the current system so that all teachers can provide students
access to technology. Upper management/ administrators must continually communicate the
progress, goals, and expectations (Clark & Estes, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008) described a
process called value streams, an analysis to understand the components within the organization,
“ how the y int e ra c t, and wha t proc e ss e s the y im pleme nt” a nd “ identifie s the processes that are the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

118
most influe nti a l i n a c hieving busi ne ss g oa ls” ( p. 105). A process like this would engage
stakeholders in the materials and objectives calibration conversation, bringing about a better
understanding of the process and how to access existing technology resources or acquire
additional technology resources and support.
Implementation
Using the Gap Analysis Framework, this study identified knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organization gaps in order to quantify the difference between Health Sciences
Ac a de m y ’s c ur r e nt per fo rma nc e a nd the or ga niz a ti on’s g oa ls (Cl a rk & Est e s, 2008) . Data
collection validated the assumed causes and solutions for the performance gaps were proposed.
This section describes how the solutions will be implemented at Health Sciences Academy.
Health Sciences Academy will integrate the proposed solutions by providing professional
development, motivational support, and by coordinating the proposed solutions with the district
and site professional development calendar so t ha t t he y c a n be buil t i nto t he or g a niz a ti on’s
structure. The proposed solutions will be scaffold into specific tasks that will be introduced and
implemented incrementally. Table 2 summarizes the causes, solutions, and implementation of
solutions proposed to address the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organization gaps.
Table 3 summ a riz e s the or ga niz a ti on’s g oa l, whi c h de li ne a tes c a sc a din g g o a ls t ha t i nc lude the stakeholders. Table 4 summarizes the performance goal, time frame, and measurement for
evaluation of the implementation of the proposed solutions. The next chapter, Chapter 6, will
discuss the evaluation process for our proposed solutions, a system to measure if the proposed
solutions are improving the system and achieving the desired outcomes.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

119
Knowledge and Skills

Information. In order to address the lack of knowledge about the Project Period
student’s expected learning outcomes, Clark and Estes ’ f ra m e wor k (2008) suggested providing
information to establish clear objectives and reduce uncertainty about what the goal is and how
to achieve a goal. P roviding infor mation i nc r e a s e s knowle dge a nd foc uses pe ople’ s atte nti on on
the objective (Clark & Estes, 2008). Furthermore, sharing specific objectives will positively
im pa c t t he tea c h e r’ s le a r ning a nd e ve ntual a ppli c a ti on of c onc e pts (C la rk & Estes, 2008) .
Teachers at Health Sciences Academy will be given a copy of the aggregate 21st Century Skills/
ESLR student outcomes list for review during a staff development meeting. The copy of the
aggregate 21st Century Skills/ ESLR student outcomes list will also be stored in Dropbox and on
Blackboard so that it is accessible to all staff members. During a staff meeting, staff members
will be engaged in conversation about the list. Teachers will be asked to highlight vague student
outcomes in order to identify student outcomes that they do not know or understand. The student
outcomes that the teachers highlight/identify will be addressed/taught as the focus objective for
the subsequent staff meeting.
Ongoing training. In order to address the lack of knowledge of planning and
implementation of teaching strategies that support PBL, teachers will engage in professional
development. Tr a ini n g i s the “ how to” and the “ p ra c ti c e a nd c o rr e c ti ve f e e dba c k” that will provide teachers the support that will help them achieve their goal (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 58).
During the training workshops, videos, PowerPoints, and other visuals will be used to appeal to
both visual and auditory senses – a c c or din g to P a ivi o’ s (YEAR) dual code theory, people will
likely learn more when the information is represented in two codes (Mayer, 2011). Staff
members will participate in a training workshop that explicitly states the purpose and objective
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

120
of the workshop (Clark & Estes, 2008). Teachers will create notes from the training, reflect, and
then engage in collaborative dialogue with colleagues about their understanding of the concepts
and principles of PBL in order to build meaning, resulting in generative learning (Mayer, 2011).
Cognitive task analysis (CTA). In order to address the lack of knowledge of how to
shift Project Period lessons from theory to practice, teachers will engage in professional
development led by a guest speaker. The professional development guest facilitator would be an
expert in PBL whose objective is to discuss successes, trouble shoot, and provide examples of
exemplars of PBL lesson implementation. Clark and Estes (2008) described cognitive Task
Analysis (CTA) as an approach to extract the knowledge and expertise of field experts through
observation, interviews, and advice. This process allows trainees to access advice about success
and failures that the experts experienced. Videos of the interview, observations, and exemplars
will be posted on Blackboard or Dropbox and accessible to teachers as resources.
Sequenced training. According to Clark and Estes (2008), effective training must be
segmented and sequenced as performed on the job in order to simulate the process, eventually
building automaticity. The concepts in the workshop would be sequenced to follow the order of
the skill being addressed, e.g., lesson planning, practice of lesson delivery, feedback, and lesson
adjustments. Like any skill, mastery will occur after ample practice.
Collaborative planning and feedback. According to Bubb and Earley (2009), a
tea c he r de ve lopm e nt p ro g r a m t ha t i nvolves “ disc ussi ng , c oa c hin g , mentor ing , obse rvin g a nd
developing othe rs is hi g h l y e f fe c ti ve ” ( p . 31). Teachers will engage in ongoing collaborative
lesson planning, lesson plan delivery, lesson observations and feedback, and reflective dialogue
similar to the Collaborative Inquiry (CI) Process described by Goodnough and Cashion (2006).
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

121
Increase awareness of pedagogical stance. Teachers will engage in ongoing and
frequent reflective dialogue about their planning, implementation, and lesson refinement process.
These conversations help to build awareness about the teachers ’ pe rf or m a nc e a s it r e late s to t he goal (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000; Goodnough & Cashion, 2006). To assist with the
monitoring of teacher development, teachers will build and maintain a professional portfolio.
The evidence of lesson plans, teachers feedback, teacher reflection, and lesson refinement will be
kept in the portfolio. According to Murtaza (2010), portfolios are not only evidence of the
professional learning –they are a factor that contributes towards enhancing teacher commitment
and motivation.
Motivation
Build individual and team confidence. Park and Ertmer ’s (2008) study proved that
increased knowledge through professional development positively affects teacher efficacy. In
order for teachers to feel a sense of success, they must first understand the objective and be given
access to information and tools that support the objective. The tools and support for the training
modules are the opportunities to dialogue and collaborate with colleagues to problem-solve and
build a sense of relatedness (Abrami, Poulsen & Chambers, 2010). The collaborative lesson
planning and problem solving includes practice lesson plan delivery, feedback, and reflection
(Murtaza, 2010).
Increase value for lesson planning for Project Period. In a study that examined the
im pa c t of te a c h e rs’ b e li e f s on t ra nsit ioni ng to a ne w c ur ric ulum , Coende rs, Te rlouw a nd Dijks tra (2010) found that teachers felt there was insufficient time in the current school practice to
develop materials, given their full load of teaching. Therefore, time must be given to teachers to
plan with each other and engage in collaborative dialogue. Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002)
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

122
pr e se nted G usk e y ’s mod e l of the proc e ss of tea c h e r c ha n ge , that throu g h p rof e ssi ona l
development and increase in knowledge, teachers were able to apply some changes in their
classroom practices, collaborative conversations encouraged reflection and lesson refinement
that yielded student achievement. The success and change in the student learning outcomes then
changed the tea c h e r’ s a tt it ude s and be li e fs a nd ov e ra ll va lue f or th e proc e ss (Clar ke & Hollingsworth, 2002).
Build relatedness and collaboration. The collaborative work and reflective dialogue
that teachers engage in become a system of support for teachers implementing an innovation.
Social support from peers builds relatedness (Pintrich, 2003). Ketelhut and Schifter (2011)
studied how to increase efficacy of adoption in a teaching innovation. The seven-year study
identified principles that support an innovation’s im pleme ntation . One of the principles, ongoing
social support system, is defined as “ongoing communication with the local social support
s y stem” a nd “ support f ro m t he princ ipal or other i nf luential sc hool s taf f” (Ketelhut & Schifter,
2011, p. 540). Dalrymple et al. (2006) also mentioned that encouragement from the dental
school administration, deans, and division chairs were important to the success of their PBL
program transition. Modeled after the Collaborative Inquiry (CI) process described by
Goodnough (2005), teachers will engage in collaborative conversations during or after each step
of the planning process: (a) all teachers work together to address a shared issue/concern
(b) lesson planning-reflection-action cycle; (c) review current research-based article and share
learnings/findings about the topic; (d) reflective/collaborative dialogue.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

123
Organization
Create a system of professional development that supports PBL for the Project
Period. Develop an ongoing PD workshop that uses teacher reflections and dialogue to select
the ongoing focus. Collect and archive all PD materials and activities. Post in Blackboard or
Dropbox. Organize PD materials and activities to create a new teacher PBL orientation protocol.
Staff should work collaboratively with site administrator to set aside time for PD workshops on
PBL. Suggest site support to organize or acquire additional resources/improvement of current
system so that all teachers provide students technology.
Time for ongoing professional development and teacher collaboration. In their
study, Hitchcock and Mylona (2009) emphasized the need for teachers to have time to lesson
plan, practice role-shifting from lecturer to facilitator, and discuss student outcomes. Murray and
Savin-Baden (2000) discussed the importance of providing PBL facilitators with support via
opportunities for discussion and to create learning materials. Health Sciences Academy
administrators will create and implement a PBL professional development curriculum that
incorporates ongoing opportunities for teacher collaboration.
Align resources via candid collaborative conversations and value streaming.
Teachers at Health Sciences Academy expressed a need for additional technology resources to
support their implementation of the Project Period. In order to systematically address this need,
value streaming –a process in which upper management engages in candid conversations about
the structure and needs of the program, implementation, and work –could align existing resources
or acquire additional resources if necessary (Clark & Estes, 2008). Resources for the Project
Period should be available and accessible to all Project Period teachers. These resources include,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

124
but are not limited to technology resources, opportunities for professional development, and
access to professional development resources, e.g., guest speakers, videos, research articles.

