Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of english language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model
(USC Thesis Other)
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of english language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 1
A CAPSTONE PROJECT: CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AT
SUNSHINE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL USING THE GAP ANALYSIS MODEL
by
Sharon L. H. Bennett
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 Sharon L. H. Bennett
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 2
Dedication
I dedicate this dissertation to the following: To My Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ,
through whom all blessings flow: I never would have made it without You! To my husband,
Alpercy Bennett, Jr.: you are an amazing support and I appreciate all that you have done to make
this happen. You have made huge sacrifices for me, and I love you immensely. To my parents,
Charles and Marva Hobbs: I thank you for giving me life and for always believing that I could
accomplish great things. If I don't get the opportunity to pay you back, I promise to pay it
forward. To my mother in law, Wessie Bennett: thank you for being gracious and loving. I felt
your prayers through this entire process. To my sister, Susanne Hobbs Reed and brother, Charles
Patrick Hobbs, and their families (Angelia, Josh, Siobhan, Kevin, and Mackenzie): thank you for
understanding the missed lunches, the forgotten events, the sporadic calls and the absentminded
discussions. I love you all! Dr. Dan Brooks, you were the one who sparked my interest in this
doctoral journey. You are a consummate educator and an inspiration to all who know you! To
my Mt. Zion Baptist Church, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., and McAuliffe Elementary
families, thank you for all of your prayers and encouragement. I am truly blessed to have you in
my life.
Finally, this dissertation is written in memory of the following individuals who have
guided and supported me. To my maternal grandmother, Mary Elizabeth Dugger Draper: you are
to this day the best teacher in the universe; thank you for inspiring me. To my fraternal
grandmother, Maggie McClinton Hobbs: I thank you for just believing in me. I will always be
your gal. And, to Alpercy Bennett, Sr., who started this journey with me on earth, and finished it
with me from glory: thank you for being my second dad.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 3
Acknowledgments
This has been an incredible journey. I am thankful to so many people for making this
possible. To my dissertation chair, Dr. Robert Rueda, thank you for this amazing opportunity to
work with your thematic dissertation group. I have learned so much! Your knowledge, honesty,
and insight were greatly appreciated.
To my dissertation committee, Dr. Kenneth Yates and Dr. Laurie Love, thank you for
your support through this process. Your patience and graciousness will never be forgotten. To
Juan Carlos Herrera and Enyetta Mingo-Long, thank you for being such a wonderful inquiry
team! In you I have found two friends that I will have forever. Go Team Sunshine!
To the remaining members of "Team Rueda," Carlos Avila, Merle Bugarin, Evelyn
Jimenez, Michael Kurland, Brent Morris, and Julie Shah, thank you for sharing your research
and your resources.
Finally, to the Sunshine Elementary community, thank you for allowing our team to come
to your school. You are incredible educators, and I learned so much from all of you. Continue
loving your students and supporting their development. I wish you much success in the future.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 7
Abstract 8
Chapter 1: Introduction 9
Chapter 2: Literature Review 16
Chapter 3: Methodology 32
Chapter 4: Findings 53
Chapter 5: Recommended Research-Based Solutions 81
Chapter 6: Implementation of Recommended Solutions 103
References 127
Appendices
A. Parent Climate Survey (English) 141
B. Parent Climate Survey (Spanish) 144
C. Teacher Survey 147
D. Student Reading Attitudes Survey 150
E. Teacher Interview Questions 155
F. Principal Interview Questions 156
G. Assumed Causes Chart 157
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 5
H. Dissertation Proposal Presentation 161
I. Presentation to Sunshine Administration 163
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 6
List of Tables
Table 3.1. Mission statement, organizational goal, and stakeholder expectations 36
Table 3.2. Summary of teacher demographics 39
Table 3.3. Sunshine Elementary student demographics summary 40
Table 3.4. Knowledge assumed causes 46
Table 3.5. Motivation assumed causes 47
Table 3.6. Organization assumed causes 48
Table 4.1. Summary of goal alignment 62
Table 4.2. Summary of professional development 64
Table 4.3. Summary of teacher collaboration 66
Table 4.4. Caring environment parent climate survey responses 68
Table 4.5. Problem solving parent climate survey responses 70
Table 4.6. Reasons for school to home contact by teachers 72
Table 4.7. Summary of parent engagement 74
Table 4.8. Summary of culturally relevant instructional strategies 76
Table 4.9. Summary of site-based leadership support 79
Table 6.1. Example of SMART goal elements and descriptors 106
Table 6.2. Summary of assessment questions using the Kilpatrick model 123
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 7
List of Figures
Figure 3.1. Sunshine Elementary School demographics 41
Figure 3.2. Illustration of the selection of assumed causes 51
Figure 5.1. Epstein's sphere of influence (Epstein, 2010) 93
Figure 5.2. Conceptual framework of how the Parent Institute for Quality
Education (PIQE) influenced Latino parents' participation in
their children's education (Chrispeels & Rivero, 2001) 100
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 8
Abstract
This project was a capstone project conducted by a team of three doctoral students. The project
focused on systematic and long-term underachievement of the English Language (EL)
population of a single school, Sunshine Elementary School, using the gap analysis model (Clark
& Estes, 2008). More specifically, the purpose of the analysis was to examine possible causes
for the literacy gap that impact student reading achievement at Sunshine. As part of the problem-
solving model, the inquiry group reviewed the school’s mission, goals, and organizational gaps.
The team investigated possible root causes for the performance gaps noted. During this phase of
the project, data were collected from Sunshine Elementary administrators, teachers, parents, and
students who completed surveys regarding their views towards literacy and the overall school
environment. The principal and several teachers participated in semi-structured face-to-face
interviews, discussions, and a review of the current school adopted literacy program. This step
led to a condensed list of validated root causes: (a) goal alignment; (b) professional development;
(c) teacher collaboration; (d) parental engagement; (e) culturally relevant pedagogy; and (f) site
based leadership. Finally, the inquiry team developed recommendations for viable solutions
based on a review of the literature as well as research and theory on developmental perspectives
on reading and literacy. This document focused on the following two causes: (a) teacher
collaboration; and (b) parental involvement as it pertains to the support of literacy instruction and
support. Awareness of the benefits of developmental reading instruction and the many means
that schools can utilize to ensure access to effective activities has implications for positive social
change by linking the multiple dimensions of reading, literacy, and comprehension development
for ELs at Sunshine Elementary.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 9
Chapter 1:
Introduction
Authors: Sharon L.H. Bennett, Juan Carlos Herrera, and Enyetta Mingo-Long
1
This gap analysis project focused on the differences of systematic and long-term
underachievement of the English Learner (EL) population of Sunshine Elementary School.
2
The
goal of this analysis was to examine possible causes and recommend solutions. The problem will
first be laid out and investigated from a national perspective, before being addressed at the local
level.
The Problem
The rapid growth of the United States English Learner population is one of the most
significant demographic trends in the United States. With the expeditious evolution of ELs in the
US accounting for one-fifth of the current school age population, the long-term educational
underachievement patterns of these students is of considerable importance (US Census Bureau,
1
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors
listed, reflecting the team approach to this project. While this version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author. While jointly authored dissertations are not
the norm of most doctoral programs, a collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices.
To meet their objective of developing highly skilled practitioners equipped to take on real-world
challenges, the USC Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted
our inquiry team to carry out this shared venture.
2
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to
refer to the school, district, and community.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 10
2006). The rise of ELs of school-age has increased by a dramatic 150%; ELs now account for one-
sixth of the school-age population, and over one-fifth of the public elementary school enrollments
(Verdugo, 2006). In the US school-age population, the educational outcomes of English Learner
students are far behind non-ELs. For example, ELs have exhibited lower levels of school
readiness at the start of kindergarten than their English speaking counterparts (Anderson, 2005).
The high school completion rate for ELs is substantially lower than for white students.
Furthermore, EL students are less likely to attend and graduate college (US Census Bureau, 2006).
The achievement disparities for ELs in education continue to be a formidable problem decade after
decade. This project investigated specific causes for elementary EL student literacy
underachievement that may be addressed by targeted interventions. This review examined factors
found to be important to the academic progress of EL students from the national, state, and local
district level, which provided the larger context for the current project.
Importance of the Problem
Student demographics are rapidly changing in the United States even as achievement
disparities persist. These changes present new challenges for teachers and administrators across
the nation. By the turn of the millennium, 14 million students spoke a language other than
English at home (August, 2007). According to the National Center for Education Statistics
(2004), Spanish speakers represent the largest group of language minority students, followed by
Asian language speakers, and then other European languages. Schools nationwide are struggling
to meet the demand of increasing populations of English-language learners. One reason for the
struggles that the schools are encountering is the sheer diversity of languages students are using
across the 50 states. In the 2000-2001 school year, over 460 languages were reportedly spoken
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 11
by ELs in the United States (Kindler, 2002). The high numbers of ELs in schools, the vast
languages spoken by ELs, and the high rates of teachers unprepared to teach this particular
population has led to significant performance gaps between ELs and their non-EL counterparts.
Rapid demographic shifts during the last few decades have created new conditions
throughout society. For instance, there is a new wave of immigrant workers who are considered
Limited English Proficient (LEP). According to Sum et al. (2002), roughly 46% of immigrant
workers are considered LEP. Those of Hispanic origin have shown to face particular
disadvantages, increasingly evident through the types of jobs available to workers with limited
language skills. Jobs of today require increased literacy skills that some workers are not able to
meet. More entry-level jobs now demand that workers be able to read, write, and solve problems
in English. K-12 schools are ideal places where students master sufficient English to be
competitive in the job market and/or to succeed in higher education settings. However, many
ELs are not being adequately prepared for such tasks.
English language proficiency is also significant in determining what type of life an
individual will live. Duval-Couetil and Mikulecky (2010) have observed a strong correlation
between language proficiency and lifetime earnings, whereby, the higher the language
proficiency of an individual, the more money an individual will earn throughout his or her
lifetime. This reiterates the importance of EL population mastery of the English language before
high school graduation. Society is demanding a new type of worker, one that is more skilled and
that has a mastery of the English language. The overall low performance of ELs is a significant
concern for schools across the country and society as a whole. Currently, there are significant
performance gaps between ELs and their non-EL counterparts, which affect schools and the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 12
larger context. As the number of EL students increase, so too does the need for solutions for
effectively improving EL performance. This is an arduous task for educators, as schools are
overwhelmingly ill-equipped to effectively educate ELs, who present unique challenges.
Since the 2002 implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), states are
required to report the performance of all students, including major subgroups (Kindler, 2002).
Among the largest subgroups is the EL population. The scores of ELs on the California
Standardized Test (CST) are used to determine the schools’ overall Academic Performance Index
(API) and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Failure to meet either or both of these targets
may result in sanctions for participating schools.
Schools are also required to help ELs improve their language proficiency. The California
English Language Development Test (CELDT) was implemented in the state in 2001; it is used
to formally assess the English language proficiency of EL students (Mora, Villa, & Dávila, 2006).
Students are given the delineation of EL based on their home language. The CELDT assesses
students in four areas: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. The purpose of the assessment
is (a) to measure the students’ English proficiency level and (b) to help measure the movement of
students to the early advanced and advanced bands, which demonstrates that students are
proficient in English. Over the last decade, schools have been held accountable at the state and
federal level for improving the performance of their EL population. It is imperative that schools
across the nation identify the needs of their particular EL populations and come up with effective
strategies to help improve their performance.
The underperformance of ELs in literacy has a negative impact on society at large. If ELs
struggle in literacy-related activities, they are in danger of falling short of academic standards.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 13
Without this critical foundation, EL students are more likely to struggle in school and less likely
to graduate high school. Students who do not graduate from high school may be suited for
neither the rigors of the workforce nor the academic demands of higher education. It is therefore
essential that schools address the problem of literacy instruction and learning, especially at the
elementary level. The problem must be acknowledged and root causes determined. It is
essential to investigate this problem further and determine some realistic and effective solutions.
Specific Purpose of the Analysis
The purpose of the project was to examine possible causes for the reading achievement
gap at a single school, Sunshine Elementary School, using the gap analysis model developed by
Clark and Estes (2008).
3
Specifically, the inquiry group examined factors that impacted student
achievement, investigated possible causes, and developed viable solutions for Sunshine. Specific
attention was given to the educational barriers that exist within the EL population from both a
national and local perspective.
3
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with two other USC Rossier School of
Education doctoral candidates, Juan Carlos Herrera and Enyetta Mingo-Long. Three doctoral
students met with Sunshine Elementary School with the aim of helping the school resolve a
genuine problem. However, the process for dissecting and resolving the problem was too large
for a single dissertation. As a result, the three dissertations produced by our inquiry team
collectively address the needs of Sunshine Elementary School (see Herrera, 2013; Mingo-Long,
2013).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 14
Definition of Key Terms
API: Academic Performance Index
AYP: Adequate Yearly Progress
CST: California Standardized Test
CDE: California Department of Education
CELDT: California English Language Development Test
CUSD: California Unified School District
EADMS: Educator's Assessment Data Management System
EL: English Learner
ELAC: English Learner Advisory Council
ELD: English Language Development
FoK: Funds of Knowledge
NCLB: No Child Left Behind Act
OARS: Online Assessment Reporting System
PCK: Pedagogical Content Knowledge
PI: Program Improvement
PIQE: Parent Institute for Quality Education
PLC: Professional Learning Communities
PTA: Parent Teacher Association
SARC: School Accountability Report Card
SDAIE: Specially-Designed Academic Instruction in English
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 15
SMART: Specific – Measurable – Attainable – Results-driven – Timely
SSC: School Site Council
ZPD: Zone of Proximal Development
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 16
Chapter 2:
Literature Review
Authors: Sharon L.H. Bennett, Juan Carlos Herrera, and Enyetta Mingo-Long
4
This chapter provides an overview of prominent factors that contribute to the disparity
between ELs and non-ELs academic achievement in general. Since this information provides the
general context for this problem area, it will be used as the foundation for examining EL reading
achievement in a single local setting. These factors include reading achievement on standardized
testing (literacy development) of ELs, academic language, accountability, urban school reform,
and pedagogical content knowledge. Following this general overview, an analysis of how these
issues developed at Sunshine Elementary will be provided with guidance through the literature.
Literacy and English Learners
According to a report of the National Literacy Panel on language Minority Children and
Youth, “Language minority students enter US schools needing to learn oral language and literacy
in a second language, and have to learn with enormous efficiency if they are to catch up with
their monolingual English classmates” (August & Shanahan, 2006, p. 53). The ability to read
defines a student’s success throughout their entire educational career (Kuhn et al., 2010).
Without concentrated attention to providing a strong, systematic literacy program for students,
and their success cannot be assured (Kuhn et al., 2010).
4
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While this version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 17
This section discusses the elements of literacy and how each impacts the reading
achievement of the English Learner. Additionally, the barriers that exist for both English Learner
students and their teachers as it relates to literacy and reading will be explored from both a
national and local perspective.
Language Components
Research conducted by Ramirez (2001) connects the following five language components
with student success:
Phonemic awareness: student ability to identify and manipulate phonemes into a spoken
language.
Phonics: student ability to understand the relationship between letters and spoken words.
Vocabulary and syntax development: student knowledge of stored information on the
meanings and pronunciations of words needed for communication.
Reading fluency: student ability to read words accurately and quickly while recognizing
and comprehending them simultaneously.
Reading comprehension Strategies: student ability to culminate all of the reading skills
and accomplish the goal of reading.
The aforementioned language components are seen as a requisite for effective instruction
of ELs as well as struggling readers Schulman (1986). Darling-Hammond (2000) affirms that
effective instruction must use language components. Prevailing scholarship strongly indicates
that teachers can effectively teach language components by augmenting the language
components with the students’ native language (see Darling-Hammond, 2000; Ramirez, 2001;
Schulman, 1986).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 18
Why Is a Strong Literacy Program Essential for Academic Success?
Literacy development is a process that is componential and cumulative, and continues
through adulthood (August & Shanahan, 2008). Literacy refers to students’ ability to use
language to effectively communicate with others through reading, writing, listening and speaking
activities (Yopp & Yopp, 2000). A successful reader is one that can not only decode, but can
transfer what is read across the curriculum (August & Shanahan, 2008). The ability to read is a
large predictor of student’s attitudes about school and learning (LeClair, Doll, Osborn & Jones,
2009). It is important that teachers be committed to giving students the tools they need to
successfully navigate the educational process.
The Elements of Literacy
The elements of literacy are those specific and explicit activities that support novice,
developing and experienced readers (Dooley & Matthews, 2009). Skills taught primarily
throughout the elementary years follow readers throughout their educational careers, and have
the potential to impact college and career readiness (Jones & King, 2012). This section identifies
the specific elements of literacy essential to creating a successful reader. Additionally, this
section illustrates the interrelationship of these skills and highlights the likelihood of reading
difficulty when one or more skills is not appropriately addressed.
Early reading activities. Clay’s (2005) term emergent literacy refers to the behaviors
that babies and young children demonstrate that emulate the act of reading before the act of
conventional reading occurs (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Studies have observed that children
become readers through a litany of pre-reading activities that prepare them to make connections
with text and understand what is being read (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). Research has shown
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 19
that, from birth, parents and caregivers need to engage babies and toddlers in activities that
introduce the beginnings of oral language (Smith, 2000; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Activities such as
being read to, being sung to, and expressive movement, foster emergent literacy (Smith, 2000;
Yopp & Yopp, 2000).
Phonemic awareness refers to the understanding that the speech stream consists of
sequential sounds than make a difference in communication (August & Shanahan, 2008; Griffith
& Olson, 1992; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Yopp and Yopp (2000) have stressed that phonemic
awareness activities must be age-appropriate. Phonemic awareness can occur through the use of
songs and chants that manipulate phonemes by changing the vowel or consonant sounds that
provide engagement and encourage participation (Smith, 2000; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Even if
the words are nonsensical, the manipulation demonstrates to students how the simple change of a
single sound in a word can also change meaning (Smith, 2000). While these activities are highly
effective, it is important to note that such activities, e.g., singing and chanting, must be deliberate
and part of a systematic literacy/reading program (Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Without such simple
activities, learning how to decode text and comprehend what is read on a literal and figurative
level will be much more difficult (Halle, 2009). For EL students, who may or may not have
phonemic awareness in their primary language, explicit activities that promote phonemic
awareness will promote success in this area (Halle, 2009; Yopp & Yopp, 2000).
Students with strong phonemic awareness skills have a much better chance of being
successful readers than students who do not (Olson & Griffith, 2002; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). Each
day, teachers at the elementary level work with students who have not had the opportunity to
participate in these early activities, which contribute to the struggles that so many students face
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 20
with learning how to read (Olson & Griffith, 2002). For the English Learner, the research
suggests that, because of the differences in phonemes between languages, phonemic awareness
in English should be integrated into the reading readiness process (August & Shanahan, 2008).
When this does not occur, it makes reading and the motivation to persist in reading related
activities even more of a challenge (Halle, 2009). In relation to language abilities, phonological
awareness is the ability to consciously attend to the sounds of language as distinct from its
meaning (August & Shanahan, 2008). This step comes after students have phonemic awareness
and is an indicator of successful reading.
Parental support for early literacy. Student progress in reading has to do with how
adults address the following four aspects of early literacy: (a) print knowledge; (b) phonological
awareness; (c) writing; (d) oral language (Restrepo & Towle-Harmon, 2008). Children between
the ages of two and five need ample opportunity to participate in these activities (Neuman, 2004;
Yopp & Yopp, 2000). The literature suggests that parental activities in the above areas support
success in reading (Kissinger, 2004; Yopp & Yopp, 2000). To support this, parents must be their
child’s principal literacy model (Kissinger, 2004). For example, parents who make the conscious
decision to read are modeling to that child that reading is important (Kissinger, 2004). A concern
is that the parents whose students need the most support do not systematically participate in such
activities (Kissinger, 2004). Parents who have low literacy levels themselves may focus on the
product of reading such as the book or the words, versus the process of reading, which entails
developing an understanding of what is actually being read (Kissinger, 2004).
Phonics, sight words, vocabulary, and fluency. Once students have an understanding
of concept of print and phonological awareness, they are prepared to transfer these skills to
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 21
phonics instruction, sight words, vocabulary, and fluency. The four elements fit together; as
readers develop, the skills build upon one another in such a way that the more comfortable
students become in phonics and sight words, and the more sight words a reader knows, the more
fluent the reader will become. While these skills are focused upon from Kindergarten through
second grade, the processes continue throughout a students’ academic career, albeit not as
explicitly.
Phonics instruction involves understanding the connection with certain letters, groups of
letters, and symbols and assigning specific sound to the symbols through play as well as explicit
instruction (Scully & Roberts, 2001). Although many reading readiness activities have taken
place before students can understand and apply phonics, this is the point in a reader's
development that the student comes to understand themselves as a "reader." For the EL student,
phonics can present difficulties if the sounds and alphabet in their native language differs from
English (Brice & Brice, 2009). This is especially the case if students have not participated in the
early literacy activities previously presented.
