University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Math and science academy literacy instruction: student study strategies, self-perception as readers, and reading achievement

(USC Thesis Other)

Math and science academy literacy instruction: student study strategies, self-perception as readers, and reading achievement

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 1

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY LITERACY INSTRUCTION:
STUDENT STUDY STRATEGIES, SELF-PERCEPTION AS READERS, AND READING
ACHIEVEMENT

by

Angela Blewitt

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

December 2013

Copyright 2013 Angela Blewitt

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 2
Table of Contents
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………….4
Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………..5
Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………………………8
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………………………………………9
Significance of the Issue……………………………………………………………………………..9
Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………………………….11
Chapter 2: Literature Review...............................................................................................14
Reading Comprehension……………………………………………………………………………14
English Language Learners………………………………………………………………………..23
Disciplinary Literacy………………………………………………………………………………..24
Social Cognitive Theory…………………………………………………………………………….26
Chapter 3: Methodology……………………………………………………………….........37
Methodological Approach…………………………………………………………………………..37
Instruments/Measures………………………………………………………………………...……..38
Data Collection Procedures………………………………………………………………...………43
Sample………………………………………………………………………………………..………..44
Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………………..…………..48
Ethical Considerations………………………………………………………………..……………..49
Chapter 4: Results…………………………………………………………...………………51
Chapter 5: Discussion and Implications for Practice……………………..………………85
References…………………………………………………………………..………………..97
Appendix A: Student Survey……………………………………………………….……...118
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 3
A.1 Information Sheet………………………………………………….…………….………119
A.2 Demographic Questionaire…………………………………………….….……….…….……121
A.3 Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) Instrument…………………………..……..123

Appendix B: Interview Guides……………………………………………………..………129
B.1 Information Sheet………………………………………………………………..…….…130
B.2 Recruitment Script for Parent/Legal Authorized Representative (LAR)..…….......132
B.3 Informed Consent for Parent/LAR………………………………………..……………133
B.4 Child Assent Form………………………………………………………..………………136
B.5 School Staff Interview Guide………………………………………….…………….…..138
B.6 Student Interview Guide……………………………………………………………..…..140

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 4
Abstract
This mixed-methods study explored the characteristics of a reading program at a South
Central Los Angeles charter school, as well as explored the relationship between motivational
and affective factors on the Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) instrument and students’
reading lexile scores. Data were collected through student questionnaire surveys and student,
teacher, and administrator interviews. The results of the study revealed that academic self-
concept, control expectation, control strategies, perceived self-efficacy, and self-concept in
reading were significantly correlated with reading scores. Additionally, students performing at
grade-level differed significantly from students performing below grade-level on these measures;
they had a strong academic self-concept. The study also revealed that self-efficacy was
perceived as crucial: in particular, teacher monitoring, caring, and one-on-one instruction to help
students gain mastery experiences to build their perceived self-efficacy and self-concept in
reading. Other influential factors were student self-advocacy (to seek help), effort, and
recognition of achievement. The findings of this study give further support to other empirical
research that has found the importance of self-efficacy. These findings have significant
implications for practice, which are also discussed.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 5
CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Reading ability in English is considered crucial to success in North American society
(Hock, 2011; Lipka, Siegel, & Vukovic, 2005). Today’s young adults who graduate with low
literacy skills have little chance for employment, even in low-paying jobs (Fleishman, 2005).
Moreover, the economic and social consequences of inadequate literacy training in our young
adult population have negative outcomes across multiple domains: education, interpersonal
development, unemployment, lower income, civil disengagement, poor health and shortened life
span (Belfield & Levin, 2009; Binder, Snyder, Ardoin, & Morris, 2011; Gandára & Contreras,
2009; Kruidenier, MacArthur, & Wrigley, 2010; Vanderberg, Pierce, & Disney, 2011).
Even more troubling, there is significant disparity among racial and ethnic groups as well
as among young adults from varied socioeconomic level (Darwin & Fleishman, 2005). Lipka,
Siegal, & Vukovic (2005) corroborate that “there is a well-known relationship between low
socio-economic status and poor literacy skills” (p. 47). In a supplemental study to the 2003
National Assessment of Adult Literacy, researchers Baer, Kutner, Sabatini, and White (2009)
found that “[a]lthough adults below the poverty threshold represented 17 percent of adults in the
nation, they represented 58 percent ” (p. vi) of adults unable to successfully answer core literacy
tasks, and it is crucial to address the literacy needs of young adults while they are still in our
public school system. The persistent lack of equity in learning outcomes for English Language
Learners (ELL), traditionally underserved racial and ethnic groups, and students from lower
socio-economic backgrounds is of great ongoing concern (NCES, 2009, 2008, 2005).