Table 2
Summary of Causes, Solutions, and Implementation of the Solutions

Knowledge & Skills Motivation Culture/Context/Capital/Policy
Causes -Lack of knowledge of
student learning
outcomes from the
aggregate 21st
Century/PBL list.
-Lack of knowledge of
planning and
implementing teaching
strategies that support
21st Century learning and
PBL, e.g., shifting
teac h er ’ s r o le f r o m lecturer to facilitator.
-Lack of knowledge of
how to shift from theory
to practice because
teachers have limited
experience with PBL,
e.g., how to ensure rigor
in the Project Period
-Lack of self-awareness of
pedagogical
stance/teaching style.

-Lack of teacher
efficacy – teac h er ’ s belief that he/she can
motivate or sustain
motivation among
challenging/struggling
learners.
- L ac k o f teac h er ’ s s e n s e
of value towards
planning for the
Project Period –
teachers know how to
lesson plan for the
Project Period but
teachers find it
difficult to prioritize
planning for Project
Period when they also
have to plan for other
classes they teach.
-Lack of systematic training and
PD on 21st Century skills, PBL,
and Project Period to refresh
teachers on a regular basis and to
orient new teachers into PBL.
-Lack of structured time for
ongoing teacher collaboration and
lesson planning for Project
Period.
-Lack of access to technology
resources to support the Project
Period curriculum.
Solutions -Provide information,
training, and
opportunities for teachers
to lesson plan and
practice lessons with
colleagues.
-Teachers will collaborate
and problem solve
together on an ongoing
basis.
-Teachers will reflect and
dialogue about their
progress, challenges, and
successes. To support
their reflective process,
-Build individual and
team confidence
-Increase value for
planning for the
Project Period
-Build relatedness
through reflection and
dialogue

-Teachers will engage in ongoing
Professional Development
-Teachers will engage in
observations, provide feedback,
and engage in ongoing reflective
and collaborative conversations
-Teachers will have access to PBL
resources e.g., technology, PD
materials
-Teachers will have opportunities
to attend PBL PD
-Administration and all
stakeholders will engage in value
stream – create deeper
understanding of resources and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

125
Ta ble 2 ( C ont’d.)

Stakeholder Cascading and Performance Goals

When a student struggles to achieve his/her learning obje c ti ve , it is t he tea c he r’ s
responsibility to scaffold the activities for the student in order to make the concept manageable
and to help the student learn. The gap analysis process engages its stakeholder in the
improvement process in a similar way. An or ga niz a ti on’s g oa l i s ac hiev a bl e b y s c a f folding steps. According to Clark and Estes (2008) , “ e f fe c ti ve pe rf o rma nc e g oa ls c a sc a d e or f oll ow
from organizational goals ” (p. 22). Table 3 summarizes hierarchical goals that begin with the
overall organizational goal; subsequent goals are identified to scaffold the achievement of the
organizational goal.

Knowledge & Skills Motivation Culture/Context/Capital/Policy
teachers will create and
maintain a professional
portfolio.
-Provide PBL expert
resources e.g., guest
speaker, videos, readings

their alignment to pedagogical
needs
-Administration will provide
support via encouragement
Implementation -Ongoing Professional
Development workshop
series on PBL
-Weekly collaborative and
reflective dialogue
sessions
-Teachers create a
professional portfolio that
includes a narrative about
their teaching
philosophy – reflecting
their pedagogical stance.
-Build individual and
team confidence
through collaborative
lesson planning,
practice delivery,
observations, and
feedback.
-Increase value for
planning and
relatedness for the
Project Period through
teacher collaboration
and reflective
dialogue.

-Create a system of ongoing
Professional Development that
supports PBL for the Project
Period.
-Build in time for ongoing PD and
teacher collaboration.
-Align resources via candid
collaborative conversations and
the value streaming process –
administration, teachers, and all
stakeholders involved will
engage in resource alignment
conversations.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

126
Table 3
Summary of the Organiz ati on’s M ain Goal, Short -Term Goals, and Performance Goals
Organizational Goal

All fourth-year Health Sciences Academy High School students will achieve 100% of the
skills on the aggregate 21st Century Skills/ESLRs list by 2015.

Stakeholder 1 Goal:
Teachers

100% of Health
Sciences Academy High
School Project Period
Teachers will be able to
teach all of the skills
listed on the aggregate
21st Century/ESLRs list
by 2015.

Stakeholder 2 Goal:
School Admin

The organization will
create and implement a
year-long PBL
Professional
Development and
Teacher Collaboration
Curriculum by 2013.

Stakeholder 3 Goal:
Students

Students will achieve
100% of the skills on the
aggregate 21st Century
Skills/ESLRs list by
2015.
Stakeholder 4 Goal:
School Admin

The organization will
provide all teachers with
the appropriate
resources to support
their implementation of
the Project Period by
2013.
Stakeholder 1
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 1:

Teachers will
collaboratively create
the Project Period
Curriculum –creating
lesson plans that address
the skills on the
aggregate 21st
Century/ESLRs list.

Teachers will create and
maintain a portfolio to
chronicle their growth.

All materials and
resources will be stored
and accessible on a
common storage space,
e.g., Dropbox,
Blackboard.

Stakeholder 2
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 1:

The organization will
schedule and implement
staff collaboration
meetings and engage
stakeholders in
classroom observations
on a regular basis.

Stakeholder 3
Cascading/
Performance
Goal 1:

All students will
demonstrate mastery of
PBL/21st Century
outcomes by presenting
an inquiry based
research project; all
projects must meet the
requirements delineated
in th e 6 A’ s r u b r ic
(Appendix G)

Stakeholder 4
Cascading/
Intermediate
Goal 1:

The organization will
meet on an on-going
basis to update resources
as requested by teachers
and to find materials
that would support the
Project Period e.g.,
guest speakers, field
trips, research-based
articles, technology, etc.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

127
T able 3 ( C ont ’ d.)

Organizational Goal

All fourth-year Health Sciences Academy High School students will achieve 100% of the
skills on the aggregate 21st Century Skills/ESLRs list by 2015.

Stakeholder 1
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 2:

Teachers will participate
in a PBL workshop to
learn or review
principles of PBL.

Teachers will create and
maintain a portfolio to
chronicle their growth.

All resources will be
stored and accessible on
a common storage
space, e.g., Dropbox,
Blackboard.

Stakeholder 2
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 2:

The organization will
contract a PBL expert to
host the staff PBL
workshop or find a local
resource to help develop
the PBL workshop.

All resources will be
stored and accessible on
a common storage
space, e.g., Dropbox,
Blackboard.

Stakeholder 3
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 2:

Students will learn and
create products that
demonstrate mastery of
discreet skills necessary
to meet the
requirements of the
inquiry project.
Stakeholder 4
Cascading/
Performance
Goal 2:

The organization will
gather and share the
identified resources and
materials needed to
implement the Project
Period, via a system that
the organization will
create to allocate
resources and materials.
Stakeholder 1
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 3:

Teachers will meet on a
regular basis to plan,
observe, provide
feedback, reflect, refine,
and discuss progress and
challenges with the
Project Period Lessons.
Stakeholder 2
Cascading/
Intermediate Goal 3:

The organization will
meet regularly to adjust
PD workshop contents,
support, and resources
to m ee t th e teac h er s ’ needs.
Stakeholder 3
Cascading/
Performance
Goal 3:

Students should be able
to articulate the learning
objective of 5 lessons
and how the content
builds his/her skills to
support PBL.
Stakeholder 4
Cascading/
Performance
Goal 3:

The organization will
engage teachers in value
streaming to discuss the
mechanics of program
implementation and
discuss teacher resource
and materials needs.

Below are the specific stakeholder performance goals and the goal measure for students
and for the organization as described in Table 3.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

128
Table 4
Summary of Performance Goals, Timeline, and Measurement of Performance Goals
Stakeholder Performance Goal Goal Measure
Students should be able to articulate the learning
objective of five lessons and how the content build
his/her skills to support PBL.

Implement by Fall Semester 2013

Evaluate by Fall Semester 2013
Students will be asked to identify three skills
from the aggregate 21st Century/ESLRs list that
they learned during the semester. The student
will then explain what they learned, how they
learned it, and how the skills they learned will be
useful in their inquiry project. Being able to
identify and describe the significance four or
more skills learned would demonstrate mastery.
Identifying three skills or less would require
reflective dialogue about the lesson delivery.