As they progress through Kindergarten and first grade, students’ development of sight
words and vocabulary assists them in moving quickly through text; this development is the
predecessor to successful fluency and comprehension (Smith, 2000). A strong sight word
vocabulary is essential because there are words that may or may not have specific phonics rules,
but are used often enough that students need to look at the entire word and know what the word
says (Allen, 1998; Williams, Phillips-Birdsong, Hufnagel, Hungler, & Lundstrom, 2009).
V ocabulary development instruction emphasizes the understanding of the meaning of words in
and out of context (Bauer & Arazi, 2011; Smith, 2000). For the EL student, the emphasis on
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 22
sight words and vocabulary development makes both oral and written production easier, and
improves reading confidence (Bauer & Arazi, 2011).
Fluency is the ability to move through text quickly without losing meaning (Conderman
& Strobel 2008; Rasinski, 2000). Without strong fluency skills, students, especially ELs, will
experience reading difficulty (August & Shanahan, 2008; Conderman & Strobel, 2008; Kuhn,
Meisinger, Levy & Rasinski, 2010). While fluency can be related to phonics, vocabulary, and
sight words, it is also a stand-alone skill that must be practiced explicitly in order for students to
be successful.
Reading comprehension. According to Bauer and Arazi (2011), reading comprehension
is “a complex cognitive process that requires simultaneous use of rapid word recognition and
semantic and syntactic cues in order to construct meaning using personal knowledge and the
content of the text” (p. 383). The ability to comprehend what is read is the reason schools
emphasize the other literacy activities previously discussed (Bauer & Arazi, 2011). It provides
access to all content area instruction (Moss, 2005). Effective comprehension also has strong
implications for college to career readiness (Jones & King, 2012). However, on their own,
literacy skills are not enough without motivation, which plays a large part in reading
comprehension (August & Shanahan, 2008). Ensuring that all students participate in
instructional strategies in an environment that promotes high levels of engagement fosters
motivation.
Appropriate instructional activities. A classroom that is literate and print-rich seeks to
engage students in instructional activities that motivate and encourage reading development
(Hawkins, 2009). Vygotsky (2002) has noted that learning is a highly social construct, where
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 23
students learn best when given opportunities to discuss what is being learned with peers.
Because of this, students need the opportunity to manipulate language in ways that strengthen
their early literacy skills (Hawkins, 2009). This occurs through appropriate instructional
practices that allow for oral interaction. Additionally, instruction must provide appropriate
scaffolding for students in need (Manyak, 2008). Research concerning student engagement
strategies suggests that the systematic application of engagement strategies (e.g., think-pair-share,
use of white boards for response) allows the support necessary for student success (Scott & Teale,
2009).
Barriers to Literacy
Access to the literacy process as a whole is the only assurance of success for all students
(Guccione, 2011; Manyak, 2008). Neglecting or omitting even one part of the process can prove
detrimental for even the brightest of students (Manyak, 2008; Netten, Droop, & Verhoeven,
2010). To further compound this, ELs experience additional concerns with access to the literacy
process than the current dominant group (Guccione, 2011; Hawkins, 2009). This section
considers key barriers to access to literacy as it specifically pertains to the EL student. While
both national and local perspectives have a similar features, they will be discussed separately.
Barriers to literacy: A national dilemma. More than 400 languages are spoken by ELs
enrolled in schools nationally (Kindler, 2002). An obvious dilemma is that, with so many
languages with their own unique linguistic patterns, it can be challenging for teachers to address
the literacy and reading needs of all students (Harper & de Jong, 2009). Additionally, being ill-
prepared to engage in the literacy process has national ramifications. Students who attend public
schools in the US come with their own perceptions of school and learning (Madrid, 2011). They
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 24
are taught by teachers who lack the experience and/or desire to service the English Learner
population in earnest (Harper & de Jong, 2009). Likewise, teachers may have preconceived
ideas concerning the abilities of ELs in their classrooms (Harper & de Jong, 2009). Many
schools are majority English Learner (i.e., over 50%), wherein the impact of substandard
teaching is concentrated on a sizeable population of students. Based on teacher perceptions of
EL students and the level of instruction EL students receive, it is not surprising that there is a
population of ELs who do not have adequate access to the full advantage of the literacy process
as early as the third grade.
While many teachers appreciate that the linguistic differences that EL students bring to
the classroom are beneficial to the overall learning process, there remain many teachers who do
not (Calderón, Slavin, & Sánchez, 2011). Within the literature, three issues emerge that impede
teachers from understanding the particular pedagogical conditions for ELs.
First, teachers of English Learner students do not always believe that the students have
the capacity to learn (Bae, Holloway, Li, & Bempechat, 2008; Calderón et al., 2011). As
students get older and become more adept at examining the differential treatment of teachers, this
perception greatly impacts their efforts on various tasks (Bae et al., 2008; Calderón et al., 2011).
Due to the perceived lack of ability of EL students, coupled with the lack of effort on the part of
students as a result of these perceptions, teachers feel validated to “water down” the curriculum,
therefore disallowing access to grade-level appropriate content and learning activities (Calderón
et al., 2011). The No Child Left Behind legislation requires that all students, including ELs, be
held to the same high academic standard (Office of English Language Acquisition, 2002).
Meanwhile, full access to the curriculum is not guaranteed. Failure to focus on teaching grade-
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 25
level appropriate curriculum adds to the disparity between the achievement of ELs and their non-
EL counterparts (Calderón et al., 2011).
Second, despite a growing number of ELs entering public schools who are in need of
specific strategies to ensure literacy success, many teachers show reluctance to alter their current
practices in the classroom (Calderón et al., 2011). In spite of tremendous within-group variability,
the perception of parental involvement is also a concern with the English Learner. Depending on
the particular cultural group, the infrastructure of the school differs greatly from the culture of
many parents (Madrid, 2011). For example, within many cultures, there is an innate trust in
teachers that compels parents to do what needs to be done without parental interference (Madrid,
2011). The resulting teacher perceptions of parents is disinterest (Madrid, 2011). Teaching
strategies, expectations and procedures may be so dichotomous that parents are unable to help
their child (Madrid, 2011). For example, according to research by Dawson (2009), homework is
an independent activity in the eyes of many groups of parents based on their own schooling.
Much of the homework in the primary grades in United States schools requires parental direction,
participation, and feedback (Dawson, 2009; Gill & Schlossman, 2003). When homework is not
returned or completed to satisfaction, the assumption is that parents do not have an interest in the
education of their children. As Buenning and Tolleffson (1987) have affirmed, EL parents do
care about their children, and they place a high regard on education. However, many EL parents
simply have a value orientation that differs from their white counterparts. For example, students
whose families do not consider reading a recreational activity, but as a survival function may not
perceive reading as a viable choice outside of the constraints of the classroom (Klauda, 2009).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 26
A third concern in regards to the instruction of ELs is that of teacher skill and experience.
Teachers are simply not sufficiently prepared to teach EL students in the manner they should be
taught (Calderón et al., 2011). There are limited teacher education programs offering more than
peripheral training for ELs. In the United States, only 20 states have specific requirements for
EL instruction as part of the credentialing requirement, and even this varies greatly. Although
the need for qualified teachers of ELs is a grave concern, the reality is that the least qualified
teachers are servicing the ELs nationwide (Harper & De Jong, 2009; Hawkins, 2009). Dense
urban areas where large concentrations (i.e., 30% or more) of ELs are taught by newer teachers
who do not have the seniority to choose where they teach (Gandara & Maxwell-Jolly, 2000;
Harper & De Jong, 2009). These newer teachers may not have the epistemological repertoire
necessary to effectively instruct ELs. Additionally, there is a nationwide climate of teachers who
have taught for fewer than five years receiving non-reelect notices due to budget constraints
(Harper & De Jong, 2009). Gandara and Maxwell-Jolly (2000) have explored the issue of pre-
service teachers participating in what they is called the “infusion approach” when preparing new
teachers for the rigors of working with culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms. This
means that pre-service teachers may be given a cursory glance of multiculturalism without the
actual tools to work with such a population. There may be an emphasis on one culture with the
incorrect assumption that this one culture will be the only one that will be taught.
Barriers to literacy: State and local concerns. California features a myriad of
languages. In Southern California, where Sunshine Elementary is located, the predominant
second language is Spanish (US Census Bureau, 2010). The US Census Bureau (2010) has
reported that more than half of the citizens of Centerville, CA were born outside of the Unites
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 27
States; a clear majority of these immigrants hails from Mexico. Additionally, most of the
students within these groups are concentrated in areas that are high poverty (Harper & De Jong,
2009). As discussed previously, teachers who have the least experience were charged with the
duty of teaching the students who need the most support (Harper & De Jong, 2009).
Content Knowledge
In addition to language components, elements of literacy, and barriers to literacy the
literature states that student success is measured through teachers that have a strong command of
content knowledge (Ramirez, 2001). Haycock (1998) has noted the considerable research that
shows how important a teacher’s content knowledge contributes to student learning. Research
regarding the importance of content knowledge is also supported by Darling-Hammond (2000),
who has suggested that content knowledge is vital to good teaching.
Every student and every culture constructs and develops language arts in their own way.
When a teacher fails to understand how cultural differences can yield different developments in
language arts, learners are placed at a disadvantage. As Haycock (1998) has asserted, it is
paramount for teacher educators to attend to the culture of their students and use that culture as a
means of enhancing student knowledge to a diverse student population.
Contributing Factors Related to EL Achievement
There are three additional areas that merit brief discussion related to ELs’ achievement in
literacy:
Urban school reform;
Accountability;
Pedagogical content knowledge.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 28
These areas are important in understanding the educational context for EL students and also
provide clues about areas to investigate in the course of this gap analysis.
Urban school reform. Urban schools across the US are faced with the challenge of
reforming literacy readiness and implementing literacy initiatives for ELs. Often the
accountability measures for urban school reform impede the ability of schools to improve the
literacy development of ELs in a meaningful way. Therefore, the purpose of urban school reform
initiatives is to define what constitutes as a viable literacy program for ELs (Guccione, 2011).
Standards governing these criteria are established with curricular and instructional measures to
substantiate school reform. As future change agents of urban school reform, an analysis of
Sunshine Elementary literacy readiness and implementation of literacy initiatives for its ELs is
essential. More importantly, as educational change agents we must work towards accomplishing
the global goal of promoting institutional changes that encourage long-term effects rather than
short-term efforts (Darling-Hammond, 2000).
Urban school reform is of particular importance to closing the literacy gap at Sunshine
Elementary. Currently, the school has been unable to close the literacy achievement gap with the
current literacy strategies used to teach ELs. Darling-Hammond (2000) has noted that it is the
urban students whom educators have most frequently failed.
The gap analysis project for Sunshine Elementary is significant because more than 50%
of students from racialized populations live in urban areas (US Census Bureau, 2006); nationally,
students of color are the fastest-growing demographic (US Department of Education, 2006).
Darling-Hammond (2000) has posited that, nationally, education systems are not experiencing
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 29
success with the current expanding student population on whom our future economic and social
well-being depend.
Accountability. As Rueda (2011) has articulated, increased accountability is best
exemplified by the federal education law, No Child Left Behind, which holds states, districts, and
schools accountable for student achievement based on standardized test scores (Linn, 2003),
although individual states have implemented their own parallel systems. Rueda (2011) has
described accountability in terms of what students should know represented by what is reflected
on formal assessments and how students compare to others in a specified reference group (p. 26).
The accountability approach has been a highly salient feature of the educational landscape in
recent years, and has been used as an essential tool in educational reform (Rueda, 2011). School
accountability is crucial to the success of Sunshine’s Elementary English Learner population.
Currently, Sunshine is not a program improvement school. However, if the school continues to
show significant EL underachievement, failure to show consistent improvement may lead to
reconstitution. Therefore, the gap analysis project for Sunshine Elementary will assist the school
with being accountable for the literacy achievement of its EL students.
Pedagogical content knowledge. The literature suggests the significance of teachers
possessing strong subject matter competency as well as cultural competence in the classroom as
necessary requirements for student success (Schulman, 1986). Schulman (1986) has described
pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) as the knowledge of how to teach effectively in a
discipline, as opposed to knowledge of the discipline itself.
The ability to possess strong cultural competence and teach effectively in a discipline, as
opposed to knowledge of the discipline itself is often a challenge that exists for today’s teachers.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 30
Moule (2012) has defined cultural competence as the ability to interact effectively with people of
different cultural/ethnic backgrounds. In the context of teaching, cultural competence enables
the teacher to educate students whose cultures differ from their own. Teachers must understand
that the students’ cultures have a considerable influence on learning (Mayer, 2008). As Wilson,
Konopak, and Readence (1993) have asserted, “Teacher educators should attempt to understand
the cultural uniqueness of the individual and make concerted efforts to assist students with
making personal connections between the theories presented in the teacher education program
and classroom practice” (p. 230).
Another concept significant to PCK is the zone of proximal development (ZPD), as
presented by Vygotsky (1978). The ZPD represents the difference between what a learner can do
without help and what he or she can do with the help of a teacher. As Kozulin (1990) has
observed, the ZPD is the essential element in the formation of higher mental functions and the
process of internalization. ZPD theory is consistent with cultural competence as both enable the
teacher to educate students effectively. Once children have gone through their ZPD, they have
learned to use their language as tools, which allow them to navigate through their culture and
environment (Kozulin, 1990).
This chapter has explored the research that pertains to the progress of EL students in
relation to literacy. The main points discussed were as follows: Literacy and ELs; language
components; elements of literacy; the complexities of learning for EL students; specific barriers
to literacy and learning that EL students face from a National and local level; and contributing
factors of EL achievement. The chapter that follows shall create an overall picture of the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 31
Sunshine Elementary School, California Unified School District, and the larger Centerville
community. Methodology used to analyze the current levels of achievement will be outlined.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 32
Chapter 3:
Methodology
Authors: Sharon L.H. Bennett, Juan Carlos Herrera, and Enyetta Mingo-Long
5
Introduction
This is a case study of Sunshine Elementary School in Centerville, CA.
6
The school is
part of the California Unified School District (CUSD), a large urban district in Southern
California. The analysis herein explored the possible factors that contributed to closing the
literacy gap of low performing Hispanic students at Sunshine Elementary School, along with
research-based solutions. At the time of the inquiry process, Sunshine Elementary School was
experiencing a 54% performance gap, as measured by the California Standards Test.
This chapter provides a context for the problem at Sunshine through the clear articulation
of the school's mission, organizational goal, and goals of the stakeholders. School demographics
are also introduced in order to provide further context for the problem. The inquiry team used a
modified gap analysis process to determine the reasons for the performance gap, based on
examining possible causes formulated through insights from the literature review as well as
through inquiry team experience. The literature provided a foundation for exploring possible
5
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While this version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author
6
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to
refer to the school, district, and community.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 33
causes for this specific school’s performance gap. The inquiry team used existing scholarship as
a basis for its analysis of Sunshine.
Mission Statement
The mission of a school is designed to convey an idea concerning how a school should
function. It should specifically direct the school on how to serve their stakeholders and how to
support learning improvement. Most significant, it is a basis on which school improvement
should be measured. An effective school clearly communicates the mission to all stakeholders,
with the understanding that all stakeholders assume the responsibility of working toward this end.
Examining the mission statement of Sunshine Elementary School provided the team with an
understanding of what the school believed and what it strived to accomplish.
Mission. Sunshine, like most schools, had a mission statement that was established by the
school and district. The mission focuses on collaboration between the staff and the community
(which may include parents); dedication to high standards for all students; an engaging
curriculum; and creating motivated students. The mission of Sunshine elementary school reads as
follows:
“Our mission is to challenge, inspire, and support our students to make a difference in the
world they live in. Together, the staff and community of Sunshine Elementary School are
dedicated to provide a safe environment, a powerful engaging curriculum, emphasizing
high standards that will empower all students to become motivated, successful and
lifelong learners.”
The mission provided for high standards, exceptional teaching, and an environment where
students were empowered to prepare for college and career.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 34
Organizational goal. The organization goal for Sunshine was established by the
mandates of NCLB; the legislation proclaimed "By 2014, 100% of students and significant
student subgroups will perform at the proficient or advanced level." The organizational goal
addresses the desired academic outcomes for all students, and specifically for EL students.
The gap. In 2010, Sunshine’s Academic Performance Index (API) rank was 808, eight
points above the statewide target of 800. Schools are ranked based on two measures: One is the
state rank and the other is a ranking that compares schools with similar demographics. In 2010,
the state ranking for Sunshine Elementary was 6 out of 10, and the similar schools ranking was a
10 out of 10. According to the CDE, the 2011 API was 765, a 43-point fall from 2010.
According to the California Standards Test results for spring 2011, 46% of students were
proficient on the Reading Language Arts test.
Stakeholders. There were four stakeholder groups at Sunshine Elementary School:
Students;
Teachers;
Administration;
Parents.
It was clear that, through the mission statement and the organizational goals, there was an
emphasis on what students need to accomplish. The mission statement also discussed
collaboration and engaging curriculum. The mission and the organizational goal influenced the
expectations of stakeholders in ways necessary to the improvement of literacy development and
achievement at Sunshine Elementary School. These precepts clearly influenced the goals of
parents, teachers, and the administration. Table 3.1 is an illustration of the mission statement of
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 35
Sunshine Elementary school. It shows how the mission statement related to the organizational
goal of all students, specifically EL students, being proficient readers as measured by the
California Standards test.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 36
Table 3.1
Mission Statement, Organizational Goal, and Stakeholder Expectations
Mission
Our mission is to challenge, inspire, and support our students to
make a difference in the world they live in. Together, the staff
and community of Sunshine Elementary School are dedicated to
provide a safe environment, a powerful engaging curriculum,
emphasizing high standards that will empower all students to
become motivated, successful and lifelong learners
Organizational Goal
All English Learners at Sunshine Elementary School will
be proficient as measured by the Reading Language arts
portion of the California Standards Test
100% of Sunshine Elementary Students will have the
literacy tools to access information across the curriculum
Stakeholder Expectations
Students Teachers Administration Parents
All students
will perform
at a
proficient or
advanced
level on all
school and
standardized
tests
All teachers
will provide
culturally
relevant
instructional
strategies and
will participate
in
collaboration
activities that
ensure
students will
meet the state
standards
Administration
will provide
appropriate
leadership that
encourages
teacher
collaboration,
parent
engagement,
goal alignment,
site based
leadership
support and
appropriate
professional
development
All parents
will be
involved in
their students'
education
through
parent
engagement
activities that
connect them
to the school
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 37
Demographics
The consideration of demographics provided useful context for the inquiry team to be
better able to recognize possible causes for the performance gap at Sunshine. This section will
specifically address the demographics of Sunshine Elementary and its surrounding community.
Community. Centerville, California is an urban city located approximately ten miles
southeast of Los Angeles. Currently, Centerville has a total population of approximately 69,800,
with the largest percentage of residents between the ages of 25-34. Centerville has a sizeable
Spanish-speaking population, with 76% of residents speaking Spanish, as compared to 23% for
the state of California, and 67% nationwide. 34% of Centerville residents are white; 14% are
Black and less than 1% are Native American or Asian. 82% of Centerville’s residents are
Hispanic. 39% of Centerville residents have completed high school, as compared to 80%
statewide. 4.5% have earned a Bachelor’s degree, as compared to 30% statewide. Less than 2%
of Centerville residents have earned Master’s degrees versus 10% statewide.
District. In 2010, the CUSD had nineteen schools. There were 12 elementary, three
intermediate, four high schools, and one continuation school. Fourteen of the schools were
Program Improvement (PI) schools and received Title I, Title III, Economic Impact Aid/Limited
English Proficiency, and Economic Impact Aid/State Compensatory Education funding. For
2010, the CUSD did not meet AYP standards. Only 13 of the 26 criteria were met. Of the 19
schools, all but five schools in the district were in PI status.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 38
The CUSD served 11,927 students in grades Pre-K through 12. District student
demographics are as follows:
11,149 Hispanic or Latino;
643 Black or African American;
34 White or Caucasian;
22 Asian or Pacific Islander (including 8 Filipino);
2 Indigenous or American Indian;
40 Multiple Response.
Additionally, the district has 7,628 EL students; 898 Special Education students; and 11,914
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students.
School. In 2010, Sunshine Elementary was a traditional Pre-K-5 school. At the time of
this inquiry, Sunshine received both Title I and Title III funds from the federal government.
Additionally, Sunshine was the only elementary school in the district not classified as a Program
Improvement (PI) school. The student enrollment for Sunshine Elementary was 629 students.
There was one principal, one teacher on special assignment, and a teaching staff of 26 teachers.
The average class size at Sunshine was 24 students per teacher.