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 6
Background of the Problem
The school system, and in particular high schools, in the United States are not meeting
the literacy needs of many of our young students. There is a systemic and long-term lack of
literacy. National literacy surveys have reported 12% to 14% of adults (approximately 29 million
people) in the United States are Below Basic in reading, and nearly one in five, or approximately
60 million adults in the population, do not have the minimum level of reading capability to
achieve success in today’s labor market (National Center for Education Statistics, 2005).
Furthermore, there has been no improvement in the reading scores of adolescents and young
adults over some 30 years (Bean & Harper, 2011).
Little exists in the research literature on how to teach reading to adolescents and
struggling young adults (Alamprese, MacArthur, Price & Knight, 2011; McShane, 2005). Most
research on literacy has been conducted on children in elementary and middle-school age groups,
much of it focused on K-5, and for many decades research studies have neglected young adult
literacy (Hock, 2011; Vacca & Alvermann, 1998; Vanderberg, Pierce, & Disney, 2011). There is
a need to better understand factors that contribute to comprehension skills in struggling
adolescent and young adult readers (Beers, 2003; Cantrell et al., 2010; Hawkins, et al., 2011;
McNamara, 2011; Moore, Alvermann, & Hinchman, 2000; Solway, 2010; White, 2011). This
lack of understanding makes it difficult to suggest interventions for young adults to effectually
improve reading comprehension.
There are multiple economic and social reasons for the entire nation, and especially
California, to be concerned with assisting the young adult population to facilitate literacy skills.
There are significant negative outcomes for low literacy rates. The crisis of our young adults not
being educated will have adverse and severe effects on our economy. For example, young adults
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 7
who leave high school without finishing, or who complete high school with poor literacy skills,
receive lower pay and less job choice, and experience higher unemployment (Gandára &
Contreras, 2009). Lipka, Siegel, and Vukovic (2005) affirm that there is a well-known
relationship between low SES [socio-economic status] and poor literacy skills. Gandára and
Contreras (2009) warn that by 2020 California will experience an 11% drop in per capita income,
resulting in serious economic hardship for the state’s population (p. 5). Additionally, the
Coalition for Juvenile Justice (2001) reports that 82 percent of prison inmates did not complete
high school, and the majority these individuals lack basic literacy skills. All in all, young adults
with low literacy skills experience hardship in finding work, earn lower pay, are more likely to
end up in prison. The reading levels of many young adults are insufficient to support academic
and occupational success (Kruidenier, MacArthur, & Wrigley, 2010; Kutner et al., 2007) and this
lack has a direct impact on both individual and statewide economic losses (Gandára & Contreras,
2009).
Not only is there an economic burden caused by young adults not finishing high school,
or graduating with low literacy skills, but as Meltzer and Hamann (2004) and DeStigter (1998)
both illustrate, literacy, too, is of great importance to the democratic principles of participation
and influence for a just and verdant society. Gandára and Contreras (2009) verify the
fundamental role literacy and education play in maintaining the fabric of our society (p. 10). The
issue of literacy has been at the forefront of concerns in our democratic society (Flores-
Gonzalez, 2002, Gandára & Contreras, 2009, Hinchey, 2004, Macrine, 2009, McLaren &
Kincheloe, 2007, Shapiro & Purpel, 2005).
Math and Science Academy (MSA) is a new charter school to help address the issue of
low literacy rates in high school graduates. With established goals and performance outcomes,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 8
the MSA program works to assist young adults to develop literacy and employability for today’s
competitive job market. The importance of innovative high schools such as MSA is that literacy
training, as research from Comyn and Barnaart (2010) and Nilsson (2010) indicate, helps
facilitate social inclusion, counteract youth unemployment, reduce poverty, and promote
economic growth.
Statement of the Problem