All students will demonstrate mastery of PBL/21st
Century outcomes by presenting an inquiry-based
research project; all projects must meet the
r equ i r em ent s de l i n ea t ed i n t he 6A’s r ub r i c .

Implement by May 2014

Evaluate by May 2014
Students at Health Sciences Academy have a
Project Period showcase every year. The
showcase exhibits the student culminating
inquiry-based research project. Not all projects
match in rigor, not all projects meet the criteria
of t h e 6A’ s PB L rub r i c . All projects must
addr e ss e ac h o f t he c om pet enc i es on t he 6A ’ s
PBL rubric. The projects must also receive
satisfactory scores on at least four out of the six
com pet enc i es o n t h e 6A’s P B L rubr i c.

The organization will engage teachers in value
streaming to discuss the mechanics of program
implementation and discuss teacher resource and
materials needs.

Implement by May 2013

Evaluate by August 2013
In order to prepare for the 2013-2014 school
year, stakeholders must engage in candid
conversations about the resource and materials ’
needs to implement the Project Period. An
inventory of existing resources and materials will
be shared, and a list of remaining/ persisting
materials and resources needs list will be created.
This list would be updated and shared after each
collaborative session.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

129
Ta ble 4 ( C ont’d.)

Stakeholder Performance Goal Goal Measure
The organization will gather and share the
identified resources and materials needed to
implement the Project Period, via a system
that the organization will create to allocate
resources and materials.

Implement by September 2013

Evaluate by October 2013
A system that communicates and allocates
available resources will be created, reviewed,
and made explicit. All teachers should have
access to the resources and materials they need
for the Project Period. An anonymous survey
via Survey Monkey can be administered to ask
teachers to share whether or not their resource
and materials ’ needs have been met and what
types of support they would like to request to
support their Project Period implementation.

Research literature about the impact of teacher knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization gap solutions were the basis of the solutions and implementation proposed in this
chapter. In order to monitor the progress and effectiveness of the proposed solutions and
implementation, a system of evaluation is presented in the Discussion in Chapter 6.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

130
Chapter 6
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to (a) identify the underlying skills required in order for
students to achieve Health Sciences Ac a de m y ’s E S L R /21st C e ntur y outco mes, ( b) de te rmine the
degree to which these skills are being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identify appropriate
assessments to measure student achievement of these skills, and (d) determine the degree to
which students are achieving these skills.
Further, this study examined the challenges in knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization teachers may encounter to provide Health Sciences Academy students with the
instruction in the ESLR/21st Century skills outcomes. The questions that guided this study are:
1. What are the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational culture,
which may affect the successful achievement of the organizational goal for Health
Sciences Academy students to achieve 100% achievement of the ESLRs and 21st
Century skills as represented by combined/aggregate 21st Century skills document?
2. What are potential solutions to address the gaps in faculty knowledge, skills, motivation,
and organizational culture to achie v e the or g a niz a t ion’s g oa l o f suc c e ssful a c hieve ment
of combined aggregate 21st Century skills and ESLRs by Health Sciences Academy
students?
Synthesis of the Results
The following are the results of the data from the document analysis, classroom
observations, and teacher interviews. These results are organized into three categories:
(a) Knowledge and Skills; (b) Motivation; (c) Organization.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

131
Knowledge and skills. The data from teacher interviews revealed that teachers at Health
Sciences Academy are knowledgeable in their content areas and are amenable to professional
growth via professional development. The teachers take pride in their work and they care about
their students. Health Sciences Academy teachers value the Project Period as an opportunity for
students to learn skills that would prepare them to be college and career ready; however, teachers
lack knowledge of the aggregate 21st Century/PBL/ESLR student outcomes list. Teachers
cannot teach what they do not know they are expected to teach. Additionally, teachers lack
knowledge in planning and implementing 21st century strategies that support PBL. Teachers
a lso l a c k knowle d g e shi ft ing f rom the l e c ture r or “ g iver ” of inf o rma ti on to fa c il it a tor a nd
teachers lack awareness of their pedagogical stance. These knowledge and skill gaps are
preventing teachers from implementing Project Period in a way that would result in 100%
student achievement of the aggregate student outcomes list, because teachers do not have enough
knowledge, experience, or practice in PBL.
Motivation. Teachers at Health Sciences Academy demonstrated commitment to the
students and a great level of expertise in their content areas evidenced by the many different
courses/preps that they teach. All of the teachers interviewed taught a minimum of two to three
different courses a day, e.g., Chemistry and Biology; Pre-Calculus and Geometry, AVID, 10th
Grade English, 11th Grade AP English. The teachers at Health Sciences Academy are
efficacious in their ability to teach their content area and in their ability to use and teach basic
technology skills. The document analysis, classroom observations and teacher interviews
revealed the motivational gaps due to a lack of teacher efficacy in motivating challenging
students and a lack of value for planning for Project Period. Teacher efficacy influences the
teachers ’ active choice and persistence towards an innovation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Teacher
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

132
e ff ic a c y a lso i nf luen c e s t he e x pe c tations tea c h e rs ha ve of stude nts and the t e a c h e r’ s cl a ssroom
practices (Neves de Jesus & Lens, 2005). The amount of planning and preparation for the
Project Period reflect teachers ’ values towards lesson planning for the program. During the
interviews, teachers indicated that they valued the Project Period, but that they found it difficult
to find time to lesson plan for it given all the other classes they also teach. Lack of teacher
efficacy and value for planning for the Project Period affect the implementation of the Project
P e riod a s evide nc e d b y t he tea c h e rs’ int e rvie w r e sponses , lack of lesson plan submissions, and
classroom observations.
Organization. Health Sciences Academy is a beautiful campus. The facilities are clean
and the high school campus atmosphere exerts a sense of calm, confidence, and focus. The
science classroom facilities have been renovated to include laboratory-grade equipment and all
teachers have computers, projectors, ELMOs, and the option to acquire and use a SMART board.
The teachers described having collegial relationships and access to many resources that support
the Project Period; however, the teacher interviews revealed that not all of the Health Sciences
Academy Project Period teachers have been trained in PBL, that the amount of training that some
teachers have received in PBL vary from teacher to teacher, and that some teachers feel the
access to resources for the Project Period is limited. Clark and Estes (2008) emphasized the
importance of aligning the organizational work and material resources. The sustainability and
implementation of a program depends on the availability of support and resources.
Recommendations and Implications
Fallik et al. (2008) suggested that program implementation is affected when teachers lack
knowledge and skills. The recommendations and implications for the knowledge and skills gap
begins with providing teachers the aggregate 21st Century/PBL/ESLR student outcomes list and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

133
professional development on PBL clarifying the program objectives and the knowledge that
teachers will need to address in their Project Period lessons.
The suggested solution for the motivation gap is to provide professional development
focusing on Project Period not only helps to close the knowledge and skills gap, it also addresses
the lack of teacher efficacy. According to Swackhamer et al. (2009), increasing teacher
knowledge affects teacher efficacy, and therefore, teacher motivation.
The solutions for the organization support the knowledge, skills, and motivation gap. To
address the need for a systematic PBL professional development module, time to collaboratively
plan PBL/Project Period lesson plans, and improve access to resources, all stakeholders must be
involved in: (a) co-constructing the Project Period Curriculum – thus participating in on-going
collaborative lesson planning, lesson observations, peer feedback, lesson refinement, and
reflective dialogue; (b) providing input about individual PBL/Project Period professional
development needs; and (c) candid conversations about the process behind teaching Project
Period and the materials and resources needed to support it.
Evaluation
An evaluation system is vital to the success of program implementation. Clark and Estes
(2008) recommended Kir kpa trick’ s (1998) Four-Levels of Evaluation as part of the framework.
This study used Kirkp a trick’ s F ou r L e ve ls of Eva l ua ti on fo r f or mative e va l ua ti on of the
proposed solutions and implementation for Health Sciences Academy. The first level of
Kirkp a trick’ s lev e ls of e v a luation eva luate d the attitudes of participants towards implementing
the program (Clark & Estes, 2008). The second level evaluated the s y st e m’ s ef fe c ti ve ne ss
during implementation (Clark & Estes, 2008). The third level of the evaluation process
examined the transfer or continued program effectiveness (Clark & Estes, 2008). Lastly, the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

134
fourth level of evaluation examined the extent to which the organizational goal was achieved
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Level 1: Reactions. This level evaluates participant reactions and motivations to
implement the program (Clark & Estes, 2008). Using Survey Monkey, an initial survey of
teacher motivation and reactions about the program will be collected. The survey will be
anonymous; however, the findings will be shared with the entire staff for discussion. The survey
will include open-ended questions about values and opinions about the program: (a) What is your
opinion about the reflective dialogue process (modeled after the Collaborative Inquiry process
which takes teachers through planning, implementation, lesson delivery observations, feedback,
reflective dialogue, and lesson refinement)?, and (b) What changes, if any, would you make to
the collaborative process? If the proposed solutions are satisfactory to stakeholders and meet
their needs, then their responses will include positive feedback.
Level 2: Learning. This level evaluates th e s y st e m’s e ff e c ti ve ne ss whil e i t i s being implemented (Clark & Estes, 2008). Before a professional development workshop, teachers will
be asked a multiple choice question about a pedagogical decision based on a PBL principle.
Teacher answers will be submitted anonymously using i>clickers (remote controls that allow
participants to vote electronically); however, the responses will be projected to illustrate the pre-
workshop range of responses. Teachers will be asked to engage in a workshop where they will
participate in professional/research literature reading, engage in small group collaborative
dialogue about the reading, work collaboratively in teams to create lesson plans that apply key
concepts from the reading about PBL. After the small group collaborative dialogue about the
reading and after the lesson plan creation, teachers will write a reflection about a “ sti c k y id e a ,” a
ke y c onc e pt he/she lea rn e d fr om t he da y ’ s wor ksh op in the reflective notes section of their
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