Sunshine Elementary participated in many activities that enhanced the educational
process. Parent visitations, curricular focus days, and awards assemblies connected the parents
and the community to the school. Math nights and multicultural activities provided value to
students and celebrated their talents. Active parent groups worked tirelessly for the good of the
school and the students. The strong tradition of Sunshine continued through the academic
achievement of the students.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 39
Staff demographics. The staff at Sunshine was very diverse in their years of experience,
ethnicities, and cultural backgrounds. In 2010, there were nineteen teachers at Sunshine, with
over half of the teachers on campus having been at the school for ten or more years. There are
two male teachers on campus. Table 3.2 summarizes this demographic information.
Table 3.2
Summary of Teacher Demographics
CATEGORY TEACHERS
Bilingual (Spanish) 7
Male 2
Female 17
Taught more than 10 years at Sunshine 11
Taught more than 10 years altogether 14
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 40
Student demographics. At the time of the inquiry project, Sunshine Elementary School
was predominately Hispanic/Latino, 97.9% of the student population. The rest of the school
population was Black/African American (0.9%) and Asian (0.2%). 74.5% of students were
designated as English Learners. 94.3% were Socioeconomically Disadvantaged. Table 3.3
summarizes this demographic information
Table 3.3
Sunshine Elementary Student Demographics Summary
GROUP % ENROLLMENT
Black or African American 0.9
Asian 0.2
Hispanic or Latino 97.9
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 94.3
English Learners 74.5
Students with Disabilities 2.1
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 41
Figure 3.1 illustrates the connection between demographics and the current performance
levels of Sunshine Elementary School. It serves to summarize the information that the inquiry
team used to begin the Gap Analysis process.
Figure 3.1. Illustration of the demographics of Sunshine Elementary School
The next section discusses the modified gap analysis process the inquiry team used to
determine the reasons for the 54% performance gap at Sunshine Elementary School.
Traditional, PK-5
One Principal, 26
Teachers
Average Class Size-
24 Students
Title I and Title III
Current Enrollment-
629 Students
API 2010-808
API 2011-765
State Rankings 2010
6 out 10
Currently, Sunshine
is NOT in PI
Currently, 54% of
students are not
proficient on the
RLA
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 42
Overview of the Modified Gap Analysis Process
The purpose of the project has been to use a modified version of the gap analysis model
developed by Clark and Estes (2008) to examine the performance of Sunshine Elementary
School as it relates to the literacy development and reading proficiency for the EL population.
Specifically, the objective was to look at the three reasons for performance gaps presented by
Clark and Estes (2008) that impede organizations from achieving both internal and external goals.
The performance gaps discussed in greater detail throughout the study are as follows:
Knowledge gaps: Do all stakeholders (e.g., teachers, students, parents) have the
information, training, and support necessary to achieve their goals?
Motivational gaps: Are there reasons that stakeholders are unable to choose to
start a task, to persist at that task, and to exude the mental effort to complete said
task?
Organizational: Are there issues within the organization (e.g., procedures,
policies) that may prevent stakeholders from achieving their goals?
There are five steps that were implemented for the gap analysis process. First, goals were
written. Performance goals developed must be concrete, challenging, and current; Clark and
Estes (2008) have termed these C3 goals (p. 26). Second, the specific gaps were identified based
on how the goals compare to the actual performance. Once a hypothesis was made, the goals
were determined so that the root causes of the gaps could be identified. When the root causes
were identified, they were thoroughly analyzed to determine whether knowledge and skill,
motivation, or organizational barriers existed, constituting the third step in the process. Often,
organizations have more than one barrier that creates the gap, when this occurs the causes of the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 43
barrier must be investigated. The investigation helped determine the root cause for substandard
performance. Fourth, solutions were developed based on what the target learning area was.
Lastly, outcomes were assessed once the solutions were implemented.
The modified gap analysis. The modified gap analysis was used as the model for this
dissertation project. A thematic group approach was used modifying the gap analysis model put
forth by Clark and Estes (2008). As articulated by Rueda (2011), the modified gap analysis
format is purposed to emulate the collaborative problem-solving that the group will be expected
to engage in within their professional work (p. 107).
This gap analysis approach differs from the Clark and Estes (2008) approach in that it
examines the long-standing and systematic differences in literacy outcomes particularly relevant
to Sunshine Elementary — specifically, the outcomes related to ethnicity, race, language, and
socioeconomic status, which form the backdrop for the current educational landscape (Rueda,
2011). The systematic differences continue to characterize the educational outcomes that are
justified by the model’s ability to assist in closing the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary.
A significant difference between Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis model and the
modified approach implemented in this project was that of identifying both assets and causes.
The Clark and Estes (2008) model’s focus was primarily concerned with identifying problems
within an organization. Conversely, this project’s inquiry team saw an essential part of the study
of Sunshine as emphasizing the activities and practices the school performed well. Since the
inquiry team consisted of educators from K-12 settings, they possessed profound understanding
of the importance of highlighting the school’s positive aspects; the team recognized this as a
valuable buy-in tool, a vehicle through which to legitimize the importance of the causes as well
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 44
as the developed solutions. Another distinguishing factor from the model established by Clark
and Estes (2008) involves the scholars’ focus on cascading goals. As a departure, this study’s
inquiry team focused primarily on the school’s global goal; at certain points during the course of
the research, the intermediate goal was also emphasized. However, the present study did not see
in its scope assessment of day-to-day performance goals for varying stakeholders.
Inquiry Team Process
The purpose of this section is to describe the measures and procedures used to perform a
gap analysis at Sunshine Elementary School. Based upon the description of this project as a
problem-solving effort intended primarily for Sunshine, the USC University Park Institutional
Review Board (IRB) concluded that this project did not qualify as Human Subjects Research and
was not subject to further review.
On November 7, 2011, the inquiry team met with the principal at Sunshine Elementary
School. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the gap analysis process to the principal
and to determine the specific needs of Sunshine Elementary School's English Learners in terms
of literacy participation and improvement. While Sunshine was not currently in Program
Improvement, the principal was concerned about the literacy performance of third grade EL
students who had been classified as "intermediate" on the CELDT for more than two years. This
is the information that the team used to move forward with the research.
On November 30, 2011, the inquiry team met with the entire Sunshine Elementary
teaching staff. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the team to the staff and to explain
the gap analysis process. The teachers at Sunshine were given the opportunity to ask the inquiry
team questions about the process.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 45
From November 2011 through March 2012, the inquiry team completed a comprehensive
literature review concerning aspects of literacy on a national, state, and local levels. There was
an emphasis on barriers to literacy. During this time, the inquiry team compiled a list of assumed
causes for literacy concerns in general. These assumed causes were based on the literature
studies as well as the professional experiences of the members of the inquiry team. A
compilation of the assumed causes are depicted in Tables 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6. These causes were
categorized by stakeholders (i.e., students, parents, teachers, administration) and type of barrier
(i.e., knowledge, motivation, organization).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 46
Table 3.4
Knowledge Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
Delayed
reading due to
holes in
literacy
processes
May not
understand
importance of
what is being
learned
Possess
literacy skills
to be effective
readers?
Possibly not
provided
appropriate
literacy
instruction
Education level
possibly similar to
their child’s
May not
understand
importance of
what is being
learned
May not have
knowledge to
access resources
May not have
skills to support
students
PD at beginning of school
(centralized) curriculum aligned
for teachers consisted of common
assessment, coding for student
achievement, benchmarked, LEA
plan, data analysis protocol. This
is a data driven program. Is the
data process giving the right data?
May not have tools necessary to
work effectively with students
Lack of teaching strategies
Know the goals of the school?
Goals effectively communicated?
Knowledge of reading and using
data to improve instruction?
Knowledge of school mission?
First principal position
New to district, new to
school
Mastery of elements of
job
May not understand
nuances of school climate
District not fully aware of
myriad tasks principal
must complete
School mission articulated
to all teachers, parents,
and students?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 47
Table 3.5
Motivation Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
Self-efficacy
based on
teacher attitudes
Work not
presented in
way that fosters
grasping of
material
Distracted by
language
barriers
Value
Self-regulation
Self-efficacy
Not holding child
accountable due to
perceived ability issues
(Pobrecito)
Meaning of education
Trust teachers to do
what they need to do
for child
May feel intimidated
by teachers
May think school has
no appreciation for
families
Participate in PD out of
obligation vs. desire to
be a lifelong learner
Stereotyping of students
Learning of new
techniques
Self-efficacy
Do not care about EL
students
Do not believe EL
student can succeed
May believe what they
are doing is effective
and should not be
changed
Principal appears highly
motivated, and wants
students and teachers to
succeed
Principal involved in
several campus
programs
CUSD possibly
unwilling to make
administrative additions
since school showing
growth and running
effectively
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 48
Table 3.6
Organization Assumed Causes
STUDENTS PARENTS TEACHERS ADMINISTRATION
Heavily focused on
language arts and
math; other subjects
may not be pushed,
especially those
subjects where literacy
skills (reading,
writing, listening, and
speaking) can be
practiced
Teachers may not
have the appropriate
materials to provide
effective instruction
Lack of resources
to support system
Outside of PTA,
few opportunities
for parent
engagement
Family dynamics
may impact parent
participation
Administrative
support
Limited time and
space for
collaboration
Limited accountability
among colleagues
May think they are
collaborating
effectively
May be reluctant to
collaborate unless
directed
May not appreciate
value of effective and
ongoing collaboration
Lack of
administrative team
Isolation
Little support from
district office
New to district,
outsider
District funding
unavailable additional
school site
administrative
personnel
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 49
From March 2012 through June 2012, the inquiry team conducted data collection
activities. The activities in which the inquiry team provided leadership were:
Teacher surveys;
Principal interview;
Parent climate surveys;
Teacher interviews;
Student reading inventory.
The parent climate survey and the student reading inventory were administered by the school,
and the school provided the data to the inquiry team. District and school site state and federal
accountability reports as well as the School Accountability Report Card (SARC), and the
California Standards Test (CST) reports were also reviewed. Further examination was made into
the schools literacy instructional program, and the instructional or academic alignment between
Sunshine Elementary school and the district. The purpose of these activities was to obtain
additional information into how the school functioned and it approached literacy. Specifically,
the assumed causes examined Sunshine Elementary organizational goals against the schools
current literacy performance gap. The inquiry team sought to validate the assumed causes in
pursuit of obtaining the schools global goal and performance achievement of closing the literacy
gap. As illustrated in Tables 3.4 — 3.6, the assumed causes were grouped into three major
themes:
Knowledge;
Motivation;
Organization.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 50
The inquiry team analyzed the possible factors that may have been attributed to the EL literacy
gap at Sunshine Elementary. The inquiry team discussed all of the assumed causes were able to
place most of the causes into categories the following categories:
Students;
Parents;
Teachers;
Administration.
Those causes that were not validated or were determined to be inconsequential were eliminated.
Figure 3.2 shows the causes that remained after the elimination process.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 51
Figure 3.2. Illustration of the Selection of Assumed Causes
Students
Students need exposure to
instructional strategies that
specifically support their
language development
Students need to be
taught literacy
activities that
support learning
Students do not
know the mission
statement
Parents
Parents do not have
a lot of opportunities
to come on campus
There is no parent
training
opportunities at
Sunshine
Parents need to
feel that the
school appreciates
their contributions
Teachers
Teachers need training in
instructional practices that
support EL students
Teachers need to
learn how to
collaborate with
each other
effectively
Teachers need to make sure
they know how to guide
students through the literacy
process
Teachers need to have
opportunities to participate
in meaningful leadership
opportunities
Teachers are not
aware of the mission
statement
Teachers need to
support parent
training activities
Administrators
Principal needs to
support teachers in
collaboration
activities
Principal is isolated
and needs support
Teachers were not
aware of the mission
statement
The district may not
have articulated the
mission statement to the
school
Administration must
provide parent
training
opportunities
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 52
Through examining the data illustrated in Figure 3.2, the inquiry team was able to
validate the causes and the collapse similar causes into larger categories. The summary of these
causes and the specific data used to validate each of these causes will be discussed in Chapter 4.
Conclusion
This chapter provided a context for the problem at Sunshine Elementary School. First,
the chapter examined the mission statement, organizational goals, and the various stakeholders at
Sunshine Elementary School. Next, the chapter addressed the demographics of Sunshine at the
community, district, and school level. Finally, the chapter examined the differences between the
gap analysis model and the modified gap analysis model used for this dissertation project.
Additionally, the inquiry team process was discussed to provide the reader with the steps the
inquiry team took during this process. The next chapter will examine the findings from the data
collected.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 53
Chapter 4:
Findings
Authors: Sharon L. H. Bennett, Juan Carlos Herrera, and Enyetta Mingo-Long
7
Introduction
This chapter is intended to report the findings from data collected related to the literacy
gap that exists between ELs and non-ELs at Sunshine Elementary School.
8
The goal of the data
collection was to examine the possible causes and validate the root causes of the literacy gap.
The inquiry team took on the role of consultants and used the gap analysis framework to study
the root causes behind the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary School.
Overview of Possible Causes for English Learner Literacy Gap at Sunshine Elementary
Based on an initial review of the literature, the inquiry team was able create a list of
possible causes for the literacy gap at Sunshine Elementary School. The inquiry team identified
a total of 33 possible causes. Once the list of possible causes was developed, the inquiry team
categorized the possible causes into the following three categories: (a) knowledge; (b)
motivation; (c) organization. Within each of these three groups, the inquiry team further
separated the list of possible causes by the following four stakeholder groups: (a) parents; (b)
students; (c) teachers; (d) administration. This table can be found in Appendix G. Out of the
7
This chapter is a revised version of a document originally created jointly by the authors listed,
reflecting the team approach to this project. While this version is still based on that earlier
document, it has been modified by the first author
8
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to
refer to the school, district, and community.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 54
validation process by the inquiry team, it was determined that both assets and causes for the
literacy gap were discovered. The following section provides details for both, and provided the
team information concerning possible solutions for Sunshine. These solutions are discussed at
length in Chapters 5 and 6.
Assets of Sunshine Elementary School
Based on in-depth interviews and parent, student, and teacher surveys, it was determined
that Sunshine Elementary School held a plethora of assets that benefit the students and families
they serve. This section will briefly discuss these assets.
Leadership commitment. At the time of the inquiry project, the principal had been on
assignment at Sunshine Elementary for approximately two years. The principal was fairly new
to the district but was highly motivated to be an effective instructional leader for the students and
teachers at Sunshine. From the interview, the principal described holding the belief that many
hats must be worn to be an effective leader. Some of the roles assigned to the principal included,
but were not limited to, instructional leader; plant manager; coach; collaborator; and advocate for
students and parents. During informal conversations, the principal mentioned that arriving to
school early in the morning and leaving long after everyone is gone was a daily reality. This was
done to ensure that all tasks were completed in a timely manner.
During the principal’s interview, it quickly became clear that the principal genuinely
cared about the students and their families and felt responsible for student success. This is
demonstrated by the ongoing involvement in student activities; the intent to start a counseling
group for mothers suffering from domestic abuse; and a personal commitment to close the
achievement gap at Sunshine.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 55
Sunshine’s principal was very passionate about ensuring that all students have equal
access to the curriculum so that they can be successful in school, so that, in the long run, all
students might have the opportunity to be college and career ready upon high school graduation.
The principal ensured that students had access to the curriculum through monitoring the use of
SDAIE strategies in order to make content comprehensible. A forty-five minute daily
instructional block dedicated to English Language Development instruction was part of the daily
schedule as well.
Mutual respect among principal and staff. Another major asset at Sunshine
elementary was that the staff respected the principal’s leadership. During the scanning interview,
the principal described the social atmosphere at Sunshine as a “non-toxic environment.” The
principal went on to comment that, although the teachers did not always agree with the school
districts’ demands, teachers at Sunshine were generally comfortable at the school. Based on the
21 teacher surveys distributed and collected, it was apparent that the teachers held a favorable
view of the principal. For example, the Sunshine Elementary School teacher survey asked
teachers if they felt supported by the administrator at their site; every single teacher marked that
they agreed with that statement. Similarly, teachers unanimously agreed that the administrator
respected all races and cultures and that she also valued the perspective of students. This
positive organizational climate shifted the focus away from the teachers and administrators and
allowed the maximum amount of attention to be placed on the students and their needs.
A majority of the teachers believed that Sunshine Elementary was a safe environment.
The survey also showed that the teachers felt their school promotes a curriculum that meets the
needs of all students. Although the principal was not solely responsible for this safe and
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 56
supportive atmosphere, it was certainly a positive reflection of the type of leadership that she has
provided and the school culture she has worked to create.
Caring teachers. The teacher interviews provided great insights as to the mentality of
the teachers at Sunshine elementary. A total of nine teachers were interviewed, with all grade
levels represented. Teachers were asked a total of ten questions regarding the background of the
school, the goals they set for their students, and their views on reading and learning.
One consistent pattern quickly began to emerge. The teachers at Sunshine demonstrated
palpable caring and concern towards their students and their families. When asked who the main
stakeholders at the school were, one teacher remarked,
“For me, I hope that the stakeholders are the children. They are the purpose and the
reason we are here. We are accountable to the administrators but honestly I am more
accountable to the parents and the students than any of the administrators."
When asked about the relationship between the community and the school, another teacher
recounted, “It's pretty amazing. It's a real sense of home, of togetherness. Everyone takes care
of everyone. For example, kids come back and I have taught parents of students." Throughout
every interview, the teachers aligned themselves with the students and their families. The
expressions and gestures demonstrated a great admiration of the children in their classes.
Several teachers raved about Sunshine’s Parent Teacher Association (PTA). In fact, five out of
seven interviewees discussed the excellent service the PTA has provided over the past year.
Teachers who actively seek to improve student achievement. The teachers at
Sunshine were very interested in improving student achievement. During the interview process,
several teachers expressed interest in developing a better instructional program for their ELs.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 57
Teachers also touted the need to use instructional time wisely. For example, one of the teachers
mentioned that, while everyone appreciated assemblies and other auxiliary activities during the
school day, there was a concern about how these activities cut directly into instructional time.
According to several teachers, each teacher was required to set individual goals with students.
This goal setting-process helps the teachers and the students prioritize learning. Other teachers
discussed the need to change curriculum during ELD when it was determined that it was neither
research-based nor effective. Finally, teachers appreciated the importance of teaching students
how to read to ensure their academic success; furthermore, the teachers endeavored to promote
the deep-seated enjoyment and prizing of reading as an avenue for participation in society.
Despite having limited access to resources for developing an instructional plan for EL literacy
achievement, the teachers continued to actively investigate methods and strategies to improve the
achievement of their EL students.
School environment. The gap analysis approach helps address the literacy achievement
gap at Sunshine Elementary School through the systematic examination and validation of
presumed causes from the perspectives of parents, teachers, and administration. One perspective
examined was the school environment. Information obtained from teacher interviews provided
evidence that Sunshine Elementary teachers were interested in learning how to better understand
subject matter more deeply and flexibly in order to provide support for both EL and non-EL
students. More specifically, Sunshine teachers expressed a desire to learn how to more
effectively help their students connect their current background knowledge in the classroom with
experiences in everyday life. The principal as well as the teachers at Sunshine were committed
to providing a strong foundation for culturally relevant pedagogical content knowledge
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 58
accessible to all learners. The school environment at Sunshine displayed the capacity to create a
greater linkage between theory and practice by developing professional roles for teachers that
allow them the flexibility to create culturally relevant literacy strategies for the school’s English
Learners.
Active PTA. According to parent climate surveys and teacher interviews, the PTA at
Sunshine Elementary enjoyed a strong presence on campus. The PTA was an asset to the school
because the participants were interested in working to make positive changes in the school and in
the larger community. At the time of the inquiry project, this was the only parent organization
sanctioned by the school. The group’s participants were very conscious of the direction of the
organization; its members possessed a strong feeling of community representation. PTA
meetings were conducted from a parental point of view. According to information obtained from
the teacher interviews, the level of participation of the Sunshine Elementary School's PTA
demonstrated that the parents who chose to engage shared a willingness to contribute their best
to school activities. Their tireless efforts showed that they were concerned with the welfare of all
students.
Culturally rich school community. Sunshine Elementary School was very proud of its
traditions and cultural awareness. Parents and teachers reported that the school had participated
in events and activities that demonstrated their appreciation for diversity and that the school
celebrated high academic achievement. Teacher interviews revealed that students had many
opportunities to demonstrate pride in themselves and their accomplishments. Through
assemblies, an active Parent Teacher Association, and participation in academic activities
sponsored by the district (e.g., Math-A-Thon, spelling bee, science fair), students were successful
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 59
in demonstrating their abilities within the school community as well as within the larger
Centerville community. The parents were a consistent presence on the campus; according to the
parent climate survey, most felt welcome on campus. For example, many of the teachers
reported in the interviews that parents enjoyed working in the school garden, and helped
maintain the garden on weekends and holidays. Parents cared about the activities at school and
wanted to be present on campus. When given opportunities to serve the school, they eagerly did.
Community stability. Families have sent their children to Sunshine Elementary School
for several generations. According to data from teacher interviews, some teachers on campus
have taught several generations of within families. Students and families saw Sunshine as a place
of support even after they matriculated from the school. Teachers continued to support and
nurture the students, families, and the Sunshine community years after their students move to
middle school, high school, and college. There was a strong sense of pride among teachers as
they discussed their relationships with students and families. Additionally, there were teachers at
Sunshine who were previous Sunshine students themselves or attended other schools within the
CUSD. This further supports the strong community ties to the school.