Math and Science Academy is an inner-city school that serves a diverse population,
including a relatively large number of students from low and marginal income families (99.2%
socioeconomically disadvantaged). Math and Science Academy is finding that their participants
are accomplishing a schoolwide proficiency rate on the California Standards Test (CST) of 47%
for English Language Arts. The CST target rate established by the state is 77.8%. MSA has an
English-language learner (ELL) population of 30.4%, and they are seeking ways to improve their
English program to meet the needs of all students. The school has only been in existence for 2
years. As a new school they are practicing a self-reflective model to document through data and
to proactively improve their student achievement. The school is actively seeking ways to
improve their literacy program. Research is needed to ascertain possible causes and potential
solutions for facilitating a proficient level of literacy for students by the end of ninth grade.
Working to find a solution to reading literacy is crucial to the success of MSA students for three very
important reasons. First, all students must pass English 9 with a C or better to fulfill the requirements
for graduation (as well as passing English 10, 11, and 12). Second, all students must pass the
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) in order to be eligible for a high school diploma (as
opposed to merely receiving a certificate of completion). The CAHSEE is taken during the tenth
grade, so it is crucial that the ninth-grade students develop reading strategies
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 9
and high-school-level fluencies before tenth grade. Third, ―Reading ability in English is considered
crucial to success in North American society (Lipka, Siegel, & Vukovic, 2005), and ―there is a
well-known relationship between low SES [socio-economic status] and poor literacy skills‖ (Lipka,
Siegel, & Vukovic, 2005), and the lack of ―college readiness (C or above in core A-G
requirements).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the nature of literacy instruction at Math and
Science Academy and to analyze the motivational and environmental factors and their impact on
student reading achievement. A mixed methods approach explored correlated personal (e.g.,
motivation, self-regulation) and contextual factors (e.g., curriculum, instruction) and reading
scores, and establish relationships between various intrapersonal and environmental factors, and
academic achievement. Based on the perceived and actual causes, recommendations were made
for a more individualized and research-based instructional plan.