135
portfolio (a binder of all the professional development training materials, lesson plans,
observation notes, feedback notes, reflective notes, and lesson revisions/refinement). The
wor kshop wil l dra w to a c lose w it h tea c h e rs sha ri ng out t he ir “ sti c k y id e a s ” to t he whole g roup
and then engaging in a post-workshop multiple choice question. Teachers will vote again using
i>clickers. The participation and votes will be projected. Then the facilitator will compare the
results from the pre-workshop question to the post-workshop question, discuss the correct
a nswe rs, a nd va li da te the tea c he rs’ pa rticipa ti on . This activity will measure teacher knowledge
by using i>clickers to cast teacher votes/answers to a multiple-choice question. If the proposed
solutions are effective in increasing teacher knowledge, then the number of correct answers in
the post-workshop multiple choice question would increase, the content of the lesson plans would
contain activities that reflect key concepts/principles from the reading, teacher reflective notes
would reflect key concepts/ principles from the reading, and teacher share outs would also
reflect key concepts/principles from the reading.
Level 3: Transfer. This level evaluates the extent of the or g a niz a ti on’s ongoing positive
results after the program is implemented (Clark & Estes, 2008). This evaluates whether teachers
are implementing what they learned from the professional development workshops, collaborative
planning, lesson observation, lesson feedback, reflective dialogue, and lesson refinement
process. During this ongoing process, teachers will be asked to save and store all professional
development materials, lessons, observation notes, feedback notes, reflective notes, and lesson
refinement in their portfolios. Teachers will use their portfolios to document the time that they
spend collaborating with colleagues and as a reference for the growth that they will make due to
this process. Teachers will build relativity and lateral accountability by observing peers deliver
lessons on a regular basis, having peers observe their lesson delivery on a regular basis and
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

136
engaging in reflective dialogue, and lesson refinement to improve the implementation of the
Project Period. If the solutions are effective, then teacher portfolios will have records of frequent
collaboration via PD handouts and notes. Another indicator that the solutions are effective is
that the portfolio will contain a plethora of lesson plans and revised lesson plans. Another
indicator that the solutions are effective is that teacher reflective dialogue about observed
classroom practices are honest, flow smoothly, and not contrived. Teacher dialogues should
reflect openness and trust and smooth transitions through the process because teachers would
have built automaticity with the Collaborative Inquiry lesson planning process.
Level 4: Impact. This level evaluates the impact of changes on organizational goals.
This level evaluates the effectiveness of the program in helping the organization achieve its goal
(Clark & Estes, 2008). According to Clark and Estes (2008), this level of evaluation is the most
expensive and difficult to address; therefore, if the level two and level three evaluations do not
result in positive evaluations, level four should not be administered. If the other levels show
positive evaluations, then stakeholders must engage in data analysis. Teachers, administrators,
and other stakeholders would evaluate student work and testing data to determine if achievement
scores are increasing because of these activities. Positive indicators that student achievement is
increasing due to the professional development practices that teachers are engaging in could be
increased quarterly, district-wide assessment scores, an increased school API score, observable
rigor in student written work, observable increase in verbal expressiveness, improved critical
thinking, and positive/self-directed work habits among students.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
The strength of the gap analysis approach is that the entire process is personalized to the
or ga niz a ti on’s ne e ds . The solutions ’ recommendations are based on data collected within the
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

137
organization to identify site-specific needs. Additionally, solutions and implementation
recommendations are cascaded into tiered goals, thus scaffolding mini-activities that will lead to
the or ga niz a ti ona l g o a l’s e ve ntual a c hieve ment . Another strength of the gap analysis approach:
the performance goals set deadlines at which time the effectiveness of the solutions and
implementations are evaluated. These formative checkpoints are helpful because it allows the
organization to make adjustments in a timely manner.
The challenge with regard to the gap analysis approach is finding the time to thoughtfully
analyze the gaps of the organization and time to analyze research in order to make appropriate
solutions and recommendations.
Limitations
This study examined the implementation of the high school Project Period at Health
Sciences Academy. The limitation of this study was that it focused on high school teachers at
Health Sciences Academy who teach the Project Period. This is a limitation because the sample
size of high school teachers was small. Health Sciences Academy is a growing academy; six
high school Project Period teachers were included in the study; one high school Project Period
teacher was excluded from this case study because she is also the author of this study. Her data
was excluded to reduce possible bias.
The Project Period is only taught once a week on Fridays. Although resources and
suggested lessons are available on Dropbox, the Project Period curriculum is not pre-determined.
Teachers select wha t t he y will tea c h a c c or din g to their students’ progress and needs. The lessons
observed during classroom observations were vastly different. One classroom observation does
not represent the entire Project Period course. Additional classroom observations could have
created a more comprehensive understanding of the teacher pedagogy and classroom dynamics.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

138
The data collection for the document analysis presented great limitations because only
one teacher submitted lesson plans for the Project Period. Lack of evidence does not mean there
is no knowledge. Although the singular lesson plan submission provided clues about the gaps in
the organization and in teacher motivation to plan for Project Period, it does not determine the
depth of knowledge in teaching PBL. Samples of teacher lesson plans as compared to their
lesson delivery in a classroom observation would have provided more precise data about each
indi vidual’ s knowle dge a nd ski ll s g a p .
By 2015, Health Sciences Academy High School students will receive a NAF seal on
their diplomas, distinguishing their high school curriculum as a health science academy. The
focus of this study was on high school teachers. Although middle school students from Health
Sciences Academy will not receive a NAF seal on their transcripts as they progress to high
school, it would be interesting to examine the Project Period implementation at the middle
school level and the extent to which the vertical articulation between the middle school and high
school Project Periods sufficiently prepare middle school students for the high school Project
Period curriculum.
Future Research
Published research about teacher development in PBL at the university level was easily
accessible. Many programs and institutions have transformed their programs and curriculum to
integrate a PBL approach. The NCLB (2001) policy has prompted school restructuring across
the nation; however, there are limited published articles about the effects of and effectiveness of
school restructuring, specifically to a PBL-Health Sciences Academy. Future research is needed
to examine other teacher development programs for the Project Period in the secondary school
context. Additionally, if the Project Period is implemented 100% and all students are taught
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

139
100% of the skills delineated on the 21st Century/PBL/ESLRs aggregate list, future research
would evaluate the extent of its effect on standardized test scores. Future research should
determine whether or not 100% implementation of the Project Period significantly impacts
student standardized test scores. If not, then the causes, not identified in this study, need to be
explored in order to identify the gap and appropriate solutions that would increase test scores in
order to move Health Sciences Academy out of program improvement status.
Conclusion and Implications
Health Sciences Academy was a traditional grade six through grade eight middle school.
After more than five years as a program improvement school, the traditional middle school
restructured to a high school Academy of Health Sciences. Despite the school restructure,
Health Sciences Academy has not experienced significant gains in its school API. One of the
many distinguishing factors at Health Sciences Academy is the Friday Project Period. It is a
PBL class taught once a week for 70 minutes designed to engage students in critical thinking.
The implications of this are that although PBL and the Project Period impact student learning
positively by supporting critical thinking and 21st Century skills, it would be beneficial to
conduct future research to measure its effect on standardized testing. “ Goo d fir st i nstruc ti on is
the be st i nstruc ti on,” is a n a da g e that r e f e rs to e x a mi ning the f ounda ti ona l c lassr oom practices
before implementing interventions. One 70-minute Project Period class per week might not
greatly influence standardized test scores; therefore, exploring daily classroom practices would
be a reasonable research topic.
This case study used the gap analysis process described by Clark and Estes (2008) to
identify the gaps in faculty knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational culture that
could be affecting the implementation of the Project Period. After data from document analysis,
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

140
classroom observations, and teacher interviews were collected, causes for the gaps in knowledge
and skills, motivation, and organization were validated. Proposed solutions, implementation, and
a process for evaluation using Kirk pa t ric k’ s (199 8) f our le ve l s of evaluation were included to
help close the gaps in knowledge and skills, motivation, and organization.
The implication of my case study to the original problem is to be able to improve an
existing process within the organization and to determine whether or not this is the program that
will result in significantly increasing student achievement. This case study might be useful to
others in similar contexts because although restructuring has not resulted in the significant gains
that were initially anticipated, Health Sciences Academy now has a plan for improving their
process. Other organizations considering or implementing school restructure or program
transition would benefit from reading this case study because it would provide insights about the
challenges that the restructuring process posed and research based solutions to address the
challenges and support the process.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

141
References

Abrami, P., Poulsen, C., & Chambers, B. (2010). Teacher motivation to implement an

educational innovation: Factors differentiating users and non-users of cooperative

learning. Educational Psychology, 24(2), 201-216.