Well-behaved students. The students at Sunshine demonstrated pride in their school,
apparent through teacher interviews as well as anecdotal observations. Both parents and teachers
mentioned the presence of significant gang activity in the Sunshine neighborhood; in fact, there
were two rival gangs positioned on either side of the school. In spite of this, the students clearly
exhibited positive conduct. This conduct was recognized and supported by the teachers,
administration, and parents. Teachers described the behavior of students as excellent. Moreover,
based on information extrapolated from the parent climate surveys, students respected the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 60
learning that took place inside the classroom. Students believed that teachers were there to help
them learn and they responded appropriately to the instruction given.
This section has detailed some of the considerable strengths of Sunshine Elementary
School. In the next section, the focus shifts to the six primary causes for the gap in literacy.
The Six Primary Causes for English Learner Literacy Gap at Sunshine Elementary
Through the review of the literature, surveys that were provided to the inquiry team from
Sunshine from parents and students, as well as site visits in which conversations with the
principal and teachers took place, the inquiry team began to compile a list of assumed causes for
the literacy gap among ELs at Sunshine Elementary School. Once the team conducted the
teacher interviews and parsed the data from the parent and student surveys, the process of
eliminating some causes and validating others occurred. The following six causes were selected
as areas of focus:
1. Goal alignment;
2. Professional development;
3. Teacher collaboration;
4. Parental engagement;
5. Culturally relevant instructional strategies;
6. Site-based leadership.
Each of these causes will be discussed in detail and will include a table that summarizes the
details of each cause in terms of knowledge, motivation and organization.
Goal alignment. From the interview with the principal it came to the team's attention
that Sunshine Elementary had not formulated its own school mission; rather, the school followed
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 61
the mission issued to it by the district. This was true for most of the other schools in the CUSD.
The problem was two-fold: First, the staff had an inconsistent perception of the school’s mission.
Second, there was no clear goal alignment; therefore, teachers created their own goals for the
students. This was problematic because the teacher goals were not always consistent with the
mission provided by the district. For example, during the teacher interviews, one teacher
remarked, “The goals are to have a safe environment, where every student will be challenged,
and a clean and safe learning environment, and the goal is for each student to be in challenge
level for reading and math." Another teacher stated that having “students on grade level and to
master grade level standards” are the goals of Sunshine Elementary. Yet another teacher
expressed, “Academically, the goals are for the students to succeed in Language Arts." Although
all of these goals were created with good intentions, they were radically different. None of these
goals provided immediate direction for action. Since the teachers did not have a consistent
understanding of the goals, they created their own. Unfortunately, this allowed teachers to move
in various instructional directions and thus collective results could not be reached. It is not that
these were not admirable goals, but they did not reflect an overall agreement on — or even
knowledge of — the goals of the school and district and how they translated to individual
teachers’ day-to-day activities.
Table 4.1 displays a summary of the findings under goal alignment. The items are
categorized based on knowledge, motivation, and organization as outlined in Clark and Estes
(2008).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 62
Table 4.1
Summary of Goal Alignment
Findings Sources
Knowledge
Not all of teachers knew school mission
provided to school by district
District did not effectively communicate
mission to Sunshine Elementary staff.
Principal Interviews
Teacher Interviews
Motivation
Teachers developed own goals for their
students; may not have valued school
mission as much as goals they created
themselves
Teacher interviews
Organization
Sunshine Elementary School has not set up
system to effectively communicate school
mission to all stakeholders
Principal Interviews
Teacher Interviews
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 63
Professional development. During the teacher interviews, it was expressed that the
professional development in which Sunshine’s teachers participated concerning how to
effectively teach English Learners was limited due to budget constraints. The lack of adequate
professional development to address the specific academic needs of ELs was a cause for the
literacy gap at the school. The teacher interviews revealed that teachers generally preferred
professional development activities that feature the following: (a) encompass learning
experiences they help to design; (b) are learner centered; (c) involve them in the community; (d)
strengthen the professional development support system by eliminating barriers. Information
from the inquiry team’s analysis supported the issue that Sunshine’s teachers were not
participating in professional development activities specific to the needs of ELs. This was an
issue because teachers were not provided consistent access to culturally relevant strategies that
specifically supported their EL students. Table 4.2 summarizes the professional development
concerns categorized by knowledge, motivation and organization.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 64
Table 4.2
Summary of Professional Development
Findings Sources
Knowledge
There was a lack of adequate EL
professional development
opportunities
Teacher interviews
Motivation
Teachers not motivated to participate
in district chosen topics
Teachers generally preferred
professional development activities
that encompass learning experiences
they helped to design; that are learner-
centered; involve them in the
community; and strengthen
professional development support
system by eliminating barriers
Teacher interviews
Initial meeting with
administration
Organization
The professional development on
effectively teaching ELs limited due to
budget constraints
Teacher interviews
Current state fiscal
situation
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 65
Teacher collaboration. Teacher collaboration is an essential part of any school system.
However, it is important to note that collaboration for the sake of collaboration is a waste of time
and resources. This section will discuss the teacher collaboration system at Sunshine Elementary
School. First, findings are presented based on the data collected. Next, the inquiry team draws
some general conclusions about the data. For the purpose of this section, we will look at the
teacher interviews and the teacher surveys. The two areas of focus prevalent in the research are
the current culture of teacher collaboration at Sunshine and the collaboration needs at the school.
According to the results of the teacher interviews, it was clear that there is a history of
teacher collaboration activities at Sunshine. The three major reasons that Sunshine teachers
chose to collaborate: to discuss classroom issues; to discuss items that the grade level leadership
could present to the administration for consideration; and to place students in groups. The
principal supported teachers collaborating regularly. However, it was not indicated by any of the
teachers that there was dedicated collaboration time that took place at the school. Additionally, a
system for effective and consistent collaboration was not in place at Sunshine.
The teacher interviews also indicated that teachers desired more time for collaboration.
For example, several of the interviewees discussed an addendum developed by the CUSD to
supplement the Open Court Reading Program. However, teachers expressed concern that there
were instructional inconsistencies in the program between classrooms and grade levels. Having
opportunities to discuss these curriculum concerns would have assisted the school in this
curriculum alignment issue. Additionally, each teacher participated in English Language
Development (ELD) activities for forty-five minutes each day. The interviews suggested that the
teachers were solely responsible for the planning and implementation of their own ELD
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 66
instruction. Opportunities for planning instruction as a grade level team would be a more
efficient use of planning time. While all teachers interviewed clearly cared about the students at
Sunshine and were concerned about their academic growth, there was no systematic way for
teacher to be accountable to one another.
Table 4.3 summarizes the finding in teacher collaboration as they relate to knowledge,
motivation and organization.
Table 4.3
Summary of Teacher Collaboration
Findings Sources
Knowledge
Teachers did not know ways to collaborate
effectively
Inconsistencies in application of curricular
programs could have been solved through
collaboration activities
Teacher interviews
Motivation
Teachers believed they are collaborating
effectively
Teachers possibly reluctant to collaborate
unless directed
Teachers may not have understood value of
effective and ongoing collaboration
Teacher interviews
Organization
Teachers needed dedicated time for
collaboration
Teachers needed system of accountability to
administration and each other
Teacher interviews
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 67
Parental involvement. It is important that schools promote the full participation of
parents in order to ensure the health of the school. For the purpose of this section, the teacher
interviews and the parent climate surveys will be examined. Three areas of emphasis stood out
as a result of looking at the data presented: (a) parents and the relationship with the school; (b)
parents and access to school resources; (c) parent needs for their children. The information from
the parent climate survey as presented in Table 4.4 reflect the approximately 27% of parents
reportedly routinely feeling unwelcome at the school. Because parental connection to the school
was an essential part of their child's success, having more than a quarter of parent respondents
remarking this way seemed noticeably high. While a large number parents reportedly felt that
they were treated with respect, nearly 12% did not feel this happened on a regular basis.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 68
Table 4.4
Caring Environment Parent Climate Survey Responses
QUESTIONS
RESPONSES
Always Almost Always Sometimes Rarely Never No Response
When I walk into this
school I feel welcome
60
(50%)
33
(27.5%)
25
(20.83%)
2
(1.67%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
I am treated with respect
at this school
68
(56.66%)
36
(30%)
12
(10%)
3
(2.5%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
The school respects my
cultural heritage.
79
(65.8%)
27
(22.5%)
13
(10.83%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
Students at my child’s
school are treated fairly no
matter what their race or
cultural background.
80
(66.67%)
31
(25.83%)
7
(5.83%)
0
(0%)
1
(<1%)
1
(<1%)
I feel welcome at
PTA/parent group
meetings.
70
(58.33%)
26
(21.66%)
10
(8.33%)
1
(<1%)
2
(1.66%)
11
(9.16%)
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 69
In the problem solving category, the data summarized in Table 4.5 reflect that a majority
of the parents surveyed believed their cultural backgrounds were appreciated. Parents also
indicated that that their children were treated fairly. Most parents reported being treated fairly
"always" or "almost always." While a majority of parents felt welcome at Sunshine Elementary,
the data reveal that 20% of parents surveyed did not consistently feel welcome at the school.
This suggests that there might have been some discord or concerns that had the potential to
influence the other parents if not addressed.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 70
Table 4.5
Problem Solving Parent Climate Survey Responses
QUESTIONS
RESPONSES
Always Almost Always Sometimes Rarely Never No Response
I have a good
working relationship
with my child’s
teacher
93
(77.5%)
17
(14.17%)
6
(5%)
3
(2.5%)
1
(0.83%)
0
(0.0%)
I can talk to the
school principal
when I need to
62
(51.66%)
31
(25.83%)
18
(15%)
6
(5%)
1
(0.83%)
2
(1.67%)
The school has a
clear process for
addressing concerns
about my child(ren)
69
(57.5%)
29
(21.17%)
17
(14.17%)
5
(4.17%)
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
If the school can't
help me, I know
they will refer me to
someone who can
66
(55%)
34
(28.33%)
13
(10.83%)
6
(5%)
1
(0.83%)
0
(0.0%)
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 71
Parent communication with teachers is another topic that the parent climate survey
explored. What teachers report to parents on a regular basis informs parents as to what is valued
by the teacher and the school. This information allowed parents to formulate their own
conceptions about what the school values. The reasons for communication that the questionnaire
addressed were: (a) behavior; (b) reading progress and achievement; (c) class work; (d)
homework; and (e) tests. Since parents were allowed to choose more than one reason for
response, the total adds up to greater than 100%.
As Table 4.6 shows, the most common reason for the school communicating with parents
was behavior. Classwork and homework ranked second and third, respectively. Topics specific
to reading achievement and concerns placed fourth out of five categories. About 15 participants
abstained from responding to the question.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 72
Table 4.6
Reasons for School to Home Contact by Teachers
Reason for Parental Contact
Responses
# %
Behavior 74 61.67
Reading 63 52.50
Classwork 69 57.50
Homework 64 53.33
Tests 60 50.00
No Response 14 11.67
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 73
Next, a teacher interview session was conducted. Nine Sunshine teachers were
interviewed, which represented 50% of the staff. The interview questions in relation to parents
and their contribution to the literacy process of students were as follows:
Who are the stakeholders of the school?
What is the relationship between the school and community?
What is your perception of the school neighborhood?
Out of the nine interviewees, four stated that parents belonged to the stakeholder group.
The belief that the role of the parent as an entity that needs to be included as part of the decision-
making force at Sunshine is a crucial one for the success of the school. Most interviewers saw
parental support as an essential part of learning, parents a strong force on the Sunshine campus,
and PTA as providing services to the school. However, none indicated the presence of a
systematic, school-wide parental support or involvement process at Sunshine.
Table 4.7 is a summary of the parent engagement concerns at Sunshine in terms of
knowledge, motivation, and organization.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 74
Table 4.7
Summary of Parent Engagement
Findings Sources
Knowledge
Parents did not know how to access school
resources
Parents did not know exactly how to help
their student become better reader
Teacher interviews
Parent climate surveys
Principal interviews
Motivation
Parents had self-efficacy issues, may not feel
they can help their child
Parents made excuses for their child; may
not believe child is capable of performing at
higher levels.
Teacher interviews
Parent climate surveys
Principal interviews
Organization
With the exception of PTA, no parent groups
or organizations connecting parents with
school
No a systematic parental engagement
program at Sunshine
Some parents did not feel welcome on
campus
Teacher interviews
Parent climate surveys
Principal interviews
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 75
Culturally relevant instructional strategies. Several Sunshine Elementary teachers and
staff expressed that the district has not created culturally relevant instructional strategies for its
English Learners. The teachers of Sunshine Elementary School expressed feeling underprepared
in effectively working with EL students. Several teachers felt that culturally relevant
pedagogical instructional strategies were needed at Sunshine. However, the teachers did not
believe their pedagogical content knowledge was strong enough to help their EL students meet
state-mandated reading proficiency requirements. Sunshine teachers felt that the CUSD was not
invested in further developing instructional strategies for English Learners, and that the district
did not offer sufficient culturally relevant instructional strategies to assist its teachers and schools.
At Sunshine Elementary, there was a dearth of culturally relevant instructional strategies
targeted specifically toward the home language and cultural differences of their English Learner
population. The lack of culturally relevant instructional support led to teachers being unable to
fully deliver culturally relevant instruction specific to the language development of ELs.
Sunshine did not clearly communicated the skills needed and adequate preparation in
understanding and applying the knowledge base of culturally relevant instruction rich in
language input, with multiple forms of literacy for all students. Sunshine Elementary teachers
believed that an organizational issue existed, wherein the school and the district did not
effectively communicate the instructional plan specific to the individual needs of English
Learners. Table 4.8 provides a summary of the culturally relevant instructional strategies based
on knowledge, motivation and organization.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 76
Table 4.8
Summary of Culturally Relevant Instructional Strategies
Findings Sources
Knowledge
Due to CUSD budget cuts, culturally relevant
instructional strategies for ELs limited
Teachers aware pedagogical content knowledge not
strong enough to help EL students meet state reading
proficiency requirements
Teacher
interviews
Principal
interviews
Motivation
Teachers felt underprepared to effectively teach ELs
Teachers value culturally relevant pedagogical
instructional strategies
Teachers saw organizational issue: school and CUSD
ineffectively communicating instructional plan specific
EL needs
Teacher
interviews
Teacher
surveys
Principal
interviews
Organization
Due to district budget cuts, Sunshine teachers unable to
fully develop instructional strategies for ELs
Sunshine not clearly communicating skills needed; no
adequate implementation of culturally relevant
instruction rich in language input
Teacher
interviews
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 77
Site-based leadership support. At the time of the inquiry project, Sunshine Elementary
School was home to nineteen teachers and approximately 500 students. Many would consider
this was a small school compared to others in surrounding districts. However, another validated
cause was the lack of site-based leadership support. From informal conversations with the
principal, it was determined that the principal had minimal support at the school site. There was
no assistant principal, no counselor, and no staff development specialist to aid the principal.
Though there was a teacher on special assignment who did an excellent job supporting the
principal concerning both management and curriculum tasks, there was no one for the principal
to communicate with on a daily basis concerning confidential information regarding staff and
parents. The administrator was in isolation and had many responsibilities. For instance, the
principal was charged with leading professional development sessions every Wednesday. During
the interview, the principal mentioned that sometimes “teacher leaders help based on proven
ability to handle responsibility."
The principal’s additional responsibilities included creating the master schedule; teacher
evaluations; counseling both students and parents; yard duty; attending district-level meetings;
and taking on day-to-day administrative tasks. Handling too many duties — all with little to no
support — had the potential to lead to stress, becoming overwhelmed, and potential burnout.
The effect of these ongoing situations could potentially lead to job ineffectiveness. However, the
principal had an opportunity to meet with other principals in the district twice a month and
participates in a monthly principal exchange program. During the interview, the principal
mentioned that the principal exchange program was adopted by the district to “assist them with
getting out of program improvement.” The focus of the program was on guided reading, the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 78
national vocabulary list, making words, working with small group, working with whole group,
and input/modeling.
These professional development activities alleviated some of the burden on the principal;
it was uncertain how much the professional development activities helped the school narrow its
literacy gap. The inquiry team felt that surrounding the principal with additional support could
be of great personal benefit and, consequently, the school.
Table 4.9 is a summary of the findings based on knowledge, motivation and organization
concerning site based leadership.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 79
Table 4.9
Summary of Site-Based Leadership Support
Findings Sources
Knowledge
District not fully aware of myriad tasks
principal must complete
Principal interview
Teacher interview
Motivation
District possibly unwilling to make
administrative additions as school showing
growth and running effectively
Teacher interviews
Organization
District did not have funding for another
administrator at school site
Teacher interviews
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 80
Conclusion
This chapter presented the findings that validated the primary six root causes for the
literacy gap that exists between ELs and non-ELs at Sunshine Elementary School. First, a brief
description of how the inquiry team reached the possible causes was described. Next, the inquiry
team reported the assets found at Sunshine. In addition, a detailed account of the six primary
root causes was discussed, as well as cautions and limitations of this inquiry Chapter 6 will
provide a second review of the literature for solutions for the following primary causes: (a)
teacher collaboration; and (b) parent engagement. Site Based Leadership, Goal Alignment
Professional Development and Culturally Relevant Instructional Strategies be addressed by the
other members of the inquiry team (see this study’s co-authors: Herrera, 2013; Mingo-Long,
2013).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 81
Chapter 5:
Recommended Research-Based Solutions
Author: Sharon L. H. Bennett
The gap analysis process at Sunshine Elementary School was a team effort.
9
Upon
completion of the entire process, the inquiry team determined that the following causes had the
most impact on the literacy development of students at Sunshine elementary school: (a) goal
alignment; (b) professional development; (c) teacher collaboration; (d) parental engagement; (e)
culturally relevant instructional strategies; and (f) site-based leadership. While acknowledging
the interdependence of these six causes, each member of the inquiry team focused on two out of
the six in order to further analyze the causes and develop an action plan for the school. The two
that will be discussed in this chapter are teacher collaboration and parental engagement. This
chapter provides a foundation of empirical research and theory to develop a plan of action
concerning teacher collaboration and parent engagement. The literature review will focus on
teacher collaboration and parental engagement. Finally, an action plan for Sunshine Elementary
will be presented in Chapter 6.
Teacher Collaboration
Teacher collaboration is an essential part of creating systems that can potentially improve
the literacy practices in any school (DuFour, 2004). The literature presented will first address the
definitions of teacher collaborations that are pervasive in the profession. Next, various processes
and activities that are used in schools will be discussed, with emphases on their successes as well
9
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to
refer to the school, district, and community.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 82
as challenges. After examining the many aspects and entities of teacher collaboration, a plan of
action can then be developed that can specifically be utilized to assist Sunshine Elementary
School in the area of literacy, to be presented in the next chapter.
What teacher collaboration actually is and what teachers perceive it to be may differ.
Perceptions of what collaboration entails may also differ between teachers and school systems
(Knackendoffel, 2005). Many teachers understand the term collaboration as having
conversations about the administrative aspects of the classroom process (Knackendoffel, 2005).
Some teachers believe that collaboration is discussing curriculum and deciding what will be
taught when (Knackendoffel, 2005). Still others believe that teacher collaboration is looking at
data in order to remediate students further. There are some teachers who do not see the value of
collaboration as a viable means of improving instruction; when asked to participate in
collaboration, these teachers tend to revert to past practices and opt not to use the information
(DuFour, 2004; Knackendoffel, 2005). For the purpose of this paper, the definition of teacher
collaboration outlined by DuFour (2004) will be employed: "Educators [...] must work together
to achieve their collective purpose of learning for all. Therefore, they create structures to
promote a collaborative culture” (p. 2).
In order for effective collaboration to take place, teachers must establish a plan for how
they will meet, what is important to them concerning meeting content, and what is necessary for
instructional practices to change (Kilbane, 2009; Knackendoffel, 2005; Richmond & Manokore,
2010). Schools must allocate the time and space for teachers to work together on a regular basis
(Knackendoffel, 2005; Leonard & Leonard, 2003; Richmond & Manokore, 2010; Vescio, Ross,
& Adams, 2008). Finally, teachers must be empowered to make decisions, given the support they
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 83
need to have ownership, responsibility, and accountability of change on campus (Kilbane, 2009;
Knackendoffel, 2005; Vescio et al., 2008). Many companies and individuals have attempted to
create their own versions of viable processes for authentic collaboration. A program pervasive in
current literature is the Professional Learning Communities (PLC) model. PLCs provide an
organizational frame for schools to participate in effective collaboration activities. This section
will provide clarification on what constitutes the PLC, describe the process, and illustrate ways
in which the program has been used successfully to improve literacy instruction.