Research Questions
This study seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the nature of Math and Science Academy’s approach to literacy instruction?
2. How do the students who are at grade level (or above) on the reading test differ from
those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their approaches to learning as
measured by the SAL instrument?
3. What are staff and student perceptions of Math and Science Academy’s approach to
literacy?
Significance of the Study
Adolescent and young adult learners, both those in high school and those engaged in
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 10
tertiary vocational programs and community college, will benefit from the knowledge gained
from this study. This study will make a contribution to the extant literature, as there is a dearth of
information on specific young adult populations (McShane, 2005). Teachers will have access to
the findings of systematic data analysis regarding the knowledge skills and specific motivation
factors for struggling readers in a non-traditional school setting. Thus, teachers will be better
equipped to facilitate reading instruction for the at-risk and struggling youth who are still in
institutions of high school and continuation school. Instructors, and the organizations in which
they function, will be better informed as to best practices for literacy instruction for struggling
adolescent and young adult readers.
The relevance of this study for the MSA site is to assist participants in meeting their
academic goals. When students make gains in reading comprehension scores, their intended
programs of study become achievable. Literacy is an engine for economic growth and a vehicle
for social inclusion (Nilsson, 2010); thus, research to facilitate literacy in struggling young adults
is necessitated by very real economic and social consequences if this issue is not addressed.
To analyze the motivational and contextual factors affecting the performance gap in
students’ reading at Math and Science Academy is to focus on the key components necessary for
functional literacy, so students will have the foundation to succeed in a career of their choosing.
Methodology
The design used to investigate the research problem was a multi-stage mixed method
approach. The quantitative phase included demographic information and document analysis
(reading score information), as well as a Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) survey. The
qualitative phase included observational data, document analysis of program materials, and
interviews (administrators, staff, teachers). This final phase was qualitative and consisted of
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 11
interviewing 10-12 students, teachers, and administrators. Once the quantitative and qualitative
data were analyzed, solutions were then recommended for implementation to improve student
literacy.
Theoretical Framework
The motivational literature on academic achievement is extensive, and one
framework in particular—Social Cognitive Theory—offers a wealth of ideas to inform our
approach to the issue of students’ approaches to learning. Social cognitive theory (SCT)
suggests that reciprocal determinism (or triadic reciprocality), the idea that people, behavior, and
environment are mutually influencing, is the key to understanding motivation and achievement
behaviors. Through this theory, human agency is explained by exploring the interactions
between these three co-factors, with the perspective that they comprise a larger, unified structure
that motivates behavior (Bandura, 1997). Social cognitive theory provided the theoretical
framework for this study by looking at the interaction between environmental factors and
motivation.
Definition of Terms

A number of terms are relevant to and referenced in this study. For the purpose of the
study, these terms are defined as follows:
Table 1
Definitions of Technical Terms in Reading Intervention / Educational Psychology Fields

Term Definition __ _ _ Source______
Attribution process Process whereby environmental and personal Schunk, Pintrich & Meece (2008)
factors influence the generation of attributions
which in turn affect cognitive, affective, and
behavioral outcomes

Automaticity Accurate, fast, and effortless performance National Research Council (1998)
of reading subprocess

Comprehension Understanding the literal meaning of the text National Research Council (1998)
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 12
and also being able to draw inferences

Decoding Applying letter-sound (grapheme-phoneme) National Research Council (1998)
correspondence to break the alphabetic code

Fluency Ability to read text quickly and accurately, National Research Council (1998)
and with appropriate prosody, while having
cognitive energy to attend to comprehension

Literacy An individual’s ability to read, write, and speak Workforce Investment Act (1998)
in English, compute, and solve problems, at
levels of proficiency necessary to function
on the job, in the family of the individual, and
in society

Metacognition Knowledge about cognition as well as the control Schunk, Pintrich & Meece (2008)
and regulation of cognition

Self-regulation The process by whereby students personally Schunk, Pintrich & Meece (2008)
activate and sustain behaviors, cognitions,
and affects that are systematically
oriented toward the attainment of goals.

Orthography Visual representation of letters and letter patterns McShane (2005)

Phoneme Unit of sound in a language National Research Council (1998)

Self-efficacy One’s perceived capabilities to learn or perform Bandura (1993, 1997)
actions at designated levels

Semantic Meaning of words McShane (2005)

Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 of this study presented a brief introduction and overview of the issues and
problems related to literacy in the young adult population in the United States.
Chapter 2 is a review of the relevant literature related to the present research topic. The
review included the following main topics 1) current findings in reading comprehension research
for young adults, 2) English-language learners, 3) disciplinary literacy, and 4) social-cognitive
theoretical framework. These topics were reviewed in an integrative fashion, supporting the
notion that knowledge skills, self-efficacy, and engagement mediate achievement in reading
comprehension.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 13
Chapter 3 presents the methodology used in the current study, including the research
design; population and sampling procedure; and the instruments and their selection, together
with information on validity and reliability. Each of these sections concluded with a rationale,
including strengths and limitations of the design elements. In addition, this chapter also
described the procedures for data collection and the plan for data analysis.
Chapter 4 presented data analyses and results of the study. Chapter 5 focused on
discussion and implications for practice.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 14
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Chapter 2 is a review of the relevant literature related to the present research topic. The
review includes the following main topics1) current findings in reading comprehension research
for young adults, 2) English-language learners, 3) disciplinary literacy, and 4) social-cognitive
theoretical framework. These topics will be reviewed in an integrative fashion, supporting the
notion that knowledge skills, self-efficacy, and engagement mediate achievement in reading
comprehension.
Reading Comprehension