Allen, D., Donham, R., & Bernhardt, S. (2011). Problem-based learning. New Directions

for Teaching and Learning, 128, 21-29.

Ambrose, S. A. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart

teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching,

and assessing: A re v isi on of Bl oom’ s taxonom y of e duc ati onal obj e c ti v e s . New

York, NY: Longman.
Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Teaching thinking skills in context-based
lea rnin g : Tea c he rs ’ c ha ll e nge s and a ss e ssm e nt kn owle dge . Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 21(2), 207-225.
Bandura, A. (2007). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological review, 84(2), 191.

Bathon, J., & Spradlin, T. (2007). Outcomes for the school choice and supplemental

educational services provisions of NCLB. Center for Evaluation & Education

Policy, 5(8), 1-16.

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The

Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39-

43.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

142
Breivik, P. (2005). 21st Century learning and information literacy. Change, March/April,

21-28

Brinson, D., & Morando, L. (2009). Breaking the habit of low performance: Successful

school restructuring stories. The Center on Innovation & Improvement, 1-43.
Bubb, S., & Earley, P. (2009). Leading staff development for school improvement. School
Leadership & Management, 29(1), 23-37.
California Department of Education. (2011-2012). School Accountability Report Card.
Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/
Cannon, D., & Reed, B. (1999). Career academies: Teaming with a focus. Contemporary

Education, 70(2), 48.

Clark, R., & Estes, R. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right

performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.

Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional

growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947-967.

Coenders, F., Terlouw, C., Dijkstra, S., & Peiters, J. (2010). The effects of the design

a nd de ve lopm e nt of a c h e mi str y c u rr iculum re for m on t e a c he rs ’ professional

growth: A case study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(5), 535-557.

Dalrymple, K. R., Wuenschell, C., & Shuler, C. F. (2006). Development and

implementation of a comprehensive faculty development program in PBL core

Skills. Journal of Dental Education. 70(9), 948-955.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Greater expectations for student learning. Liberal

Education, 86(2), 6.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Third annual "brown" lecture in education research--the

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

143
flat earth and e duc a ti on: How A mer ic a ’s c omm it ment to equ ity will determine

our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334.

Dunemn, K., Hopkins-Chadwick, D. L., Connally, T., & Bramley, K. (2011). Designing

and implementing the army nursing leader academy. U.S. Army Medical

Department Journal, 18.

Fallik, O., Eylon, B.S., Rosenfeld, S. (2008). Motivating teachers to enact free-choice project-

Based learning in science and technology (PBLSAT): effects of a professional

development model. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19, 565-591.

Fincher, R. E., Sykes-Brown, W., & Allen-Noble, R. (2002). Health science learning

academy: A successful "pipeline" educational program for high school students.

Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges,

77(7), 737.

Fleischman, S., & Heppen, J. (2009). Improving low-performing high schools: Searching

for evidence of promise. The Future of Children, 19(1), 105-133.

Ghaith, G., Yaghi, H., (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and

attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 13 (3), 451-458

Gándara, P., Rumberger, R., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Callahan, R. (2003). English learners in

California schools: Unequal resources, 'unequal outcomes. Education Policy

Analysis Archives, 11, 36-36.

Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay-

Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based

curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

144
Teaching 45(8), 922-939

George, J. M., & Lubben, F. (2002). F a c il it a ti ng t e a c h e rs’ pro fe ssi ona l g ro wth throug h

their involvement in creating context-based materials in science. International

Journal of Educational Development, 22(6), 659-672.

Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and

attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 13(3), 451-458.

Goodnough, K. (2005). Fostering teacher learning through collaborative inquiry. The

Clearing House, 79(2), 88-92.

Goodnough, K., & Cashion, M. (2006). Exploring problem-based learning in the context

of high school science: Design and implementation issues. School Science and

Mathematics, 106(7), 280-295.

Hess, G. A., Jr. (2003). Reconstitution –three years later: Monitoring the effect of

sanctions on Chicago high schools. Education and Urban Society, 35(3), 300-27

Hew, K., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning:

current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education

Technology Research & Development, 55(3), 223-252.

Hitchcock, M. A., & Mylona, Z. (2009). Teaching faculty to conduct problem-based

learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal,

12(1), 52-57.

Hoff, D. (2008). More schools facing sanctions under NCLB. Education Week,

28(16). Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/

Jennings, J., & Rentner, D. S. (2006). How public schools are impacted by "No Child Left

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

145
Behind". Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review,

72(4), 4-9.

Kaplan, L., & Evans, M. (1997). Changing school environment: Restructuring one Virginia

high school. NASSP Bulletin, 81(589), 1-9.

Kemple, J., & Willner, C. (2008). Career academies: Long-Term impacts on labor market
outcomes, educational attainment, and transitions to adulthood. New York, NY: MDRC.
Ketelhut, D. J., & Schifter, C. C. (2011). Teachers and game-based learning: Improving
understanding of how to increase efficacy of adoption. Computers & Education,
56(2), 539-546.
Lam, S., Cheng, R., Choy, H. (2009). School support and teacher motivation to implement
project-based learning. Department of Psychology, the University of Hong Kong,
Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong Department of Educational Psychology, Counseling and
Learning Needs, the Hong Kong Institute of Education, Tai Po, New Territories, Hong
Kong. Received 18 September 2008; revised 2 April 2009; accepted 21 July 2009
Larson, L., Miller, T. (2011). 21st century skills prepare students for the future. Kappa

Delta Pi, 46(3), 121-123.

Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
McDowall, S. (2010). Literacy teaching and learning for the 21st century. Bridging the

theory to practice gap. Research Information for Teachers (Wellington), (2)2.

Meyers, C. V., & Murphy, J. (2007). Turning around failing schools: An analysis.

Journal of School Leadership, 17(5), 631-659.

Mintrop, H., & Trujillo, T., (2005). Corrective action in low-performing schools: Lessons

for NCLB implementation from state ad district strategies in first-generation

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

146
accountability systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(48), 1-30.

Mumtaz, S. (2006). F a c t or s af f e c ti n g tea c he rs’ us e of inf or mation and c omm unica ti ons

technology: a review of literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher

Education, 9(3), 319-342. University of Warwick, Coventry, USA. Available online:

20 Dec 2006.

Murray, I., & Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Staff development in problem-based learning.

Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 107-126.
Murtaza, K. F. (2010). T e a c h e rs’ professional development through whole school
improvement program (WSIP). International Journal of Business and Social
Science, 1(2), 213.
Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, Al, Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher
STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional
development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research,
106(2), 157-168.
Neves de Jesus, S., Lens, W. (2005). An integrated model for the study of teacher

motivation. Applied Psychology, 54(1), 119-134.

Olmesdahl, P. J., & Manning, D. M. (1999). Impact of training on PBL facilitators.

Medical Education, 33(10), 753-755.

Park, S. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2008). Impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on

tea c he rs’ be li e fs r e ga rdin g te c hnolog y us e . Journal of Research on Technology in

Education, 40(2), 246-267.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2002), Learning for the 21st Century, A Report and

MILE Guide for 21
st
Century Skills

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

147
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). A Framework for 21st Century Learning,

Tucson (21st century Skills. Prepare students for the future)

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2011). http://www.p21.org/results-that-matter: 21st century

skills and high school reform. Washington, DC

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Pelletier, L., Legault, L., & Seguin, C. (2002). Pressure from above and pressure from

be low a s dete rmina nts of tea c he rs’ mot ivation and tea c hin g be h a viors .

Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 186-196. ©2002 by the American

Psychological Association, Inc.

Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student

motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 95(4), 667 –686.

Rogers, M. A. P., Cross, D. I., Gresalfi, M. S., Trauth-Nare, A. E., & Buck, G. A. (2011).

First year implementation of a project-based learning approach: The need for

a ddre ssi n g tea c he rs ’ or ie ntations in t he e ra of r e fo rm . International Journal of

Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 893-917.

Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the

right solutions to the right problems. New York, NY : Tea c h e r’ s C oll e g e

Press

Silva, E. (2009). Measuring skills for 21st-century learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9),

630-634.

Schein, E. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(5), 109-119.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

148

Schwartz, A., Soifer, D. (2012). The value of English proficiency to the United States economy.

Lexington Institute, December 2012, pp 1-13.

Scott, C., Duffrin, E., Kelleher, M., & Neuman-Sheldon, B. (2009). Improving low-

improvement schools: Lessons from five years of studying school restructuring

under NCLB. Center Education Policy

Shouse, R., & Mussoline, L. (2000). High risk, low return: The achievement effects of

restructuring in disadvantaged schools. Social Psychology of Education, 3(4)

245-249.

Smith, G. (1994). Preparing teachers to restructure schools. Journal of Teacher

Education, 45(1), 18-30.

Swackhamer, L. E., Koellner, K., Basile, C., & Kimbrough, D. (2009). Increasing the

self-efficacy of inservice teachers through content knowledge. Teacher

Education Quarterly, 36(2), 63-78.

Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappan 77(7),

464-67

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive

construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805

Verdugo, R. & Flores, B. (2007). English-language learners. Education and Urban

Society, 39(2), 167.

Walberg, H. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook on restructuring and substantial school improvement.

Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation and Improvement.

Wells, S., Warelow, P., & Jackson, K. (2009). Problem based learning (PBL): A

conundrum. Contemporary Nurse, 33(2), 191-201.
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

149

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy – Value theory of achievement

motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

150
Appendix A

Partnership for 21
st
Century Learning: 21
st
Century Definitions

LEARNING AND INNOVATION SKILLS

Learning and innovation skills increasingly are being recognized as those that separate
students who are prepared for a more and more complex life and work environments in
the 21st century, and those who are not. A focus on creativity, critical thinking,
communication and collaboration is essential to prepare students for the future.

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION
Think Creatively
 Use a wide range of idea creation techniques (such as brainstorming)
 Create new and worthwhile ideas (both incremental and radical concepts)
 Elaborate, refine, analyze and evaluate their own ideas in order to improve and
maximize creative efforts
Work Creatively with Others
• De ve lop, i mpl e ment a nd c ommunicate new ideas to others effectively
• B e op e n a nd r e sponsi ve to new a nd dive rse pe rspe c ti ve s;; i nc or por a te g r oup
input and feedback into the work
• De mons tra te or i g inali t y a nd inventiven e ss i n w or k a nd unde rst a nd the r e a l
world limits to adopting new ideas
• Vie w f a il ur e a s an o pp or tuni t y to l e a rn;; und e rst a nd that c re a ti vit y a nd
innovation is a long-term, cyclical process of small successes and frequent
mistakes
Implement Innovations
• Ac t on cr e a ti ve idea s t o make a tan g ibl e a nd use ful c ontribut ion t o the f ield in
which the innovation will occur

CRITICAL THINKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING
Reason Effectively
• Use va rious t y pe s of r e a soni ng (induc ti ve , de d uc ti ve , e tc.) a s app rop ria t e to
the situation
Use Systems Thinking
• Ana l y z e how p a rts of a whole int e ra c t wit h e a c h other to produc e ov e ra l l
outcomes in complex systems
Make Judgments and Decisions
• Ef fe c ti ve l y a na l y z e a nd e va luate e videnc e , a r guments, c laims a nd be li e f s
• Ana l y z e a nd e va lu a te major a lt e rna ti ve point s of view
 Synthesize and make connections between information and arguments
 Interpret information and draw conclusions based on the best analysis
 Reflect critically on learning experiences and processes
Solve Problems
 Solve different kinds of non-familiar problems in both conventional and
innovative ways
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

151
 Identify and ask significant questions that clarify various points of view and
lead to better solutions

COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION

Communicate Clearly
 Articulate thoughts and ideas effectively using oral, written and nonverbal
communication skills in a variety of forms and contexts
 Listen effectively to decipher meaning, including knowledge, values, attitudes
and intentions
 Use communication for a range of purposes (e.g. to inform, instruct, motivate
and persuade)
 Utilize multiple media and technologies, and know how to judge their
effectiveness a priori as well as assess their impact
 Communicate effectively in diverse environments (including multi-lingual)

Collaborate with Others
 Demonstrate ability to work effectively and respectfully with diverse teams
 Exercise flexibility and willingness to be helpful in making necessary
compromises to accomplish a common goal
 Assume shared responsibility for collaborative work, and value the individual
contributions made by each team member

INFORMATION, MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY SKILLS

People in the 21st century live in a technology and media-suffused environment, marked
by various characteristics, including: 1) access to an abundance of information, 2) rapid
changes in technology tools, and 3) the ability to collaborate and make individual
contributions on an unprecedented scale. To be effective in the 21st century, citizens and
workers must be able to exhibit a range of functional and critical thinking skills related to
information, media and technology.

INFORMATION LITERACY
Access and Evaluate Information
 Access information efficiently (time) and effectively (sources)
 Evaluate information critically and competently
Use and Manage Information
 Use information accurately and creatively for the issue or problem at hand
 Manage the flow of information from a wide variety of sources
 Apply a fundamental understanding of the ethical/legal issues surrounding the
access and use of information

MEDIA LITERACY
Analyze Media
 Understand both how and why media messages are constructed, and for what
purposes
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

152
 Examine how individuals interpret messages differently, how values and points
of view are included or excluded, and how media can influence beliefs and
behaviors
 Apply a fundamental understanding of the ethical/legal issues surrounding the
access and use of media
Create Media Products
 Understand and utilize the most appropriate media creation tools,
characteristics and conventions
 Understand and effectively utilize the most appropriate expressions and
interpretations in diverse, multi-cultural environments

ICT (Information, Communications and Technology) LITERACY
Apply Technology Effectively
! Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate and communicate
information
! Use digital technologies (computers, PDAs, media players, GPS, etc.),
communication/networking tools and social networks appropriately to access, manage, integrate,
evaluate and create information to successfully function in
a knowledge economy
! Apply a fundamental understanding of the ethical/legal issues surrounding the
access and use of information technologies

LIFE AND CAREER SKILLS

Toda y ’ s li fe a nd wor k e n vironments r e quire f a r m or e than thinki ng ski ll s a nd c ontent
knowledge. The ability to navigate the complex life and work environments in the
globally competitive information age requires students to pay rigorous attention to
developing adequate life and career skills.

FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTABILITY
Adapt to Change
 Adapt to varied roles, jobs responsibilities, schedules and contexts
 Work effectively in a climate of ambiguity and changing priorities

Be Flexible
 Incorporate feedback effectively
 Deal positively with praise, setbacks and criticism
 Understand, negotiate and balance diverse views and beliefs to reach workable
solutions, particularly in multi-cultural environments

INITIATIVE AND SELF-DIRECTION

Manage Goals and Time
 Set goals with tangible and intangible success criteria
 Balance tactical (short-term) and strategic (long-term) goals
 Utilize time and manage workload efficiently
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

153

Work Independently
 Monitor, define, prioritize and complete tasks without direct oversight

Be Self-directed Learners
 Go beyond basic mastery of skills and/or curriculum to explore and expand
one ’s ow n lea rnin g a nd oppor tuni ti e s to g a in e x pe rtise
 Demonstrate initiative to advance skill levels towards a professional level
 Demonstrate commitment to learning as a lifelong process
 Reflect critically on past experiences in order to inform future progress

SOCIAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL SKILLS

Interact Effectively with Others
 Know when it is appropriate to listen and when to speak
 Conduct themselves in a respectable, professional manner

Work Effectively in Diverse Teams

Respect cultural differences and work effectively with people from a range of
social and cultural backgrounds
 Respond open-mindedly to different ideas and values
 Leverage social and cultural differences to create new ideas and increase both
innovation and quality of work

PRODUCTIVITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Manage Projects
 Set and meet goals, even in the face of obstacles and competing pressures
 Prioritize, plan and manage work to achieve the intended result

Produce Results
 Demonstrate additional attributes associated with producing high quality
products including the abilities to:
 Work positively and ethically
 Manage time and projects effectively
 Multi-task
 Participate actively, as well as be reliable and punctual
 Present oneself professionally and with proper etiquette
 Collaborate and cooperate effectively with teams
 Respect and appreciate team diversity
 Be accountable for results

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

154
LEADERSHIP AND RESPONSIBILITY

Guide and Lead Others
 Use interpersonal and problem-solving skills to influence and guide others
toward a goal
 Leverage strengths of others to accomplish a common goal
 Inspire others to reach their very best via example and selflessness
 Demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior in using influence and power

Be Responsible to Others
 Act responsibly with the interests of the larger community in mind
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

155
Appendix B

Expected Student Learning Results at Restructured Health Sciences Academy

The list below is the Expected Student Learning Results (ESLRs) for students at the
Restructured Academy of Health Sciences. The ESLRs were established to conform to WASC
accreditation requirements.

I. Collaborative Workers Who:
a) Learn from and work collaboratively with others in formal and informal settings
b) Adapt to varied roles and responsibilities while working productively with others
c) Exercise personal responsibility and flexibility in personal, workplace, and community
contexts

II. Effective Communicators Who:
a) Organize ideas and communicate thoughts and information orally
b) Understand, manage, and create effective oral, written and multimedia communication
in a variety of forms and contexts
c) Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate and communicate information

III. Critical Thinkers Who:
a) Read, analyze and comprehend complex material
b) Demonstrate ability to frame, analyze, and solve problems
c) Reflect critically on learning experiences and processes
d) Make connections between curriculum and real world applications in preparation for
competition in a global society

IV. Productive Learners Who:
a) Evaluate priorities, set goals, and create a plan for post-secondary education and careers
b) Monitor own understanding and needs, locating appropriate resources, and transferring
learning from one domain to another
c) Demonstrate self-motivation and self-discipline

V. Responsible Citizens Who:
a) Act responsibly with the interests of the larger/global community in mind
b) Demonstrate ethical behavior in personal, workplace, and community contexts
c) Demonstrate respect and appreciation of individual differences, cultures and beliefs
d) S e t hi g h st a nda rds f or one ’s se lf a nd oth e rs a nd wor k dil ig e ntl y to m e e t d e fine d st a nda r ds.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

156
Appendix C

Aggregate 21st Century skills, PBL skills, and ESLRs List

Appendix C is the aggregate list of 21
st
Century and PBL skills combined with ESLRs.
These are the expected skill set for college and career ready academy students who graduate
from the Restructured Academy of Health Sciences.