The PLC process. While the PLC can be defined in many ways based on the
perspectives of the participants, the following basic elements should be part of the PLC process:
(a) shared values and vision; (b) a collaborative culture; (c) a focus on examining outcomes to
improve student learning; (d) supportive and shared leadership; and (e) shared personal practice
(DuFour, 2004; Hord, Roussin, & Sommers, 2010). When members of a school staff commit to
all of these elements, they strengthen the school’s ability to make sustainable changes that will
benefit students. For the purpose of this paper, schools that make a commitment to the
systematic development of all elements will be addressed as "authentic PLC schools"
Elements of an authentic PLC. Teachers at authentic PLC schools tend to value the
importance of working toward a common goal (DuFour, 2004; Hord, Roussin, & Sommers,
2010). Shared values and visions happens when grade level teams, departments, and entire
schools prioritize what all staff members will work toward (Richmond & Manokore, 2010).
Creating a community of shared values and vision is a process that evolves over time (DuFour,
2004). A successful PLC school will have a vision statement which will convey the value of the
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 84
school (DuFour, 2004; Richmond & Manokore, 2010). Every staff member of the PLC school
must commit fulfilling the school vision (DuFour, 2004).
According to DuFour and Eaker (1998), teachers working together can accomplish more
than they can in isolation. While another name for the collaborative culture is called collective
creativity (Hord, 1998), the term collaborative culture is the most prevalent (DuFour, 2004).
Regardless of the preferred terminology, the literature makes it clear that teachers require the
time and space to collaborate in order for a collaborative culture to grow (Buffum & Hinman,
2006; Knackendoffel, 2005). Teachers and students need to be proximate to one another on
campus; this should be considered when planning classrooms, recesses, and breaks
(Knackendoffel, 2005). Both school and district create effective master schedules that allow for
common planning time among teams. Authentic PLC schools do everything possible to ensure
that collaboration can take place, which includes being respectful of the ideas of others and
demonstrating transparency with members of the team (DuFour, 2004). Teams also make the
conscious decision to focus on items pertinent to academic improvement (DuFour, 2004).
One of the concerns about the PLC is that teachers do not have the time to actually meet
and have authentic conversations about curriculum, data and instructional practices (Buffum &
Hinman, 2006; Knackendoffel, 2005). There also need to be a level of respect for teachers and
their ideas so that they feel the PLC group is once that provides safety and respect when sharing
topics concerning classroom practices (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; Knackendoffel, 2005;
Richmond & Manokore, 2010). Conversely, leadership must be transparent and open to site-
based leadership (Richmond & Manokore, 2010).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 85
Teachers in PLCs must be committed to focusing on examining outcomes to improve
student learning. One of the lofty goals of the PLC is ensuring students learn (Buffum &
Hinman, 2006; DuFour, 2004; Vescio et al., 2008). DuFour (2004) has specified three questions
that must be addressed during the PLC collaboration meetings: (a) What do we want students to
know? (b) How will we know that students know it? (c) What will we do if students have not
learned? (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; DuFour, 2004). Teachers participating in PLCs should
understand the focus of the PLC as being to analyze data and use what is gleaned to improve
learning (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; DuFour, 2004; Knackendoffel, 2005). Much of the time,
teacher perceptions of the PLC process is about meeting and perhaps discussing concerns
(Buffum & Hinman, 2006; DuFour, 2004). However, it goes beyond just looking at data. It also
means that teachers develop specific grade level and departmental goals that all team members
commit to in order to make instructional changes. It also requires teachers to be accountable to
one another throughout the process (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; DuFour, 2004; Knackendoffel,
2005; Richmond & Manokore, 2010).
The leadership at a PLC school looks different than a traditional site. When a school is
committed to supportive and shared leadership, teachers and administrators work together to
make school-wide decisions based on feedback for teachers and their grade levels teams or
departments (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; Richmond & Manokore, 2010). Teachers are empowered
to help with decision-making, which also gives them responsibility for school improvement
(Buffum & Hinman, 2006; Richmond & Manokore, 2010). Administrators must be willing to
allow teachers to become empowered (Richmond & Manokore, 2010).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 86
Teachers need opportunities to discuss, observe each other, and create curriculum and
instructional strategies that meet the goals established by the team (DuFour, 2004;
Knackendoffel, 2005). The purpose of shared personal practice is to create authentic situations
that strengthen instructional practices (DuFour, 2004; Richmond & Manokore, 2010). According
to information presented by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (1997),
teachers have reached lofty goals once they are able to have frank discussions about each other's
practice, visit each other's classrooms, and support each other's growth as professionals.
However, this requires teachers to trust each other and to create norms that give teachers the
freedom to be honest and take risks (Buffum & Hinman, 2006; Hord, 1997; Richmond &
Manokore, 2010).
Benefits of PLC. Schools that are interested in making systemic changes to instructional
practices tend to develop an appreciation for the PLC process. Teachers participating in
authentic PLCs report feeling less isolation than those who do not (Hord, 1997). Additionally, the
shared vision develops into a school-wide goal of exemplary teaching and student learning (Hord,
1997). Teachers develop a stronger commitment to the school and the program because they feel
as if they contributed to its success. Research shows that students who attend schools with a
strong commitment to an authentic PLC experience have better attendance, are more engaged in
school, and generally academically outperform students who do not attend schools that have the
authentic PLC experience (Hord, 1997).
PLC barriers. There are several barriers to the PLC process that should be considered
when choosing to embark in this direction. First, most of the PLC programs that schools
implement stress that collaboration is not and cannot be made mandatory (Buffum & Hinman,
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 87
2006; Knackendoffel, 2005). Second, research stresses the importance of trust among colleagues
(Knackendoffel, 2005; Richmond & Manokore, 2010). Third, collaborative teams must value
each other’s' opinions and contributions to the team (Knackendoffel, 2005). Leadership must be
willing to relinquish some of its authority in certain areas in order for teachers to believe that
their collaborative efforts are valued (Knackendoffel, 2005; Leonard & Leonard, 1999).
The PLC process is arguably a valuable one, providing a scaffold for schools. However, if
collaboration is to be appealing to teachers, they must also be willing to participate in activities
that are authentic and meaningful (Richmond & Manokore, 2010). The following section will
discuss various research-based activities that have the potential to keep teachers engaged in
collaboration for the purpose of raising student achievement. The following process will be
expanded: (a) lesson study; (b) action based research; and (c) critical reflection. Using one
activity or any combination thereof adds layers to collaboration and provides appropriate
conduits for professional development, growth essential for teachers to develop an understanding
of the academic needs of students.
Lesson study. Lesson study is a technique developed in Japan that provides for rich
discussion and connection among teachers (Fernandez & Chokshi, 2002; Robinson & Leikin,
2012). The process of the lesson study allows teachers to collaborate while developing a lesson
(Fernandez & Chokshi, 2002; Lewis, Perry, Foster, Hurd, & Fisher, 2011; Schmoker, 2006).
Teachers choose a grade level standard coupled with an area of documented concern based on
current student data (Fernandez & Chokshi, 2002; Lewis et al., 2011). With this information, the
teachers create a lesson that one of them will then teach. They will subsequently critique the
lesson based on the lesson delivery and adherence to standards (Fernandez & Chokshi, 2002;
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 88
Lewis et al., 2011). Once the lesson is revised, it is taught again in another classroom by another
teacher (Fernandez & Chokshi, 2002; Lewis et al., 2011).
A study by Robinson and Leikin (2011) demonstrates the power of the lesson study
process. Eleven teachers participated in the following lesson study steps:
Lesson planning by the team;
Teaching the planned lesson by one of the teachers and observation by other members
of the team;
Reflecting on the lesson collaboratively to plan an improved version;
Teaching the improved lesson by one of the teachers and observation by the others;
Conducting a final reflective discussion collaboratively.
As teachers developed the lesson, they discussed the essentials that each teacher would cover
during the lesson. During the teacher observations, the lessons were scripted by the other
teachers. Once the lesson had been taught by all, teachers used information from the
observations and examined what took place in the lesson in order to make improvements. This
process is consistent with DuFour’s (2004) discussion of teachers as having a shared personal
practice.
From this continual practice of examining each other’s work, several insights on
instruction were gained. First, through the observation and scripting process, teacher were able to
identify aspects of the lesson that were problematic, which is easier for teachers to do when not
engaged in the actual teaching of the lesson (Lewis et al., 2011; Robinson & Leikin, 2011).
Second, the teachers involved collaboratively developed awareness for the need for changes in
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 89
their instructional practices, and used the process of brainstorming to devise strategies for
improving instruction (Lewis et al., 2011; Robinson & Leikin, 2011).
Action research. Action research is another vehicle for cultivating a collaborative
culture. Action research provides opportunities for teachers to examine concerns at their grade
levels and develop a plan for improvement in the areas of need (Sowa, 2009). Action research
provides a vehicle for teachers not only to capriciously solve problems, but to obtain both
qualitative and quantitative data to make educated decisions (Sowa, 2009). Action research
allows for authenticity in that teachers are not seeking problems to solve, but are encouraged to
identify problems that already exist in the context of the school setting (Babkie & Provost, 2004;
Sowa, 2009). Babkie and Provost (2004) have pinpointed six distinct steps for conducting action
research:
1. Identify problem, which gives teachers the opportunity to determine issues that are
germane to their current reality;
2. Collect and evaluate information from various sources, such as academic data,
anecdotal records, or surveys;
3. Analyze the data to determine the places where there is consistency and inconsistency
between data sources;
4. Develop a plan for intervention or change in which teachers determine the steps to
correct the academic concerns based on the data;
5. Implement the intervention/change and continue data collection;
6. Analyze the data and evaluate the results to determine if the plan was successful, if
the plan needs to be continued, or if a new plan needs to be developed.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 90
In working collaboratively, the authors note that teachers can determine grade level or
departmental trends are impacting student learning (Babkie & Provost, 2004).
Elias, Gilles, and Wilson (2010) illustrate how the process of action research has the
potential to change how teachers collaborate. Located in a Midwestern city, Parkland School
transitioned to a professional development school with a strong university partnership
relationship. Significantly, there was already a strong collaborative community at the school
prior to its transition. Action research was one of the stipulations of the partnership. Teachers at
Parkland were interviewed regarding their perception of how school was conducted before and
after action research became a part of the school’s culture. Many teachers noted that
participating in both classroom research and school research helped them examine their
proactivity, encouraged them to learn from others, and aided in alleviating issues stemming from
isolation. A very small number of teachers found the action research unhelpful; their perception
was that they could be more effective without such collaborative activities. Because of the
relatively low number of teachers who felt negatively, the information gathered from this study
can be read as validating the use of action research.
Critical reflection. The concept of critical reflection comes from the seminal work of
Dewey (1933): "Reflection involves not simply a sequence of ideas, but a consequence, […] a
consecutive ordering in such a way that each determines the next as its proper outcome, while
each in turn leans back on its predecessors"(p. 6). Critical reflection has the potential to change
how the PLC functions (Dewey, 1933; Wolfensberger, Piniel, Canella, & Kyburz-Graber, 2010;
Yost, Sentner, & Florenza-Bailey, 2000). Adding this dimension to the collaborative process
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 91
allows for this cognitive provides an inroad for further discussion on curriculum and instruction
(Riveros, Newton, & Burgess, 2012).
Teacher collaboration works when teachers have prioritized working together in a
community that demands respect, accountability, shared vision; and reflection (DuFour, 2004;
Hord, 1997; Riveros et al., 2012). Collaboration works best when teachers are given the tools
necessary for success (time, space, resources, and support). Suggestions for the application of
these ideas and practices to this setting will be discussed in Chapter 6. The next section will
discuss the importance of parental involvement and engagement as a mechanism for literacy
development and support.
Parental Involvement and Engagement
Parents who are connected to the school have students who perform at higher levels
(Darling & Westberg, 2004; Rasinski & Fredericks, 1989; Wong & Hughes, 2006). How
families perceive schools can have a direct effect on reading and literacy achievement (Darling
& Westberg, 2004; Rasinski & Fredericks, 1989). A specific parental engagement plan connects
parents to the school in authentic ways. Additionally, there are legal reasons for making parental
engagement a priority. The NCLB mandates that 10% of all Title I finding be budgeted and used
for parent engagement efforts if a school is in Program Improvement (PI) (California Department
of Education, 2012). This section will provide a literature review of the various perceptions of
what parent engagement entails. This section will also provide an action plan for parental
engagement that will connect parents to the school and give parents to the tools to support
literacy growth in their children.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 92
Most schools acknowledge the value of parents as essential members of the school
community. Further, most schools will report that they have activities and programs in which
parents can participate and connect to the school. However, there are distinct differences
between parent involvement and parent engagement. Parental involvement is valuable because it
provides for parents to be a part of the campus through a variety of activities (Bower & Griffin,
2011; Darling & Westberg, 2004). However, typical parent involvement activities are based on
the needs of the school, and tend to be imposed on parents (Bower & Griffin, 2011). The use of
the word "imposed" is intentional; it is not intended to imply that the parent involvement
activities are forced upon parents. Rather, it is used to indicate activities that are deemed
important to the school without considering the needs of the home, activities such as parent
conferences; parent workshops; class helpers and other volunteer opportunities; and parent
communication (printed or electronic). Most of these activities are based on important
information or data that must be communicated to the parent (Bower & Griffin, 2011).
Parent engagement is a reciprocal process. Parent engagement involves the school being
very specific and deliberate in the implementation of parental activities with a deep
understanding of what parents can contribute and who parents are (Lopez, 2001; Wong &
Hughes, 2006). Parent engagement allows parents to make their own connections to the school
because their talents and strengths are not only acknowledged, but are given value and utility in
the school setting (Lawson & Alameda-Lawson, 2012; Lopez, 2001). Parent engagement allows
parents to seek their own place in the school system while creating opportunities for their
students as well as other families (Lawson & Alameda-Lawson, 2012; Lopez, 2001; Wong &
Hughes, 2006). Finally, parent engagement encourages the school to learn about families with a
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 93
marked level of intimacy that instructional practices are altered in order to address the needs and
interests of the students (Lawson & Alameda-Lawson, 2012; Lopez, 2001).
The Epstein model. The Epstein model of parent involvement is one of the most
prevalent models for parents involvement utilized in schools (Bower & Griffin, 2011; Epstein,
2010). The model presents the concept of the overlapping sphere of influence (Epstein, 2010).
The three entities in this conceptual framework are: (a) parents; (b) schools; and (c) community
(Epstein, 2010). In this model, parents, schools and communities functioning independently,
working in partnership with one another to improve instructional practices (Epstein, 2010). The
framework suggests that parents, schools and the community must work together. A parent
partnership protocol was developed through this framework, used to guide schools in their parent
engagement efforts (Bower & Griffin, 2011; Epstein, 2010). Figure 5.1 depicts a visual of these
functions.
Figure 5.1. Epstein's Sphere of Influence (Epstein, 2010)
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 94
The following are keys to parent engagement that schools and families must have to
ensure academic growth (a) parenting; (b) communicating; (c) volunteering; (d) learning at home;
(e) decision making; (f) collaborating with the community (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London,
2001). Schools are encouraged to see parents as vital partners, each of whom need access to the
educational process (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001). The following section will
discuss the importance of each of these keys as well as examples of how they work together.
The Epstein model: Key concerns. Presumably, the Epstein model addresses the role of
the parent first because what happens in the home is an essential part of a student's success
(Epstein, 2010). Schools support families in this area by preparing them to appropriately help
their children. The assumption in this area is that parents are not going to concern themselves
with how well their students are reading until other needs are met (Epstein, 2010; Sapone &
London, 2001). Services such as literacy classes for parents, health services for families, and
home visitations inform parents of activities and services that provide support for parents
(Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001). The drawback to typical parenting activities is that the
school makes the decision about what is important versus providing opportunities for parents to
demonstrate their needs and their contributions. These "funds of knowledge" will specifically be
discussed later in this section. In order for parents to understand what is important in school,
there must be effective and systematic communication with parents so that parents are able to
support the literacy development of their students (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001).
Communication takes the form of notes, newsletters, phone calls, and parent conferences
(Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001). Communication also entails translation and
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 95
interpretation services for parents for whom English is not the primary language (Epstein, 2010;
Sapone & London, 2001).
Effective communication should create opportunities for parents to feel welcome on
campus. Parents want what is best for their children, and they want to be involved in their
children’s education. V olunteering is an excellent way to connect parents to the school and to
ensure they see firsthand how they can support improvement in literacy (Epstein, 2010; Sapone
& London, 2001). However, as schools develop opportunities for volunteering at the school,
what should be considered are the myriad contributions parents can offer to ensure they are
connected to the school (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001).
Once parents have a clear idea of what schools require of students, then learning at home
may better support the in-school learning. A significant concern with literacy development is the
differences between how schools and parents perceive literacy support (Sapone & London, 2001).
Learning at home provides this connection by encouraging schools to provide support and
specific activities for parents to lead at home that directly affect the literacy growth of their
children (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001). It also requires schools to develop an
understanding of the home in their application of activities for parents (Epstein, 2010; Sapone &
London, 2001).
Parents who are empowered with information to assist their children and opportunities to
become an integral part of the learning process have the potential to be key decision makers on
campus. Making decisions means becoming involved in activities that might potentially improve
the instructional practices of the school (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001). The Parent-
Teacher Association is an effective place for parents to participate; alternatively, parent groups
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 96
such as School Site Council (SSC) and the English Learner Advisory Council (ELAC) can have
more of an impact because the input of these groups affects how state and federal money is
allocated at the school (Epstein, 2010; Sapone & London, 2001).
Adaptations to the Epstein model. When developing or improving upon a parent
engagement program at a school, the Epstein model provides a beginning point as it covers a
multitude of parent concerns that may disenfranchise them from full school participation
(Epstein, 2010). However, parent engagement takes shape differently in different communities,
and adaptations may be needed. Language and sociocultural aspects of learning in the home are
often contradicted by activities in the school (Lopez et al., 2001). Much of what Epstein writes
about works when the assumption is that parents will come because they know how to navigate
the school system (Lopez et al., 2001; Bower & Griffin, 2011). As stated earlier on concerning
parent engagement in general, much of what the Epstein model encourages "imposition" of
activities and information concerning the school's needs without the school practicing any
reciprocity (Bower & Griffin, 2011). A case study conducted by Bowers and Griffin (2011)
examined potential problems with the model. An additional contention is that the Epstein model
does not address already established advocacy entities, such as the church or other community
organizations. While using the Epstein model to connect families to schools, it is equally
essential for schools to practice reciprocity and connect with the home.
Unfortunately, the model presumes no difference between perceptions of learning in the
home and school (Lopez et al., 2001). In communities where there is a dichotomous view of
school and home, what happens in the home and community is an essential part of engaging
parents in the educational process. The next section will discuss funds of knowledge, a theory
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 97
which is a catalyst for providing schools with an understanding of parents and their strengths
and how to use these strengths to influence instructional practices
Funds of knowledge. The term “funds of knowledge” (FoK) refers to historical and
cultural bodies of knowledge that students bring from their homes and communities (Gonzales,
Moll, & Amanti, 2005; Hogg, 2011; Marshall & Toohey, 2010). A common assumption in
education is that students from marginalized cultures are not capable of or prepared for reading-
related activities. In fact, their FoK are not consistent with the objectives of the school (Gonzales
et al., 2005; Hogg, 2011). However, understanding the importance of FoK has a direct impact on
how student internalize literacy because literacy behaviors are based not only on what occurs in
the classroom, but on the perceptions of literacy in the home (Gonzales et al., 2005) Throughout
the literature, the definition of FoK centers around not only acknowledging the many talents and
contributions that students bring to school, but highlights employing what is used in the home to
strengthen the connection parents have with the educational system (Gonzales et al., 2005; Hogg,
2011). FoK are not a list of traits that teachers can pull to figure out how to work with students
(Gonzales et al., 2005). Rather, they provide opportunities for schools to examine families and
their potential and current contributions and use these contributions as in integral part of the
educational process.
Schools must provide parents and families opportunities to connect with the school.
Meeting with parents at the school and in the community allows school personnel to develop
relationships with families with the express purpose of understanding the valuable insight they
have to offer the school. Additionally, it reveals values parents provide for their children that can
be capitalized on to support literacy practices (Gonzales et al., 2005). Visiting students' homes
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 98
and learning about what is important to families is one way of engaging parents in school
activities (Gonzales et al., 2005; Moje, Ciechanowski, Kramer, Ellis, Carrillo, & Collazo, 2004;
Roswell, 2005). Once parents are connected to the school, their participation in other activities
tends to increase (Gonzales et al., 2005).
A study conducted at a school in Tucson, Arizona by a teacher named Marla Hemsley
was presented by Gonzales, Moll and Amanti (2005). The teacher researcher conducted visits to
the homes of several students. One family in particular was chosen based on an established
relationship with the father at the school. The teacher acknowledged the advanced
communication skills of the parent through his talent in writing poetry and songs (Gonzales et al.,
2005). Through this visit, the teacher was able to access the parent's fund of knowledge,
encouraging him to help with a rendition of “The Little Red Hen.” Through visits to other
homes, the teacher found that parents had sewing talents and other talents that made the
production successful. This powerful literacy support for students was made possible by
understanding what the parents had to offer the school. Additionally, it empowered the parents
involved to participate in other leadership opportunities at the school. The teacher was
encouraged to continue in order to determine what other talents the parents might have possessed
to support literacy development (Gonzales et al., 2005).