In this section of the Literature Review, I will discuss what we know regarding
adolescent and young reading. I will also present current research findings on how to facilitate
reading for struggling adolescent and young adult learners, and the factors demonstrated to
contribute to comprehension skills.
Scarcity of Research on Adolescent and Young Adult Readers
Little exists in the research literature regarding how to teach reading to adult learners and
struggling later adolescent readers (Alamprese, MacArthur, Price & Knight, 2011). Most
research on literacy has been conducted on children in elementary and middle-school age groups,
with adolescent and adult literacy neglected for many decades (Vacca & Alvermann, 1998;
Vanderberg, Pierce, & Disney, 2011). In recent years, there has been increased attention on the
struggling older reader, with young adult literacy on the list of the International Reading
Association’s survey of hottest topics (Cassidy & Cassidy, 2008). There is still a need to better
understand the factors that contribute to comprehension skills in the struggling adolescent and
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 15
young adult readers (Cantrell et al., 2010; Hawkins, et al., 2011; McNamara, 2011; Moore,
Alvermann, & Hinchman, 2000; Solway, 2010; White, 2011).
Because there is a paucity of research on struggling adolescent and young adult readers,
there is disagreement regarding the degree to which Kindergarten-to-Grade Level Five (K-5)
research findings can be generalized to the young adult education population. Some researchers
assert that K-5 analyses can inform young adult reading instruction (Kruidenier, 2002; NCICHD,
2006; Vanderberg, et al., 2011); whereas, other researchers (Sabatini, Shore, Holtzman, &
Scarborough, 2011) point to the scant evidence, and assert that we cannot extrapolate best
literacy practices for young adult learners due to the weak connections and lack of abundant
research. Kruidenier (2002) conducted a meta-analysis of 70 studies of young adults (non-
ESOL) and the researcher’s findings strongly suggest applicability, for he asserts that many
participants in basic skills programs exhibit characteristics of the Learning Disabled (LD)
learner. However, Stanovich and Stanovich (2003) advocate scrutiny and care in applying
research findings from what works with children who have a Learning Disability (LD), what
works with young English Language Learners (ELL), and the findings of K-12; the researchers
assert the need to wait until there forms a consensus within the research community indicating
that a critical mass of studies point to a particular conclusion. Thus, even though there is
disagreement in the literacy literature regarding whether or not one can generalize research
findings from K-5 studies to the young adult learner, the debate has more to do with a lack of
studies than any finding of dissenting information.
Reading Skills Development
A number of the approaches do work for struggling young adult readers (Kruidenier,
2002; NCICHD, 2006; Vanderberg, et al., 2011). The next sections will delineate specific
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 16
approaches that the research suggests are effective for young adult learners: reading assessment
profiles, phonemic awareness and word analysis, fluency, vocabulary, and reading
comprehension.
Reading Assessment Profiles
One area researchers are in agreement on is the need to assess prior knowledge. For
young adult learners, Kruidenier, MacArthur, and Wrigley (2010) assert this importance of
assessment, for young adult learners can have difficulty in any of the several different crucial
areas of reading (e.g. phonemic awareness and word analysis, fluency, vocabulary, or reading
comprehension). The researchers recommend generating a reader profile for each student in
order to have a starting place for effective reading instruction. The individual needs of the
students are often not diagnosed specifically enough in order to provide instruction to meet the
needs of the student, which is troubling from an instructional perspective (Schroeder, 2011).
Recent studies stipulate the importance of component skills assessment for young adult students
(Binder, Snyder, Ardoin, & Morris, 2011; MacArthur, Konold, Glutting, & Alamprese, 2010;
Sabatini, Sawaki, Shore, & Scarborough, 2010). Thus, it is important to assess each component