Collaborative Workers Who:
Learn from and work collaboratively with others in formal and informal settings:

1a) Students work collaboratively in formal settings such as work-based sites & classrooms.
(Examples: lab procedures, health fairs, project period, guest speaker lectures, field trips to
universities & medical sites, job shadowing, mentoring)
Students are life-long learners that engage in learning in all settings, including daily experiences
and interactions outside the classroom. (Examples: research & information sharing in the home;
group work outside of the classroom/after-school; learning through conversations with
community members)

Adapt to varied roles and responsibilities while working productively with others:

1b) Students are able to independently determine roles & responsibilities within a group, and are
comfortable taking on any of the various roles in a group-work setting (Examples: facilitator,
time-keeper, note-taker, speaker) Students are able to stay on-task and be self-directed in a group
setting, and all members actively participate and contribute to group work.

Exercise personal responsibility and flexibility in personal, workplace, and community contexts:

1c) Students make sound decisions in personal, work & community contexts. Students
demonstrate flexibility when presented with obstacles, challenges, or unintended outcomes by
finding alternate solutions.

II. Effective Communicators Who:

Organize ideas and communicate thoughts and information orally:

2a) Students are able to orally articulate ideas in sequential and logical fashion. Students speak
with confidence and authority, and are able to code-switch depending on the setting and audience
they are presented with (Examples: classroom debates, speeches, presentations, job-shadowing
share-outs) Students demonstrate a strong command of academic language by applying content
vocabulary in their speech.

Understand, manage, and create effective oral, written and multimedia communication in a
variety of forms and contexts:

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

157
2b) Effectively identify and utilize reliable sources of information to create oral, written and
multimedia presentations. Students will synthesize research information and paraphrase to suit
their presentation needs. Students are aware of consequences and implications of plagiarism;
and cite sources appropriately. (Ex: Easybib.com, Purdue Owl) Understand and produce
different genres of writing appropriate to the purpose of the assignment. (Examples: research
papers, narratives, persuasive writing, PowerPoint)

Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate and communicate information:

2c) Students must demonstrate technology proficiency in computers/mac/pc, tablets, web-based
and computer software presentation programs. (Ex: Prezi, PowerPoint, Animoto) Students draw
from a variety of primary and secondary sources to formulate assertions. Students will use
academic database to search and locate reliable sources of information. (Ex: Eric, JStor, Google
Scholar)

III. Critical Thinkers Who:

Read, analyze and comprehend complex material:

3a) Students are skilled readers who can understand advanced text, ex: expositor, technical,
grade-level, and college-level texts. Students can draw common themes from a variety of text,
read with purpose, and apply understanding of text structure by anticipating concepts and
drawing relevant information.

Demonstrate ability to frame, analyze, and solve problems:

3b) Students identify problems, contributing factors and affected populations. Students locate
relevant information in order to identify or propose solutions and discuss implications.

Reflect critically on learning experiences and processes:

3c) At key points, students discuss performance expectations as delineated on a rubric, work
progress. Teachers provide formative and summative feedback to support student individual
reflection in comparing project outcomes to the project rubric and discuss reflections as a class.

Make connections between curriculum and real world applications in preparation for
competition in a global society:

3d) Students engage in authentic projects that examine a relevant/global issues. Students use
multiple high-performance work organization skills (ex: collaborative work, use of technology,
collection, organization, analysis, and communication of information)

IV. Productive Learners Who:

Evaluate priorities, set goals, and create a plan for post-secondary education and careers:

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

158
4a) Students identify and monitor enrollment in prerequisite courses that support post-secondary
aspirations and their progress towards graduation. Teachers post grades every two-three weeks.
Students self-monitor progress and meet with the counselor on a semester basis to discuss
interventions and enrichment opportunities. Students visit university campuses and participate in
guest speaker lectures to acquire information about career options. Students engage in activities
and discussions during advisory period to explore career options and pathways.

Monitor own understanding and needs, locating appropriate resources, and transferring learning
from one domain to another:

4b) Students use formative and summative assessment data, student work, and checking for
understanding to monitor understanding or gaps in knowledge. Students are self-directed
learners who ask teachers for clarification or seek out available resources from others (ex:
students, teachers, staff members, programs, information postings). Students apply prior
knowledge or use clarification and resource finding skills to support learning. Students make
connections between content areas in order to deepen understanding.

Demonstrate self-motivation and self-discipline:

4c) Students establish personal timelines/deadlines and habitually keep them. Students pursue
personal goals independently, without external prodding. S tudents’ moti va ti on is i ntrinsic and
students understand the relationship between their effort and success.

V. Responsible Citizens Who:

Act responsibly with the interests of the larger/global community in mind:

5a) Students make choices that positively impact themselves and the community.

Demonstrate ethical behavior in personal, workplace, and community contexts:

5b) Students exercise sound moral judgment in all arenas of their life with or without
supervision.

Demonstrate respect and appreciation of individual differences, cultures and beliefs:

5c) Students have knowledge/exposure and demonstrate appreciation for a variety of cultures and
beliefs distinct from their own.

S e t hi g h st a nda rds for on e ’s se lf a nd oth e rs a nd w or k dil ig e ntl y to m e e t def ined stand a rds:

5d) Students aim to meet and exceed academic and personal goals. They encourage and support
peers to do the same.

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

159
Appendix D

Document Analysis Checklist

This checklist was created by extracting 10 overarching skills from the themes on the aggregate
list of 21
st
century skills and ESLRs (Appendices A and C). Listed under each theme and
overarching skills are bullet points of discreet skills that support mastery of each theme. The
skills on this checklist will be ticked/checked if observable evidence of these skills are present in
the submitted lesson plan for the Project Period.

Collaborative Workers

1. Learn from and work collaboratively with others
2. Adapt to varied roles
3. Exercise responsibility and flexibility

____Work effectively and respectfully with diverse teams
____Flexibility and willingness to be helpful and compromise to accomplish a
common goal
____Assume shared responsibility for collaborative work, value individual
contributions
____Collaborate and cooperate effectively with teams
____Be accountable for results
____Conduct themselves in a respectable, professional manner
____Respect cultural differences and work efficiently with others

Effective Communicators

4. Organize ideas and communicate thoughts and information orally
5. Understand, manage, and create effective oral, written, and multimedia communication in
a variety of forms and contexts
6. Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate, and communicate information

____Ask significant questions that clarify points of view
____Use appropriate expressions and interpretations in diverse, multi-cultural
environments
____Students articulate thoughts and ideas in oral, written and non-verbal forms
____Listen to decipher meaning, values, attitudes, and intentions
____Know when it is appropriate to listen and when to speak
____Use communication to inform, instruct, motivate, and persuade
____Utilize multiple media and technologies, and know how to judge their
effectiveness/assess their impact
____Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate and communicate
information
____Understand how and why media messages are constructed
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

160
____Examine how individuals interpret messages and how values and points of view
are included/excluded to influence beliefs and behaviors

Critical Thinkers

7. Read, analyze, and comprehend complex material
8. Demonstrate ability to frame, analyze, and solve problems
9. Reflect critically on the learning experiences and processes
10. Make connections between curriculum and real world applications in preparation for
competition in a global society

____Students are creating new ideas
____Students are refining, analyzing, and evaluating their own ideas in order to
improve and maximize creative efforts
____Students implement and communicate new ideas to others
____Students are open and responsive to new and diverse perspectives: giving and
receiving critical feedback
____Demonstrate originality and inventiveness in the work; understand real world
limits
____Failure is an opportunity to learn, experimentation is a cyclical process
____Act on creative ideas to make a tangible and useful contribution to the field in
which the innovation will occur
____Deductive or inductive reasoning
____Analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall
outcomes in complex systems
____Evaluate arguments and claims
____Synthesize and make connections between information and arguments
____Interpret information and draw conclusions
____Reflect on learning experiences
____Solve different kinds of non-familiar problems
____Evaluate information (sources)
____Use information accurately and creatively for the issue at hand
____Manage the flow of information from a wide variety of sources
____Apply a fundamental understanding of the ethical/legal issues surrounding the
access and use of information

Productive Learners

11. Students aim to meet and exceed academic and personal goals. They encourage and
support peers to do the same.

____Access information efficiently and effectively
____Know ethical/legal issues around access and use of media
____Utilize appropriate media creation tools, characteristics and conventions
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

161
____Use digital technology and social networks to access, manage, integrate, and
create information to function
____Apply ethical/legal issues with the use and access of technology
____Adapt to varied roles, jobs, responsibilities, schedules and contexts
____Work effectively in a climate of ambiguity and changing priorities
____Incorporate feedback effectively
____Deal positively with praise, setbacks, and criticism
____Understand and balance diverse views to reach workable solutions in multi-
cultural environments
____Set goals with tangible and intangible success criteria
____Create short (tactical) and long (strategic) goals
____Use time and manage workload efficiently
____Monitor, define, prioritize and complete tasks independently
____Demonstrate initiative to advance skill and learn
____Reflect on past experiences to inform future progress
____Set and meet goals even in the face of obstacles
____Prioritize, plan and manage work to achieve the intended result
____Produce high quality products
____Leverage strengths of others to accomplish a common goal.
____Demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior in using influence and power
____Act responsibly with the interests of the larger community in mind

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

162
Appendix E

Classroom Observation Checklist

This checklist was created by extracting 10 overarching skills from the themes on the aggregate
list of 21
st
century skills and ESLRs (Appendices A and C). Listed under each theme and
overarching skills are bullet points of discreet skills that support mastery of each theme. The
skills on this checklist will be ticked/checked if observable evidence of these skills are present
during the classroom instruction of the Project Period.