While examining the idea of FoK, the literature suggests that home visitations provide
more authenticity when working with families as it allows for interactions in familiar settings
(Moll et al., 1992; Moje et al., 2004). One concern is the time and money to visit homes with
appropriate regularity. There is also the issue of perception. Parents may feel as if they are
being judged by the teachers when they visit (Lin & Bates, 2010; Meyer, Mann, & Becker, 2011).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 99
Teachers may be concerned parents might not feel comfortable with the visit as well (Meyer et
al., 2011).
Understanding and considering FoK helps teachers see parents in a positive manner. It
has the potential to change the outlook of how schools address the needs to students from all
backgrounds. It also empowers parents who may not have participated in the past. When
schools have events and activities, parents can see the value because (a) they trust the school and
(b) schools do a better job in choosing activities that engage parents based on their strengths.
The next section will discuss the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE). This program is
unique in its attempts to acknowledge and utilize parents in a systematic way.
PIQE. The Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE) provides a supportive frame
for schools aiming to empower parents (Chrispeels & Rivero, 2001; Golan & Peterson, 2002;
Riojas-Cortez, Flores & Clark, 2003). A K-12 effort, the program’s content differs based on the
level served; ultimately, the outcome for all workshops is college preparation (Chrispeels &
Rivero, 2001; Riojas-Cortez et al., 2003). At the elementary level, the focus is on ensuring
parents can navigate the school system and understand the way the school works (Chrispeels &
Rivero, 2001; Golan & Peterson, 2002; Riojas-Cortez et al., 2003). Chrispeels and Rivero
(2001) have presented a framework that suggests that, before participating in PIQE, parents may
have a less-than-clear view of their role as educational partners. Through the PIQE, parents
gather tools to navigate the school system in a culturally sensitive environment (Golan &
Peterson, 2002). The desired outcome is for parents to be informed and empowered, and ready
to work with the school on behalf of their children. At the elementary level, the program offers
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 100
specific instructions to parents on how to make literacy instruction important (Chrispeels &
Rivero, 2001; Riojas-Cortez et al., 2003). Figure 5.2 illustrates this conceptual framework.
Figure 5.2. Conceptual framework of how the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE)
influenced Latino parents' participation in their children's education (Chrispeels & Rivero, 2001).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 101
According to the information provided on the PIQE website (Parent Institute for Quality
Education, 2012), several types of activities that can be used to improve the school’s relationship
with parents, including:
Parent engagement education program;
Early childhood development program;
Teachers’ workshop on effective parent engagement;
Three-day teachers’ seminar;
Best practices model.
It is clear that that PIQE tries to address all the items that may keep parents from participating in
their child’s educational process. PIQE recognizes that both the parent and the school must
change in order for parents to be more engaged. However, PIQE is very expensive, costing as
much as $300 per parent graduate. In spite of this barrier, school do experience success with
PIQE as it provides a mechanism for becoming more involved in the school and its many
processes (Chrispeels, González, & Arellano, 2004).
Conclusion
Teacher collaboration and parent engagement both play an important role in the
improvement of literacy at Sunshine Elementary School for two reasons. First, strengthened
parent engagement and teacher engagement bolsters the effectiveness of each of these essential
stakeholders. Second, it provides opportunity for both stakeholder groups to change their
perspective vis-à-vis their roles and responsibilities. Chapter 6 will present an action plan for
Sunshine Elementary, proposing suggestions on how the school might provide added structure to
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 102
its existing teacher collaboration and parental involvement processes. Additionally, the chapter
will introduce the Kirkpatrick frame for evaluating these programs.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 103
Chapter 6:
Implementation of Recommended Solutions
Author: Sharon L. H. Bennett
The goal of this gap analysis was to investigate the possible causes for the literacy gap at
Sunshine Elementary School.
10
The areas of teacher collaboration and parent engagement were
examined in terms of their impact on stakeholder participation in activities affecting literacy.
The recommendations for Sunshine Elementary School are focused on the areas of teacher
collaboration and parent engagement. As Chapter 5 illustrated, collaboration has the power to
impact literacy instruction as a support to any professional development efforts in which the
school participates. Just as important is the finding relating to parent engagement, which is that
it enables parents, as their child’s first teachers, to provide the support schools need to make
literacy significant to students.
Teacher Collaboration
The research-based solutions emphasized in the previous chapter include professional
learning communities, lesson study and action research. Since one of the causes for EL literacy
underachievement at Sunshine Elementary School as identified through the gap analysis process
was inconsistent teacher collaboration practices, this section will discuss three strategies for
improvement in this area.
Recommendation I: Support ongoing collaboration. Supporting ongoing
collaboration must take place before teachers can work together authentically. Fortunately,
10
In order to maintain the confidentiality of participants, this dissertation uses pseudonyms to
refer to the school, district, and community.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 104
Sunshine does have aspects of this in place. While Sunshine staff have described working
collaboratively in grade level groups, their processes can be streamlined so that the times they
meet are productive.
Rules of engagement. Once collaboration teams are established, rules of conduct must
be developed. DuFour (2004) has termed these group norms. They dictate what will take place in
the meeting, what will be discussed, and what will not be tolerated by the group. Norm setting
needs to be part of the agenda for each meeting. The grade level group decides what these norms
are in order to make the best use of the group’s time. Examples of norms include:
Come to each meeting prepared. Each person is responsible for bringing
materials, ideas, and an attitude conducive to collaboration.
Stay on topic. Follow the agenda. If there is something that is pressing, agree to
place it at the end of the agenda or commit to placing it on the next agenda.
Agree to disagree. Occasionally there will be discussions that are contentious.
Respect others and their opinions.
What is decided by the group is what will be communicated to others. Group
members must be supportive of decisions made in the collaboration group.
Establishing how the group with conduct itself will facilitate developing trust, honesty, and
transparency.
Time and space for collaboration. The administration needs to make sure that
collaboration time is built into the contract day. This can be done two ways. The most cost
effective method is to petition the district for early release or late start days. In so doing,
teachers are granted at least an hour each week dedicated to collaborative efforts. A second way
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 105
is through using substitutes to release grade levels for collaboration time. However, this way
requires schools to use additional funds to pay for substitutes; therefore, these substitute
meetings may not be a feasible alternative to the weekly meetings. In either case, the
collaboration time must be dedicated to collaboration. Many teachers become frustrated because
collaboration somehow manages to morph into discussions on unrelated topics, which is not how
the collaboration time was designated to be used. It is also important that collaboration time is
not encroached upon by other events.
Proximity is essential as well. Teachers in common grade levels must have recesses and
lunches at the same times because as they develop the collaborative culture, they will need built-
in times during the day to touch bases and discuss concerns. While these discussions are not
required, it is clear that, when given the space to participate in professional activities, teachers
committed to collaboration will take advantage of the time. Additionally, having common break
times assists with relation-building among teachers. As teachers continue to share ideas and
build trust with one another as grade level teams, shared leadership is the next step to supporting
a collaborative culture.
Shared leadership. Sunshine has participated in school-based leadership on some level
for several years. While it has looked differently each year, it is evident that the staff values the
process of grade level representatives meeting regularly with the administration to make
decisions. It would be helpful for Sunshine to streamline this shared leadership process by not
only allowing the administration to disseminate information for grade levels to report, but also
for grade levels to discuss the issues that take place within their groups based on data and the
results of the collaboration meeting
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 106
Recommendation II: Focus on data-driven decision-making. A large part of creating
a collaborative culture is using this time to make decisions to improve learning. Sunshine
Elementary does participate in data collection and setting goals, and has done so in some fashion
for the last several years. However, the teachers within grade levels must ensure that they look
closely at the data to more effectively develop specific plans that will help the students meet their
goals.
Data collection and analysis. Although many schools are data rich, teachers may not
analyze data in a way that is most beneficial to students and their learning. This section outlines
an example of how Sunshine can be more strategic in data collection and analysis. The example
used will be fifth graders at a fictional institution. These students experienced low benchmark
scores in the area of reading.
Upon reviewing the benchmark test, fifth grade teachers find that only 48% of the
students were considered proficient. For the grade level to be considered proficient, 70% of
students need to score proficient on the test. A strand study would need to take place in order to
determine why more students did not perform proficiently on the benchmark. (Most schools use
data management system such as Data Director, OARS or EADMS which makes this step
simple). In analyzing the data by strand, three primary areas of concerns are identified: (a)
discern main ideas and concepts presented in texts, identifying and assessing evidence that
supports those ideas; (b) know abstract, derived roots, and affixes from Greek and Latin and use
this knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words; (c) establish and develop a situation
or plot.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 107
It may not make sense to choose all three standards; rather, the question that should be
asked is, "What standard or standards have the greatest potential to improve performance?" This
is where teacher discussion is valuable, as it is not always the standard with the most questions
on the test. When teachers have committed to the process of teacher collaboration, this
represents an opportunity to discuss all possible reasons why students may be having difficulty in
these areas. Teaching materials, teaching strategies, student ability, teacher talents, challenges,
and related organizational issues need to be part of this discussion. This process de-emphasizes
placing blame and instead stresses validating causes based on documented information.
After discussion, teachers may decide about which standards to prioritize. For example,
teachers might feel that addressing the standard “know abstract, derived roots and affixes from
Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words” is the most
important because, if students do not recognize the meanings of Greek and Latin words while
reading, comprehending what is being read is impacted. Additionally, addressing this standard
may help address some of the other standards of concern.
Once a standard or a group of standards are selected, then goals must be set. The next
section will discuss the specifics of goal setting and how Sunshine can use the SMART goal
process to create
Goal setting. Once schools have identified the specific strands affecting student
achievement, and have discussed all possible reasons for lack of achievement, goals must be set.
However, goals need to be reasonable in their application. Too often, teachers set lofty goals that
cannot be met because prerequisite skills have not been addressed. Therefore, it is important that
the goals be SMART:
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 108
Specific: narrow in scope;
Measurable: there must be a way to ascertain the degree to which the goal is
successful;
Attainable: the goal must be reasonable;
Results-driven: know what the ultimate goal is and base the desired outcome
on this;
Timely: provide a reasonable amount of time — not too much, not too little.
Table 6.1 outlines the steps of the SMART goal and the elements that must be considered when
creating one.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 106
Table 6.1
Example of SMART Goal Elements and Descriptors
SMART Goal Elements Descriptors
Specific
22% improvement on the February 2013 Benchmark
test in reading
Measurable
Improvement in the area of "know abstract, derived
roots and affixes from Greek and Latin and use this
knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words"
Determined by the results on the February 2013
benchmark test in the area of reading
Attainable
Teachers will focus on one standard
Sufficient time allocated for teacher participation in
appropriate activities (instruction, parent activities) to
support improvement in selected area
Results Driven
70% of all fifth graders will be "proficient" in the area
of “know abstract, derived roots and affixes from
Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the
meaning of complex words”
Timely To be met by February 2013 (six instructional weeks)
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 107
Although teachers typically share their goals with other grade levels, the next step is to
share the goals with the students and parents. It is a powerful process informing students of the
goals set by the grade level team. In doing this, students can help cultivate solutions and offer
affirmations about how their learning behaviors will change in order to meet these goals. Parents
can also support the goals though activities that are sent home and through communication with
teachers. Once goals are set, discussion on how these goals will be met must commence. The
action plan is the "how" of data-driven decision-making.
Action plan. The action plan phase consists of determining the activities that will be
implemented in order to meet the goal. This is where the individual talents of the teachers can be
shared with an entire grade level. Both curriculum and instructional strategies should be
brainstormed. For example, if the standard that will be addressed based on data analysis is
“know abstract, derived roots and affixes from Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to
analyze the meaning of complex words," then the following action plan might be developed:
1. Teachers will teach two Greek roots each week
a. Week 1: aqua-water; audi-hear
b. Week 2: cent-hundred, fract-break
c. Week 3: ject-throw, oct-eight
d. Week 4: ped-foot, script-write
e. Week 5: uni-one, vis-see
f. Week 6: Review and assess.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 108
2. Students will work in cooperative groups to derive meaning of words based on the
roots using a dictionary.
3. Students will use literacy bags at home to practice Greek roots with their parents.
Teachers do not need to create an unmanageable list of strategies that they can use. Instead,
choosing two or three strategies or activities keeps the goal that they have chosen manageable.
Also, it is easier for teachers to commit to a few strategies because there is less chance for
teachers to become frustrated and abandon the goal. Additionally, teachers must be sure to
assess the chosen activities periodically. It is perfectly acceptable for ineffective activities to be
abandoned and replaced with ones that work.
Assessment is an integral part of the action plan. This is the step that determines whether
or not the goals were met. Did the students meet the goals? What were the demographics of the
students who did or did not meet the goal? To what can results be attributed? Will the team
continue with the same goal, or abandon the goal and move on to another? Part of the success,
or lack thereof, involve (a) the selection of instructional practices that the teachers choose and (b)
the lesson delivery. Through the collaboration process, examining instructional practices would
strengthen the teachers' understanding of how to better make progress in meeting the established
goals.
Recommendation III: Lesson study as a shared personal practice. Chapter 5
described the lesson study process as a means for stronger collaboration opportunities. Once
grade levels at Sunshine have committees to data-driven decision-making, the use of a modified
lesson study would be helpful in aligning their instructional program. Also, the lesson study
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 109
compels teachers to use the data and the action plan for their grade level to focus on the type of
lesson might best help students meet their goals.
The lesson study process is an involved one; it will be helpful for Sunshine to start with
the basics. It is suggested that teachers begin by using the standard chosen as the focus standard
and create a lesson together. The lesson format must be agreed upon; it is not necessary for it to
be complex. The idea is for teachers to agree on what it important for them to teach in order to
reach the goal. For example, if the teachers decided to use "know abstract, derived roots and
affixes from Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words,"
and are teaching two Greek roots each week, they might opt to develop an instructional routine
than can be used for each word.
In a true lesson study, teachers participate in the "critical friends" process, which entails
one teaching the lesson while the rest observe and take notes. Afterward, the teachers would
discuss the lesson and make changes as needed. However, as teachers learn to trust one another,
it may be of greater benefit for teachers to begin the lesson study process by writing the lesson
together, committing to teaching the lesson by a certain date, and discussing the lesson after it
was taught. As the collaborative culture continues to develop, critiquing each other’s teaching
may come later.
Authentic teacher collaboration is a process that requires schools to commit to developing
the types of relationships that foster trust, transparency, and a belief that student achievement
should be the primary reason for meeting. For these same reasons, it would be in Sunshine
Elementary School's best interest to examine and realign their parental engagement efforts. The
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 110
next section offers prescriptions for Sunshine in the area of parental engagement, with the
objective of creating meaningful and authentic relationships with families.
Parental Engagement
Schools must value the contributions of parents as partners in the educational process.
The research-based solutions emphasized in the previous chapter include the use of the Epstein
model and analyzing the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE). Since one of the causes
for EL literacy underachievement at Sunshine Elementary School as identified through the gap
analysis process was the need to streamline parental engagement processes, this section will
discuss three strategies for improvement in this area.
Considering PIQE. PIQE, a parent involvement program, was discussed in Chapter 5. A
K-12 initiative, PIQE’s goal is to create an environment in which parents have a clear picture of
their students' needs in relation to college and work preparedness. At the elementary level, the
emphasis is on parents becoming more involved on campus through effective communication
with the school, advocating for students, and creating a home environment effective for learning.
After the nine week session, parents graduate with strategies that have a positive impact on their
child’s education.
Schools may experience challenges after PIQE is complete; they must be prepared for
these newly empowered parents. For example, parents who are equipped might expect that the
school will host events to help them better support their child. If schools are not ready to support
PIQE graduates, this can be problematic for several reasons. First, since the cost of PIQE can be
up to $300 per graduate, it is in the best fiscal interest of the schools to provide opportunities for
parents to be more involved. Second, parents may perceive the school to be ineffective if their
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 111
expectation of more engagement activities are not fulfilled, which is the opposite of what the
PIQE program attempts to promote. If Sunshine decides to consider using PIQE, the staff must
be prepared to meet the expectations of the parents. Once a school has participated in the PIQE
process for a few years, many of the elements can be adapted and sustained by the staff.
Through class newsletters, home visits, and auto calls, parents can be reminded about
maintaining effective learning environments at home. Training students in how to study
independently and creating a checklist of appropriate study attributes as part of homework can
also help focus parents on maintaining appropriate behaviors. Another element of PIQE that can
easily be maintained at the school is using the resources of the district and the community.
Finally, the power of PIQE is that all classes are presented in the home language of the
participants. The power of PIQE is that it is not merely training; rather, it strives to change the
culture of the school as a whole, creating teachers and parents who are willing to collaborate
creatively for the benefit of the students.
Modifying the Epstein model. The Epstein model for parent involvement is one of the
most widely used frames for designing a school's parent engagement program (Bower & Griffin,
2011; “Evaluating evaluations,” 2002). The model stresses creating activities that met the
academic and social needs of the families through considering the three spheres of influence:
School;
Home;
Community.
While the Epstein model is an effective frame for assessing middle-class communities, there are
concerns about indiscriminately applying the model across class stratifications because of its
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 112
narrow perception concerning how parental participation on campus. Additionally, the model
presupposes that the information from the school is more important than the information that can
be obtained from families. The Epstein model assumes that parents are comfortable with the
school system and know how to navigate the system. However, families that experience lack of
access; limited understanding of English; conflicting views of what school should look like; and
high levels of poverty have differing perspectives concerning school and may not benefit from
traditional approaches. This does not mean that the school should assume that parents do not
care about the progress of their children. It simply means that their perception of schools does
not mirror the reality of the school system, and that their perceptions need to be integrated in any
parental involvement program. Information concerning the funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti,
Neff, & Gonzales, 1992) needs to guide how parent engagement efforts are organized. As
discussed in Chapter 5, home visitations can give schools a clear picture of the needs of the
family. And, while the school still needs to focus on the specific standards that must be taught,
this understanding of the home and the parent perspective must influence the function of the
school.
Recommendation IV: Develop a parent education program. The concern with parent
training programs is that much of the time, schools do not consider the important factors of a
strong parent education program. These factors include parent needs, student data, and
appropriate course creation. Parent trainings must provide opportunities to share how they work
with students. However, state standards cannot be ignored. The collaboration processes
discussed previously stress the need for teachers to focus on data-driven decision-making.
Examining both student data and parent needs can effectively help frame a simple yet
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 113
meaningful parent education program. This section will discuss steps to create a parent education
program that considers the academic needs as determined by standards that are taught and parent
needs.
Student data. As part of the collaborative process, teachers analyze data and use the data
to change classroom practices. This same data needs to drive the creation of parent education
sessions. When creating classes for parents, it is essential the focus stem from a documented
concern that can be verified through the data.
Parental input. The needs of parents should drive any parent education program.
Unfortunately, most parent education programs are planned and conducted without parents being
part of the equation. For example, most parent education efforts are scheduled in the evening,
when parents who walk children to school remain after the first bell sounds and arrive up to an
hour before the dismissal bell rings. It is clear in this instance that many parents are available
during the day. Another instance is that many workshops are in lecture form, whereas parents
may desire opportunities for practical, hands-on activities that they can do with their students.
Whatever the case may be, parental input for planning is critical.
Myriad opportunities to obtain information concerning parental needs became apparent
during the inquiry process. It was noted that parents congregate about the school for at least an
hour after class has started, and arrive on campus approximately thirty minutes before dismissal.
Taking advantage of these times to hold a parent coffee or meet-and-greet would be an effective
way to explore parent perspectives. Using school events such as parent conferences and back-to-
school night as fora for teachers to become informed on parental needs is also potentially
effective. Part of the conference protocol can be to ask parents a series of open-ended discussion
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 114
points that can assist the school in the development of potential training opportunities.
Alternatively, home visitation activities, as presented by Moll, Amanti, Neff, and Gonzales
(1992), allow school personnel to discuss academic needs with parents and highly worth
considering. While home surveys could be sent home with students to be completed, there may
not be a high rate of return. If this method is chosen, part of this process needs to be a system of
student incentives for returning the questionnaires, understanding that even then the data should
be considered with caution.
Developing courses. Instead of trying to create a single class or series of classes for the
entire school, it would be more effective to provide grade levels with the responsibility of
creating a course or set of courses specific to the realities of that particular grade level. Teachers
at Sunshine currently maintain a strong connection to their parent communities. Because of this,
they have the greatest power of influence when encouraging parents to attend trainings. Creating
opportunities for teachers to craft courses also fosters a sense of ownership in relation to the
process.
Based on the desired outcome of the action plan, grade level groups should be able to
easily develop a short workshop for parents. If possible, students of the attending parents can
accompany their parents. For example, if the standard being addressed is "know abstract,
derived roots and affixes from Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the meaning of
complex words," then perhaps having a "make and take" literacy bag workshop on Greek roots
might be helpful. This is an effective practice for two reasons: first, both parents and students
learn how to interact with one another in ways that support literacy practices at school; second,
teacher-facilitators can observe these interactions and incorporate them into their instruction.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 115
Additionally, interpretation services should be provided for parents with limited English
fluency. This can be done through teachers, classified staff or parent volunteers. The interpreter
should be someone familiar with the school and educational terms and acronyms. Further, in
order for parents to feel included in the classes, interpretation audio systems (including
headphones) can be used so that parents are free to move about as they wish. Not having to sit
near an interpreter removes spacial limitations as well as the stigma associated with not being
fluent in English.
Having parents visit the school for trainings is a start. However, it is also important for
parents to experience how teachers and students interact in class. Activities that allow for this,
such as “bring a parent to school” day, not only give parents the opportunity to see how grade
level goals are fulfilled, but parents can also take this information home and create activities
consistent with what is happening at school.
Recommendation V: “Bring a parent to school” day. Providing parents with
opportunities to learn how to help their students at home and providing volunteering are two
essential features of the Epstein model for parent involvement (Epstein & Salinas, 2004).
However, as stated previously, the Epstein model assumes that parents have the tools that support
the school without considering whether or not the school has the tools to support parents. “Bring
a parent to school” day is a school wide effort that allows for two things to occur. First, parents
are made welcomed on campus in a non-threatening fashion. Second, it is a way for teachers to
model effective literacy practices that parents can replicate at home. The planning of “bring a
parent to school” day can be as simple or as multifaceted as the school wishes.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 116
The day should offer parent services and activities from beginning to end. Once parents
bring students to school, parents should then convene in a multipurpose room or similar large
area, to be greeted by administration and district officials. Schools are advised to make light
breakfast fare available for the meet-and-greet as well as a community and district resources
personnel (e.g., student services, special education, EL support, assessment, food service) on
hand to answer questions and, if possible, initiate problem solving as necessary. This allows
parents to see the many resources available to them, and it allows these offices to form
relationships with the parents in a non-confrontational way. It may be effective for the
superintendent or designee to address the parents, reassuring them of concerns that the school
has identified.
While these types of activities are effective for any parent population, they are essential
for the parent population in schools such as Sunshine where there is high poverty and limited
access to resources. There are many school resources that parents are not aware of; having them
in one place provides a convenience for parents. Since many Sunshine's parents walk to school,
having these resources on campus provides additional access. Finally, being able to address the
superintendent provides empowerment for parents.
After the meet-and-greet, the parents are dismissed to their student's classrooms. The
teachers' role of including parents in activities and selling these literacy activities is crucial.
Teachers must make an effort to be engaging, and should choose activities for “bring a parent to
school” day that support the action plan created during the collaboration phase. For example, if
the action plan calls for improvement in the area of "know abstract, derived roots and affixes
from Greek and Latin and use this knowledge to analyze the meaning of complex words," then
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 117
having parents help the class play a dictionary game using the Greek roots would be appropriate.
The activity needs to be one where both parents and students are engaged in the tasks, which can
later be replicated by the parents at home. Additionally, the activity should be designed so that
parents of multiple students can leave one classroom and arrive at another and still participate in
the various activities. If this is a problem for the Sunshine community, a suggestion would be to
have separate events for Pre-K-2 and grades 3-5.
After an hour, parents reconvene in the multipurpose room for evaluation. Although
more about evaluation will be discussed in a subsequent section, the evaluation of an event of
such magnitude can help guide additional parental engagement activities. Additionally, the
empowerment parents experience has the potential to encourage parents to participate in other
leadership opportunities.
Recommendation VI: Literacy bags. Literacy bags make connecting home and
school's literacy efforts in a simple fashion (Barbour, 1998; Grande, 2004; Richardson, Miller,
Richardson, & Saks, 2005). No matter how much effort is made to get parents on campus to
work with students, there are always some unable or unwilling to attend school-related activities.
There are also parents who do participate but have identified that their child needs continued
literacy support. Literacy bags meet the needs of both situations. Inside the bags are books for
students to read or have read to them; there may also be an extension activity based on the
documented goals of the school or grade level. Bags must also contain specific instructions in
relation to what parents need to do with the student. The activities must be structured such that
the parent and child can work collaboratively.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 118
In the bag there may be a book, literacy game or related activity intended to reinforce a
skill being addressed in class (Grande, 2004). Although items that are returned to school after
use may be cost effective, bags that are sent home and kept at home serve a greater purpose.
Students have the opportunity to practice reading and participating in the activities continually.
Skills that are difficult can be practiced on a daily basis. This repetition, especially for EL
students, supports English development. An added benefit is that parents are able to use the
bag’s activities for younger siblings to frontload information. Yet a third benefit is that parents
can play the games with students in order to improve their own English language skills.
Literacy bags can be purchased, but they are very expensive. It is suggested that teachers
create their own using sealable plastic bags (e.g., Ziploc-style), which can be purchased in bulk
or can be donated by parents. Sunshine's PTA has demonstrated an interest in donating items for
classrooms, so this may be an ideal item the PTA can commit to purchasing for the school. For
teachers who may not have additional time to create the actual bags, newly empowered PIQE
parent volunteers can assemble the bags either at home or at the school.
The recommendations concerning parent engagement take into account the Latino EL
population that makes up a large segment of Sunshine Elementary school. There is a high degree
of respect and trust for teachers in this community (Madrid, 2011). According to the surveys, the
parents at Sunshine trust the school’s staff. Having grade level teachers create and facilitate the
instruction in the parent trainings and the “bring a parent to school” day builds upon this trust.
Additionally, the activities in both events allow parents to interact with their students, the
teachers, and other parents. However, the family dynamic of the EL students at Sunshine must be
taken into consideration when creating parents events, and it will be important for Sunshine to
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 119
think divergently about how parent engagement looks through events that create community and
home outreach.
Additional considerations. It is critical to be mindful of experiential disparities among
middle-class families and lower-income families. The most obvious difference is in family
makeup. Middle-class families are typically two-parent households. However, single-parent
families are likelier to be relegated to lower-income strata (Biblarz & Raftery, 2010). With this
comes students whose parents have limited availability because they are the sole providers for
the family. It is important for schools to avoid making assumptions about how a family values
education based on a perceived lack of participation. Instead, providing alternatives for
participation is essential. Events on weekends and near significant cultural holidays (e.g., Day of
the Child, Cinco de Mayo, Mexican Independence Day) not only provide parents an opportunity
to come to the school to celebrate important cultural events, but can connect the school with the
larger community.
Technology provides powerful tools to bring school-designed trainings into the home.
Websites such as YouTube and TeacherTube are inexpensive and allow schools to upload
recordings of trainings and providing access to parents who are unable to attend. Another option
might be to create DVDs so that parents can access the trainings. However, schools must take
care not to assume that parents have access to these types of technologies in the home, e.g.,
internet access, computers, tablets, and smart phones.
Parents whose work and home obligations do not allow for them to attend school events
may get the content through the technology resources previously presented, but they have limited
opportunities to discuss ideas with other parents. Sunshine should also consider partnering with
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 120
community organization, such as libraries and community centers and design evening or
Saturday sessions in which teachers can replicate their workshops off-campus or screen the
training videos. When the videos are shown, it may be helpful to have a teacher in attendance to
provide clarifications as needed. Finally, hosting video days in the homes of willing parents
during convenient times provides parents with the information needed in a comfortable setting.
Additionally, extended family is part of the dynamic in many homes. Grandparents,
aunts, uncles, and other adults in the home can also provide rich literacy support for children in
the household, and providing these adults with resources that build upon what happens at school
is an effective way to improve reading skills. Having an event similar to “bring a parent to
school” day, such as a “grandparents' lunch,” is a creative way to reach this faction of the family.
Members of extended families can visit the school, eat lunch with the students, and participate in
mini-workshops, with themes like "reading to children in the home" and "television and literacy
development." Events such as “grandparents’ lunch” provides the support necessary while
keeping in mind that (a) most of the people participating are older and need activities that take
this into consideration and (b) some of the members of the extended families have different types
of influence than the parent such that their role is not that of the disciplinarian. So activities
should also be interactive and social in nature.
Fathers are an integral part of a child's development. In homes where a father is present,
the issue of long work hours presents the same concerns that the single parent experiences.
However, events such as "donuts with dad" can focus on specifically targeting the father or father
figure in the household. The event can be scheduled earlier than the typical parent engagement
event, as many fathers have early work hours. Abbreviated versions of the trainings can be
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 121
presented. If the fathers at Sunshine are made to feel that they are important and needed, they
may come. Perhaps only a few fathers will attend to begin with, but it is a good starting point.
Evaluation of Solutions
In order to ensure that the solutions suggested are effective once implemented, the
Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick, 2001) for evaluating programs can be used. The four levels of
evaluation:
Level 1: Reactions;
Level 2: Learning;
Level 3: Behavior;
Level 4: Results.
Level 1 addresses the reaction of participants. This process should take place
immediately and should not be a drain of resources (Champion, 2003). For teacher
collaboration, are they attentive during the training? Do teachers seem interested is what is being
taught? For parent engagement, do the surveys after events indicate that there was interest in the
events?
Level 2 gauges what the participants learned. At this level, the guiding question is, Do
the participants know what they need to know to continue participation? For teacher
collaboration, are teachers using what they learned about collaboration during collaboration
time? Are teachers establishing and adhering to norms? Are they cooperating with all activities?
Through the student, can teachers tell that parents are working with their students? Are teachers
returning information to school and communicating with the school as needed?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 122
Level 3 measures behavior, which connects with learning. The guiding question is, Do
the participants know enough to change their behavior? For teacher collaboration, are there
lesson plans that address that lessons developed are those agreed upon by the grade level?
During formal and informal observation, is there a commitment to instructional strategies and
activities? Are teachers volunteering successes on goals being set? During parent interactions,
do they report that they have personally benefitted from the training through a renewed
commitment to the education of their students?
Level 4 addresses results: How did the training transfer to improving the performance of
the participants? For example, when teacher collaboration is measured, if the goal of
collaboration is improving student outcomes, did test scores rise? Did student efficacy and
persistence improve? For parent engagement, are parents more visible on campus? Table 6.2
lists possible questions to consider when using the Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick, 2001).
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 123
Table 6.2
Summary of Assessment Questions Using the Kilpatrick Model
Evaluation
Level
Definition Teacher Collaboration Parent Engagement
LEVEL 1:
REACTIONS
How well did the
learners like the
learning process?
Were the teachers
motivated to
participate in the
activities presented?
Did parents
participate in the
activities
presented at the
school?
Are parents
readily signing up
for the next
activity?
LEVEL 2:
LEARNING
What did they
learn? (the extent
to which the
learners gain
knowledge and
skills)
Did the teachers learn
activities that will
contribute to a more
collaborative
community?
Do the grade level
agendas and minutes
illustrate what has
been learned?
Do parent climate
surveys indicate
that parents
learned something
useful?
"Make and take”
activities: was
product high
quality?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 124
LEVEL 3:
BEHAVIOR
(What changes in
job performance
resulted from the
learning process?
(capability to
perform the newly
learned skills
while on the job)
Are teachers
collaborating both
during meetings and
outside of meetings?
Are teachers'
conversations
focusing more on
student's academic
improvement?
Are teachers open
and excited about
discussing the
activities such as
lesson study
Do lesson plans
demonstrate teachers'
commitment to the
action plan?
Do parents initiate
communication
with the school?
LEVEL 4:
RESULTS
What are the
tangible results of
the learning
process in terms of
reduced cost,
improved quality,
increased
production,
efficiency?
Have instructional
practices improved?
Have the teachers met
their goals? To what
extent if not?
Are parents
participating more
in school activities?
Are students
coming to school
with higher levels
of engagement?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 125
Cautions and Limitations
It is important to know that there were some cautions and limitations to the findings
presented. First, not all teachers participated in the teacher interview. This was primarily due to
time constraints that were outside the control of the school and the university. Second, students
and parents did not participate in any interviews. Third, not all parents and students participated
in the surveys provided by the school. Finally, teachers were not observed in order to analyze
their instructional practices. The hope of the inquiry team was that the responses solicited were
authentic and provided accurate information that supported documented assumptions and
conclusions. However, the inquiry team recommended that the administration of Sunshine
Elementary School and the California Unified School District follow up on any successes and
concerns that may be illuminated by this study and use this information to further examine the
practices at Sunshine.
Conclusion
This chapter outlined recommendations for Sunshine Elementary School to close the
school’s literacy achievement gap. These recommendations were based on the research-based
solutions presented in Chapter 5. The current chapter provided recommendations for
streamlining the teacher collaboration process at Sunshine. Additionally, it provided
recommendations on specific activities that allow for greater access for parents through the
parental engagement program.
It is important to mention that the solutions discussed in Chapters 5 and 6 addressed only
two of the six causes impacting literacy achievement at Sunshine. It is essential for Sunshine to
access the research and recommendations from the remaining two members of the three-party
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 126
inquiry team in order to address the activities that can impact the literacy achievement at the
school and consider the research holistically. Sunshine Elementary School may choose to
prioritize the implementation of the recommendations, or make modifications as desired.
However, it was the recommendation of the inquiry team that Sunshine addresses each of the
areas presented.
Successful teacher collaboration and parent engagement programs are based on trust,
honesty, and the ability to understand the needs of all participants. Sunshine Elementary School
already exhibits a deep appreciation for each other as a collective of colleagues; additionally, the
school has established good relationships with families. Implementing the recommendations
suggested should not be difficult for the school, and will provide opportunities for further growth
in both areas.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 127
References
Anderson, J. (2005). Historical Context for Understanding the Test Score Gap. Chapel Hill, NC:
University of North Carolina Press.
August, D. (2007). Developing Reading and Writing in Second Language Learners:
Demographic Overview. New York, NY: Center for Applied Linguistics and the
International Reading Association.
August, D. & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners:
Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2008). Developing Reading and Writing in Second-
Language Learners: Lessons from the Report of the National Literacy Panel on
Language-Minority Children and Youth. New York, NY: Routledge.
Published jointly with the Center for Applied Linguistics and the International
Reading Association.
Babkie, A. M., & Provost, M.C. (2004) Teachers as researchers. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 39(5), 260-268.
Bae, S., Holloway, S. D., Li, J., & Bempechat, J. (2008). Mexican-American students’
perceptions of teachers’ expectations: Do perceptions differ depending on student
achievement levels? The Urban Review, 40(2), 210-225.
Barbour, A. C. (1998). Home literacy bags promote family involvement. Childhood Education,
75(2), 71.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 128
Bauer, E. B., & Arazi, J. (2011). Promoting literacy development for beginning English learners.
The Reading Teacher, 64(5), 383-386.
Biblarz, T. J. & Raftery, A. E. (2010). Rethinking the pathology of matriarchy: Family structure,
educational attainment, and socioeconomic success. In A. Yarber & P. Sharp (Eds.),
Focus on single-parent families: Past, present, and future. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Brice, R. G., & Brice, A. E. (2009). Investigation of phonemic awareness and phonic skills in
Spanish-English bilingual and English-speaking kindergarten students. Communication
Disorders Quarterly, 30(4), 208-225. doi: 10.1177/1525740108327448
Bower, H. A., & Griffin, D. (2011). Can the Epstein model of parental involvement work in a
high-minority, high-poverty elementary school? A case study. Professional School
Counseling, 15(2), 77-87. doi: 10.5330/PSC.n.2011-15.77
Buenning, M., & Tollefson, N. (1987). The cultural gap hypothesis as an explanation for the
achievement patterns of Mexican-American students. Psychology in the Schools, 24(3),
264-278.
Buffum, A, & Hinman, C. (2006). Professional learning communities: Reigniting passion and
purpose. Leadership, 35(5), 16.
Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The
Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127.
California Department of Education. (2012). 2012 Adequate yearly progress report information
guide (2011–12 Accountability Progress Reporting System, pp. 1-79).
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 129
Champion, R. (2003). Taking measure: Choose the right data for the job. Journal of Staff
Development, 23(2).
Chrispeels, J., González, M., & Arellano, B. (2004). Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Parent
Institute for Quality Education in Los Angeles Unified School District September 2003 to
May 2004 evaluation report (Rep.). Santa Barbara, CA: University of California, Santa
Barbara Gevirtz Graduate School of Education.
http://piqe.org/Assets/SpecialPrj/PIQE%202004%20Evaluation/Piqe%20Evaluati
on%202004.htm
Chrispeels, J., & Rivero, E. (2001). Engaging Latino families for student success: How parent
education can reshape parents' sense of place in the education of their children. Peabody
Journal of Education, 76(2), 119-169. doi: 10.1207/S15327930pje7602_7
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research into Results: A Guide to Selecting the Right
Performance Solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Clay, M. M. (2005). An Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement. Auckland, NZ:
Heinemann.
Conderman, G., & Strobel, D. (2008). Fluency flyers club: An oral reading fluency intervention
program. Preventing School Failure, 53(1), 15.
Darling, S., & Westberg, L. (2004). Family literacy: Parent involvement in children's acquisition
of reading. The Reading Teacher, 57(8), 774-776.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-44.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 130
Dawson, P. (2009). Homework: A guide for parents. Communique – National Association of
School Psychologists, 38(1), 26.
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the
Educative Process. Boston, MA: DC Heath and Company.
Dooley, C. M., & Matthews, M. W. (2009). Emergent comprehension: Understanding
comprehension development among young literacy learners. Journal of Early Childhood
Literacy, 9(3), 269-294. doi: 10.1177/1468798409345110
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8),
6.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional Learning Communities at Work: Best Practices for
Enhancing Student Achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.
Duval-Couetil, N., & Mikulecky, L. (2011) Immigrants, English, and the workplace: Evaluating
employer demand for language education in manufacturing companies. Journal of
Workplace Learning. 23, 209-223.
Elias, M., Gilles, C., & Wilson, J. (2010). Sustaining teachers' growth and renewal through
action research, induction programs, and collaboration. Teacher Education Quarterly,
37(1), 91.
Epstein, J. L. (2010). Teamwork is the key: The national network of partnership schools.
National Civic Review, 99(2), 21-29. doi: 10.1002/ncr.20014
Epstein, J. L. (2011). School, Family, and Community Partnerships: Preparing Educators and
Improving Schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 131
Epstein, J. L., & Salinas, K. C. (2004). Partnering with families and communities: A well-
organized program of family and community partnerships yields many benefits for
schools and their students. Educational Leadership, 61(8), 12-18.
Evaluating evaluations: The case of parent involvement programs. (2002). Review of
Educational Research, 72(4), 549-576. doi: 10.3102/00346543072004549
Fernandez, C., & Chokshi, S. (2002). A practical guide to translating lesson study for a US
setting. The Phi Delta Kappan, 84 (2), 128-134.
Gandara, P., & Maxwell-Jolly, J. (2000). Preparing teachers for diversity: A dilemma of quality
and quantity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Linguistic Minority Research
Institute. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9xx421bc#page-1
Gill, B., & Schlossman, S. (2003). Parents and the politics of homework: Some historical
perspectives. Teacher College Record, 105(5), 846-871.
Golan, S., & Petersen, D. (2002). Promoting Involvement of Recent Immigrant Families in Their
Children's Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project.
Gonzales, N., Moll, L. C. & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing
Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Grande, M. (2004). Increasing parent participation and knowledge using home literacy bags.
Intervention in School and Clinic; 40(2), 120-126.
Guccione, L. M. (2011). Integrating literacy and inquiry for English learners. Reading Teacher,
64(8), 567-577.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 132
Harper, C., & de Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching English-language learners.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(2), 152-162.
Hawkins, B. (2009). Teacher cooperatives. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for
Quick Review, 75(2), 57-61.
Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters: How well-qualified teachers can close the gap.
Thinking K-16, 3(2), 1-16.
Herrera, J. C. (2013). A capstone project: Closing the achievement gap of English learners in
literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Team project co-authored by S. L. H. Bennett & E. Mingo-Long.
Hogg, J. (2011). Funds of knowledge: An investigation of coherence within the literature.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 666–677.
Hord, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: What are they and why are they
important? Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/change/issues/issues61.html
Hord, S. M., Roussin, J. L., & Sommers, W. A. (2010). Guiding Professional Learning
Communities: Inspiration, Challenge, Surprise, and Meaning. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Jones, A. G., & King, J. E. (2012). The common core state standards: A vital tool for higher
education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(6), 37-43.
Kilbane, J. F. (2009). Factors in sustaining professional learning community. NASSP Bulletin,
93(3), 184-205. doi: 10.1177/0192636509358923
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 133
Kindler, A. L. (2002). Survey of the States’ Limited English Proficient Students and Available
Educational Programs and Services: 2000–2001 Summary Report. Washington, DC:
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition and Language Instruction
Educational Programs.
Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). The four-level evaluation process. In L. L. Ukens (Ed.), What smart
trainers know: The secrets of success from the world’ s foremost experts (pp. 122-132).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Kissinger, A. M. (2004). The need for emergent literacy events in schools. Knowledge Quest,
33(2), 58.