Collaborative Workers

1. Learn from and work collaboratively with others
2. Adapt to varied roles
3. Exercise responsibility and flexibility

____Work effectively and respectfully with diverse teams
____Flexibility and willingness to be helpful and compromise to accomplish a
common goal
____Assume shared responsibility for collaborative work, value individual
contributions
____Collaborate and cooperate effectively with teams
____Be accountable for results
____Conduct themselves in a respectable, professional manner
____Respect cultural differences and work efficiently with others

Effective Communicators

4. Organize ideas and communicate thoughts and information orally
5. Understand, manage, and create effective oral, written, and multimedia communication in
a variety of forms and contexts
6. Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate, and communicate information

____Ask significant questions that clarify points of view
____Use appropriate expressions and interpretations in diverse, multi-cultural
environments
____Students articulate thoughts and ideas in oral, written and non-verbal forms
____Listen to decipher meaning, values, attitudes, and intentions
____Know when it is appropriate to listen and when to speak
____Use communication to inform, instruct, motivate, and persuade
____Utilize multiple media and technologies, and know how to judge their
effectiveness/assess their impact
____Use technology as a tool to research, organize, evaluate and communicate
information
____Understand how and why media messages are constructed
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

163
____Examine how individuals interpret messages and how values and points of view
are included/excluded to influence beliefs and behaviors

Critical Thinkers

7. Read, analyze, and comprehend complex material
8. Demonstrate ability to frame, analyze, and solve problems
9. Reflect critically on the learning experiences and processes
10. Make connections between curriculum and real world applications in preparation for
competition in a global society

____Students are creating new ideas
____Students are refining, analyzing, and evaluating their own ideas in order to
improve and maximize creative efforts
____Students implement and communicate new ideas to others
____Students are open and responsive to new and diverse perspectives: giving and
receiving critical feedback
____Demonstrate originality and inventiveness in the work; understand real world
limits
____Failure is an opportunity to learn, experimentation is a cyclical process
____Act on creative ideas to make a tangible and useful contribution to the field in
which the innovation will occur
____Deductive or inductive reasoning
____Analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall
outcomes in complex systems
____Evaluate arguments and claims
____Synthesize and make connections between information and arguments
____Interpret information and draw conclusions
____Reflect on learning experiences
____Solve different kinds of non-familiar problems
____Evaluate information (sources)
____Use information accurately and creatively for the issue at hand
____Manage the flow of information from a wide variety of sources
____Apply a fundamental understanding of the ethical/legal issues surrounding the
access and use of information

Productive Learners

11. Students aim to meet and exceed academic and personal goals. They encourage and
support peers to do the same.

____Access information efficiently and effectively
____Know ethical/legal issues around access and use of media
____Utilize appropriate media creation tools, characteristics and conventions
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

164
____Use digital technology and social networks to access, manage, integrate, and
create information to function
____Apply ethical/legal issues with the use and access of technology
____Adapt to varied roles, jobs, responsibilities, schedules and contexts
____Work effectively in a climate of ambiguity and changing priorities
____Incorporate feedback effectively
____Deal positively with praise, setbacks, and criticism
____Understand and balance diverse views to reach workable solutions in multi-
cultural environments
____Set goals with tangible and intangible success criteria
____Create short (tactical) and long (strategic) goals
____Use time and manage workload efficiently
____Monitor, define, prioritize and complete tasks independently
____Demonstrate initiative to advance skill and learn
____Reflect on past experiences to inform future progress
____Set and meet goals even in the face of obstacles
____Prioritize, plan and manage work to achieve the intended result
____Produce high quality products
____Leverage strengths of others to accomplish a common goal.
____Demonstrate integrity and ethical behavior in using influence and power
____Act responsibly with the interests of the larger community in mind

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

165
Appendix F

Interview Questions

1. What do you think is the role of 21
st
century skills and applied project based learning in
education? How do you think 21
st
century skills and applied project based-learning affect
student achievement? (K)
2. What is your understanding of the project period? (K)
3. What are the 21
st
century skills and applied project based learning outcomes? (K)
4. Does project period align with your own teaching philosophy? If so please share why and
how? (K)
5. What aspect of project period do you find most valuable? (M)
6. How much do you value teaching 21
st
century skills and applied project based learning?
Do you teach it in other classes apart from project period? (M)
7. Do feel prepared to lesson plan and teach a 21
st
century curriculum? (M)
8. Describe the ways in which you have taught 21
st
century skills and applied project-based
learning in project period. (Pedagogical approach/teaching style) (K)
9. Describe examples of applied project based learning activities that you have incorporated
into your curriculum. (M)
10. Do you use technology in project period? If so, what kinds of things do you do? What are
the students expected to do with technology? (K)
11. How do you ensure rigor in the student created projects? (K)
12. How confident do you feel that you are able to provide instruction to your students on the
following: (M)
a. In the role of facilitator vs. presenter
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

166
b. Using and teaching technology
c. Teaching effective oral, written, and multi-media communication
d. Teaching students how to analyze and evaluate complex material
e. Teaching metacognitive knowledge and self-regulation skills and productive
learners
13. How confident do you feel about teaching 21
st
century skills? (M)
14. How confident do you feel about incorporating applied problem/project-based learning?
(M)
15. How do you support students who have difficulty staying motivated? (K)
16. How much training in teaching 21
st
century skills and applied project based learning have
you received? (O)
17. Have you received professional development learning about or planning for the project
period? Evaluate how it went? (O)
18. Do you collaborate with other teachers about project period? If so, how much time do
you spend? (M/O)
19. Would you be interested in attending professional development outside of school hours?
(M)
20. Describe your sense of support and resources for project period. (O)
21. How equipped and prepared do you feel to teach 21
st
century skills in project period?
What support would you need? (M/O)
22. Have you experienced any challenges with teaching project period? Or, do you anticipate
barriers? If so, what are they? (M/O)
23. Would you change anything about project period? (O)
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

167
24. Based on your submitted documents and classroom observations, I did not observe
certain qualities, do you have evidence of teaching skills listed on the document analysis
or classroom observation checklists?
25. Is there anything else you would like to add to our conversation?

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AT A RESTRUCTURED ACADEMY

168
Appendix G

6 A’ s Rub r ic

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This case study used the Gap Analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) framework, a six-step problem solving approach to identify goals, determine performance gaps, diagnose causes, recommend research-based solutions, and evaluate the results to examine student achievement of a Restructured Health Sciences High School Academy’s Expected Student Learning Results/21st Century outcomes. The purpose of this study was to (a) identify the underlying skills required in order for students to achieve the outcomes, (b) determine the degree to which these skills are being taught in the Friday Project Period, (c) identify appropriate assessments to measure student achievement of these skills, and (d) determine the degree to which students are achieving these skills. In this qualitative case study, document analysis, classroom observations, and interviews were conducted to collect data from six high school Project Period teachers. Findings from this study indicate that teachers like teaching the Project Period, but lack knowledge and skills about expected student learning outcomes and how to transition their roles from lecturer to facilitator. This study also found that teachers lack value and structured time to plan for the Project Period. This study recommends solutions, drawn from the literature, to help the stakeholders within the organization to address these challenges. This case study demonstrates how the Gap Analysis framework is used to identify performance gaps, evaluate current practices, and address performance issues when implementing the Project Period.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: School site leadership factors

PDF

An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: central office leadership factors

PDF

An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: teacher factors

PDF

Addressing the challenges for teachers of English learners in a California elementary school using the gap analysis approach

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 learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model

PDF

A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high schol: a focus on teacher collaboration and cultural competence

PDF

Increasing student performance on the Independent School Entrance Exam (ISEE) using the Gap Analysis approach

PDF

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

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 language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model

PDF

Increasing parent involvement at the high school level using the gap analysis framework

PDF

Establishing a systematic evaluation of an academic nursing program using a gap analysis framework

PDF

Examining faculty challenges to improve African Americans’ developmental English outcomes at an urban southern California community college using gap analysis model

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

The use of gap analysis to increase student completion rates at Travelor Adult School

PDF

Examining liberal arts colleges achievement of student learning outcomes for a global perspective: an innovation gap analysis study

PDF

A-G course completion percentage upon high school graduation. A gap analysis

PDF

Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis

Asset Metadata

Creator Ramos-Beal, Camille (author)

Core Title Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Degree Conferral Date 2013-05

Publication Date 04/30/2013

Defense Date 03/04/2013

Tag 21st century learning,gap analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,problem based learning,project based learning,project period,restructured academy

Advisor Yates, Kenneth (committee chair), Rueda, Robert (committee member), Wagner, Jennifer (committee member)

Creator Email camillem.ramos.beal@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11295224

Unique identifier UC11295224

Legacy Identifier etd-RamosBealC-1638

Document Type Dissertation