Klauda, S. L. (2009). The role of parents in adolescents’ reading motivation and activity.
Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 325-363.
Knackendoffel, E. A. (2005). Collaborative teaming in the secondary school. Focus on
Exceptional Children, 37(5), 1-16.
Kozulin, A. (1990). The concept of regression and Vygotskian developmental theory. Developmental
Review, 10(2), 218-238.
Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B., Levy, B. A., & Rasinski, T. V . (2010).
Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and
definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230-251.
Lawson, M., & Alameda-Lawson, T. (2012). A case study of school-linked, collective parent
engagement. American Educational Research Journal, 49(4), 651–684.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 134
LeClair, C., Doll, B., Osborn, A., & Jones, K. (2009). English language learners’ and non-
English-language learners’ perception of classroom environment. Psychology in the
Schools, 46(6), 568-577.
Leonard, L., & Leonard, P. (1999). Reculturing for collaboration and leadership. Journal of
Educational Leadership, 92(4), 237-242.
Leonard, L., & Leonard, P. (2003).The continuing trouble with collaboration: Teachers talk.
Current Issues in Education, 6(15).
Lewis, C., Perry, R., Foster, D., Hurd, J., & Fisher, L. (2011). Lesson study: Beyond coaching.
Educational Leadership, 69(2), 64-68.
Linn, R. L. (2003). Accountability: Responsibility and Reasonable Expectations. Los Angeles,
CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation, CRESST.
Lopez, G. R. (2001). The value of hard work: Lessons on parent involvement from an
(im)migrant household. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 416-437.
Madrid, E. M. (2011). The Latino achievement gap. Multicultural Education, 18(3), 7.
Manyak, P. C. (2008). What's your news? Portraits of a rich language and literacy activity for
English-language learners. The Reading Teacher, 61(6), 450-458.
Marshall, E., & Toohey, K., (2010). Representing family: Community funds of knowledge,
bilingualism, and multimodality. Harvard Educational Review, 80(2), 221-244.
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Teaching by priming students’ motivation to learn. In R. E Mayer (Ed.),
Learning and instruction (pp. 209-223). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 135
Meyer, J. A., Mann, M. B., & Becker, J. (2011). A five-year follow-up: Teachers’ perceptions of
the benefits of home visits for early elementary children. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 39(3), 191-196. doi: 10.1007/s10643-011-0461-1
Mingo-Long, E. (2013). A capstone project: Closing the achievement gap of English learners in
literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Team project co-authored by S. L. H. Bennett & J. C. Herrera.
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T.
(2004).Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday
funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38-70.
Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzales, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching:
Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice,
31(2), 132-141.
Mora, M. T., Villa, D. J., & Dávila, A. (2006). Language shift and maintenance among the
children of immigrants in the U.S.: Evidence in the Census for Spanish speakers and
other language minorities. Spanish in Context, 3(2), 239-254.
Moule, J. (2012). Cultural Competence: A Primer for Educators. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Cengage.
Netten, A., Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2011). Predictors of reading literacy for first and
second language learners. Reading and Writing, 24(4), 413-425.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 136
Office of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement
for Limited English Proficient Students (ED). (2002). No child left behind: Educating
linguistically and culturally diverse students. (pp. 1-6). Washington, DC: US Department
of Education.
Publication Number: ED 469 393
Pahl, K., & J. Rowsell (Eds.). Family Literacy Experiences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Parent Institute for Quality Education (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.piqe.org/prog_parentengage.php
Ramírez, J. D. (2001). Bilingualism and Literacy: Problem or Opportunity? A Synthesis of
Reading Research on Bilingual Students. A Research Symposium on High Standards in
Reading for Students in Diverse Language Groups: Research, Policy, and Practice.
Washington, DC: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs, US
Department of Education.
Rasinski, T. (2000). Speed does matter in reading. Reading Teacher, 54(2), 146-151.
Rasinski, T. V ., & Fredericks, A. D. (1989). Working with parents: What do parents think about
reading in the schools? The Reading Teacher, 43(3), 262-263.
Restrepo, M. A., & Towle-Harmon, M. (2008). Addressing emergent literacy skills in English-
language learners. ASHA Leader, 13(13), 10.
Richardson, M. V ., Miller, M. B., Richardson, J. A., & Sacks, M. K. (2008). Literacy bags to
encourage family involvement. Reading Improvement, 45(1), 3-9.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 137
Richmond, G., & Manokore, V. (2011). Identifying elements critical for functional and
sustainable professional learning communities. Science Education, 95(3), 543-570. doi:
10.1002/sce.20430
Riojas-Cortez, M., Flores, B., & Clark, E. (2003). Los niños aprenden en casa: Valuing and
connecting home cultural knowledge with an early childhood program. Young Children,
58(6), 78-83.
Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and
learning: Critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of
Education, 35(1), 202-216.
Robinson, N., & Leikin, R. (2012). One teacher, two lessons: The lesson study process.
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1), 139-161. doi:
10.1007/s10763-011-9282-3
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance: Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Sapone, S., & London, K. (2001) Increasing parent involvement. Leadership for Student
Activities, 30(3), 19-21.
Schmoker, M. J. (2006). Results Now: How We Can Achieve Unprecedented Improvements in
Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum
Development.
Schulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 4-14.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 138
Scott, J. L., & Teale, W. H. (2009). Effective literacy instruction for urban children: V oices from
the classroom. Reading Teacher, 63(4), 338-341.
Smith, J. A. (2000). Singing and songwriting support early literacy instruction. The Reading
Teacher, 53(8), 646.
Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (1997). Professional learning communities:
What are they and why are they important? Issues... About Change, 6, 1.
Sowa, P. A. (2009). Understanding our learners and developing reflective practice: Conducting
action research with English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8),
1026-1032. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.04.008
Sum, A., Fogg, N., Harrington, P., Khatiwada, I., Trub’skyy, M., & Palma, S. (2002). Immigrant
Workers and the Great American Job Machine: The Contributions of New Foreign
Immigration to National and Regional Labor Force Growth in the 1990s. Boston, MA:
Northeastern University Center for Labor Market Studies.
US Census Bureau. (2006). Population Profile of the United States. Race and Hispanic Origin in
2004. Washington, DC.
US Census Bureau. (2006). School Enrollment — Social and Economic Characteristics of
Students: October 2005. Table 1, Current Population Survey. Washington, DC: US
Department of Commerce.
US Census Bureau. (2010). State and County Quick Facts: Centerville, CA. Retrieved from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0644574.html
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 139
US Department of Education. (2003). NCES Plan for NAEP Background Variable Development.
Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
Published jointly with the National Center for Education Statistics and the
National Assessment of Educational Progress.
US Department of Education. (2006). High School and Beyond; 1990 High School Transcript
Study; National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988; 1994 High School Transcript
Study; and 1998 High School Transcript Study. Washington, DC: US Department of
Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
Published jointly with the National Center for Education Statistics and the
National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Verdugo, R. (2006). A Report on the Status of Hispanics in Education: Overcoming a History of
Neglect. Washington, DC: National Education Association, Human and Civil Rights.
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional
learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 24(1), 80-91. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2002). Mind in society and the ZPD. In A. Pollard (Ed.), Readings for reflective
teaching (pp. 112-114). London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2009). Cultural-historical theory of psychological development. In M. E.
Gredler (Ed.), Learning and instruction-theory into practice (pp. 117-159). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 140
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child
Development, 69(3), 848-72.
Williams, C., Phillips-Birdsong, C., Hufnagel, K., Hungler, D., & Lundstrom, R. P. (2009). Word
study instruction in the K-2 classroom. The Reading Teacher, 62(7), 570-578.
Wilson, E. K., Konopak, B.C., & Readence, J.E. (1993). Examining Central Issues in Literacy
Research, Theory, and Practice (42nd ed., pp. 335–343). Chicago, IL: National Reading
Conference.
Wolfensberger, B., Piniel, J., Canella, C., & Kyburz-Graber, R. (2010). The challenge of
involvement in reflective teaching: Three case studies from a teacher education project on
conducting classroom discussions on socio-scientific issues. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 26(3), 714-721. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.007
Wong, S. W., & Hughes, J. N. (2006). Ethnicity and language contributions to dimensions of
parent involvement. School Psychology Review, 35(4), 645-662.
Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000a). Sharing informational text with young children. The
Reading Teacher, 53(5), 410-423.
Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000b). Supporting phonemic awareness development in the
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 54
Yost, D. S., Sentner, S. M., & Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000).An examination of the construct of
critical reflection: Implications for teacher education programming in the 21st century.
Journal of Teacher Education, 51(1), 39-49.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 141
Appendix A:
Parent Climate Survey (English)
Sunshine Elementary School Climate Survey
Dear Families,
We want Sunshine Elementary School to be the best that it can be. Please fill out this survey and
tell us what you think our school’s strong points are and what you think could be better. We
welcome your comments and ideas.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Caring Environment at Sunshine Elementary
1. When I walk into this school I feel welcome.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I am treated with respect at this school.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. The school respects my cultural heritage.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. Students at my child’s school are treated fairly no matter what their race or cultural
background.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
5. I feel welcome at PTA/parent group meetings.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………
Problem Solving at Sunshine Elementary
1. I have a good working relationship with my child’s teacher.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I can talk to the school principal when I need to.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 142
3. The school has a clear process for addressing concerns about my child(ren).
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. If the school can’t help me, I know they will refer me to someone who can.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Communication at Sunshine Elementary
1. My child’s teacher notifies me if my child is having a problem with (circle all that apply):
Behavior Reading Classwork Homework Tests
2. It is easy to get all school information written in Spanish and English.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. The school consults me before making important decisions about my child.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. Every year the school informs me of what grade level standards are expected of my child.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Student Progress at Sunshine Elementary
1. My child’s teacher keeps me well informed about how my child is doing in school.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
2. I understand the grade level standards that my child is supposed to meet.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. Sunshine Elementary gives useful information on how to improve my child’s progress.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
4. At Sunshine Elementary students feel challenged to do their best.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
5. At this school students enjoy reading
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Satisfaction of Sunshine Elementary
1. I am very satisfied with the quality of this school
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 143
2. I would recommend this school to family and friends with children.
Always Almost always Sometimes Rarely Never
3. What grade is your child in? List all if you have more than
one.________________________
4. I identify my child’s race as: ________________________
5. What is the school doing that is most helpful to you as a parent?
_______________________________________________________________________
6. Write one thing you would like the school to do to improve your child’s learning
experience?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 144
Appendix B:
Parent Climate Survey (Spanish)
Encuesta de clima en la escuela primaria Sunshine
Queridas familias,
Nosotros queremos que la escuela primaria Sunshine sea la major escuela posible. Por favor
tome unos minutos y llene esta encuesta y diganos cuales son las areas fuertes de la escuela y que
areas pueden ser mejor. Sus comentarios e ideas son bienvenidas.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Un medio ambiente de carino en la primaria Sunshine
6. Cuando entro en la escuela me siento bienvenido/a
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
7. Me tratan con repeto en esta escuela
Siempre Casi Siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. La escuela respeta mi herencia cultural
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
9. Los estudiantes de la escuela de mi hijo(a) reciben un trato justo sin importar su raza u
origen cultural.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
10. Me siento a gusto en las reuniones de padres/grupo PTA
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Resolucion de problemas en la primaria Sunshine
5. Tengo una buena relación de trabajo con el maestro(a) de mi hijo(a).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
6. Puedo hablar con la directora de la escuela cuando lo necesito hacer.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 145
7. La escuela cuenta con un proceso claro para abordar las preocupaciones acerca de mi
hijo(a).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. Si la escuela no me puede ayudar, sé que me va a referir a alguien que pueda hacerlo.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Comunicacion en la primaria Sunshine
5. La maestra/El maestro de mi hija(o) me notifica si mi hija(o) tiene un problema con
(marque lo que corresponda):
Comportamiento Lectura Trabajo de clase Tarea
Examenes
6. Es fácil de obtener toda la información de la escuela por escrito en Español e Inglés.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
3. La escuela me consulta antes de tomar decisiones importantes acerca de mi hija(o)
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
4. Cada año la escuela me informa de los estándares de nivel de grado que se espera de mi
hija(o).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Progreso del estudiante en la escuela primaria Sunshine
6. La maestra/el maestro de mi hija(o) me mantiene bien informado acerca de cómo mi
hija(o) está haciendo en la escuela.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
7. Entiendo las normas de nivel de grado que mi hija(o) se supone que debe cumplir.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 146
8. La primaria Sunshine ofrece información útil sobre cómo mejorar el progreso de mi
hija(o).
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
9. En Sunshine, los estudiantes de primaria se sienten desafiados a hacer lo mejor.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
10. En esta escuela, los estudiantes disfrutan de la lectura
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca Nunca
………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Satisfaccion de primaria Sunshine
7. Estoy muy satisfecho con la calidad de esta escuela.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
8. Yo recomendaría esta escuela a mi familia y amigos con niños.
Siempre Casi siempre Aveces Casi nunca
Nunca
9. ¿En qué grado está su hija/o? liste todos si usted tiene más de
uno________________________
10. identifico la raza de mi hija/o, como: ________________________
11. ¿Qué está haciendo la escuela que es más útil para usted como padre?
________________________________________________________________________
12. Escriba una cosa que le gustaría que la escuela haga para mejorar la experiencia de
aprendizaje de su hija/o?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 147
Appendix C:
Teacher Survey
Gender:
Male_____ Female_____
Race:
Years teaching at Sunshine:
Circle Years of Teaching:
0-3 4-6 7-10 11-13 14-16 17-20
1. Sunshine Elementary School Agree Disagree
The administrators at Sunshine Elementary support its teachers.
Sunshine Elementary School is safe.
Sunshine has a curriculum that meets the needs of all students.
Sunshine Elementary School’s student discipline policy is fair.
At Sunshine, the teachers develop lesson that are culturally relevant to
all races.
At Sunshine, teachers value what students have to say.
At Sunshine, administrators respect all races and cultures.
At Sunshine, administrators value what students have to say.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 148
2. Please mark how well you think Sunshine Elementary is preparing
students for the following
Not Well Very Well
Proficiency in reading by the close of 2nd grade.
Developing students’ critical thinking skills.
To meet State Standards.
Close the literacy gap for disadvantaged youth.
Prepare students for the next grade.
Prepare students for standardized test
3. Which of the following are the most important qualities for teaching? (Circle 3)
Explaining material well to students. Working with all students' styles of learning &
culture.
Using fun and creative techniques. Building trust and respect with students.
Having control of the classroom. Subject matter expertise
Believing in all students' abilities to learn. Giving students individualized help with their
work.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 149
4. Thinking about the students at Sunshine (overall), please mark if you
agree or disagree:
Agree Disagree
Students at Sunshine care about learning and getting a good education.
Students at Sunshine get to be creative and use their abilities in school.
I know about what's going on in my students' lives outside of school.
I am able to teach to my students' individual strengths and weaknesses.
At Sunshine students should take responsibility for their learning.
Student-teacher relationships affect overall school success.
Students at Sunshine care about learning and getting a good education.
Students at Sunshine get to be creative and use their abilities in school.
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 150
Appendix D:
Student Reading Attitudes Survey
(Provided by and Administered by the school)
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 151
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 152
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 153
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 154
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 155
Appendix E:
Teacher Interview Questions
BACKGROUND
Who are the stakeholders?
Who is influential in the decision-making? Tell me more about the EL population?
What is the committee structure of the school? Informal? Formal?
What is the relationship of the school and community?
What is your perception of the school neighborhood?
How long has the current structure been in place at this school?
How do policies get made?
How receptive is the school to teacher input?
GOALS
What are the goals of the school? Are the goals practical? How do the goals impact your
teaching?
PROBLEM
What are your views on reading and learning?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 156
Appendix F:
Principal Interview Questions
1. How do you perceive your role as principal? What level of support do you receive?
2. What is your school mission? How aligned is the mission to the reality of your school?
3. Who are the stakeholders at your site/district? What is your level of interaction with
these stakeholders?
4. How are decisions made at your site?
5. Discuss the climate at Sunshine. What are some strengths? What are areas of possible
growth?
6. How are your teacher leaders selected? What are their duties?
7. Who are your “unofficial” teacher leaders? How do they impact school policy decisions?
8. What is your perception concerning teacher collaboration at Sunshine?
9. How would you describe the students at Sunshine?
10. How involved is the community (parents, families, others) in the area surrounding
Sunshine? What are some outreach/education activities that you offer? What are your
plans for future opportunities?
11. What programs and systems currently exist that serve EL students, both directly and
indirectly?
12. How are your EL programs structured? How have these programs changed since your
arrival at Sunshine?
13. In What professional development activities has your staff participated? In relation to
these activities, how is student progress monitored?
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 157
14. What are some things you would like to see changed that you believe would assist with
EL student achievement? Are these things feasible
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 158
Appendix G:
Assumed Causes Chart
Students Parents Teachers Administration
KNOWLEDGE
Delayed
reading due
to holes in
literacy
processes
Students
may not
understand
the
importance
of what is
being
learned
Education Level
may be similar to
where their
students are.
Parents may not
understand the
importance of
what is being
learned
Parents may not
have the
knowledge to
access resources
PD at beginning of school
(centralized) curriculum
aligned for teachers which
consisted of Common
Assessment, Coding for
student achievement,
benchmarked, LEA plan,
Data Analysis Protocol.
This is a data driven
program. Is the data
process giving the right
data?
Teachers may not have the
tools necessary to work
effectively with students
Lack of teaching strategies
Do teachers know the goals
of the school?
Are the goals effectively
communicated?
New to district,
new to school.
Appears to
know the
elements of the
job
May not
understand the
nuances of the
school climate
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 159
MOTIVATION
Student self-
efficacy
based on
teacher
attitudes
Student work
is not
presented in a
way that
makes them
want to
understand
the material.
Distracted by
the language
barriers
Value
Self-
Regulation
Self-Efficacy
(Pobrecito)
Meaning of
Education
Parents trust the
teachers to
Participate in PD out of
obligation vs. desire to
be a lifelong learner
Stereotyping of students
Learning of new
techniques
Self-Efficacy
She appears
highly
motivated and
wants her
students and
teachers to
perform well
She is involved
in several
programs at
school
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 160
ORGANIZATION
Heavily
focused on
LA and
Math, and
some of the
other
subjects may
not be
pushed,
especially
those
subjects
where
literacy skills
(reading,
writing,
listening and
speaking)
can be
practiced
Lack of
resources to
support system
Outside of PTA,
there are few
opportunities for
parent
engagement?
Support from
Administrator
Opportunities for
collaboration
There is no
administrative
team. Isolation
Little support from
District office
New to district,
outsider
Disaggregating
data based on EL
achievement
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 161
Appendix H:
Dissertation Proposal Presentation
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 162
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 163
Appendix I:
Presentation to Sunshine Administration
GAP ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LEARNERS’ ACHIEVEMENT 164
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English language learners at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of English learners in literacy at Sunshine Elementary School using the gap analysis model
PDF
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 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 using the gap analysis model: closing the college readiness gap for Latino English language learners with a focus on college affordability and student grades
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high school: a focus on teaching strategies and placement options
PDF
Addressing the challenges for teachers of English learners in a California elementary school using the gap analysis approach
PDF
An alternative capstone project: closing the achievement gap for Latino English language learners in elementary school
PDF
A capstone gap analysis project of English learners' achievement at a suburban high schol: a focus on teacher collaboration and cultural competence
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the achievement gap for Hispanic English language learners using the gap analysis model
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Closing the Hispanic English learners achievement gap in a high performing district
PDF
An alternative capstone project: bridging the Latino English language learner academic achievement gap in elementary school
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: teacher factors
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: School site leadership factors
PDF
Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model
PDF
Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis
PDF
Examining the choice of business majors to participate in a short-term study abroad program using the gap analysis model
PDF
An alternative capstone project: Evaluating the academic achievement gap for Latino English language learners in a high achieving school district
PDF
An examination of tri-level collaboration around student achievement using the gap analysis approach: central office leadership factors
PDF
Examining the achievement gap of seventh grade English language learners: A gap analysis
Asset Metadata
Creator
Bennett, Sharon L. H.
(author)
Core Title
A capstone project: closing the achievement gap of english language learners at sunshine elementary school using the gap analysis model
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/03/2013
Defense Date
02/04/2013
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
action research,English learners,funds of knowledge,lesson study,Literacy,OAI-PMH Harvest,parent engagement,parent involvement,teacher collaboration
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Rueda, Robert (
committee chair
), Love, Laurie (
committee member
), Yates, Kenneth A. (
committee member
)
Creator Email
hihobb@yahoo.com,shbennet@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-229805
Unique identifier
UC11295167
Identifier
usctheses-c3-229805 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-BennettSha-1504.pdf
Dmrecord
229805
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Bennett, Sharon L. H.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
action research
English learners
funds of knowledge
lesson study
parent engagement
parent involvement
teacher collaboration