of reading to assess the student’s needs (Kruidenier, et al., 2010).
Alphabetics: Phonemic Awareness and Word Analysis
Binder et al. (2011) found a direct correlation between reading ability and performance
on phonological measures, and the researchers assert that it is crucial to assess orthographic
skills in young adults’ reading ability, as these skills were found to have been used in a
compensatory function to mitigate low phonological decoding skills. Of equal import, young
adults outperform children on orthographic tasks, and children outperform young adults on
phonological decoding tasks (Binder, et al., 2011), highlighting need for young adult learners to
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 17
develop their phonemic awareness and word analysis skills. Additionally, in a meta-analysis of
NAAL documents, Sabatini et al. (2011) found that studies of low-literate young adults have
consistently documented deficiencies in word recognition (fluency), decoding, and spelling
skills. Taken together, these studies reveal a struggling young adult learner who has difficulty
developing the fluency necessary for reading ability, and this fluency is hampered by the young
adult learner not phonologically decoding words, but rather the orthographic reliance on patterns
and visual representations. This, combined with a lower vocabulary (as many adults in English
as a Second or Other Language (ESOL) programs have on average relative to their alphabetics
ability (Kruidenier, et al., 2010) would inhibit reading progress or the ability to figure out
increasingly difficult text. Many non-ESOL young adults have a greater store of vocabulary and
of sight words than children do (Kruidenier, et al., 2010); however, these young adults, too, are
relying on patterns and visual representations, which impede decoding more difficult text.
Overall, direct instruction of phonemic awareness and word analysis for children does
work (Kruidenier, et al., 2010). Whereas, in a study of adolescent and adult neo-literates in
Burkina Faso, the researchers Royer, Abadzi, and Kinda (2004) found that in an experimental
training program that combined phonological awareness and rapid-reading training,
phonological-awareness training by itself does not enhance the ability to identify words and
understand sentences. Their study sought to address the concern that many young adults who
graduate from high school fail to attain automaticity in word recognition, and therefore expend
considerable effort to haltingly recognize words in a text, which is similar to the phenomenon at
Math and Science Academy in that many of the students graduated junior high school, but read
haltingly at a fourth- or fifth-grade level. The researchers in Burkina Faso lauded the benefits of
automaticity for word recognition, as phonological awareness increased, and they observe
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 18
automaticity allows for semantic mapping. To emphasize, in addition to words becoming
encapsulated (automaticity), semantic processing relates the surface-level comprehension to the
reader’s prior knowledge, and this cognitive developmental theory-based approach advocated by
the researchers is further expanded upon by them to include the necessity of modeling three key
processes: (1) readers must be aware of whether or not they are understanding what is being
read, (2) they must be able to change their reading behavior if they are not understanding and (3)
they must be able to use a variety of reading strategies depending on the nature of the text being
read and the purpose of reading . Thus, the young adult learner needs to be given systematic
instruction in phonological decoding skills to build fluency; however, the metacognitive
awareness of the young adult must be brought to bear upon the process.
Fluency

The National Reading Panel (2000) identified reading fluency as a critical component of
effective reading. According to Rasinski (2011) fluency is comprised of word identification,
phonological decoding, and understanding of the syntactic and semantic nature of a text at an
efficient enough level to allow for comprehension of the text. Guided, repeated oral readings are
the most effective approach to teaching fluency (Kruidenier, et al., 2010; National Research
Council, 1998; Rasinkski, 2011; Vanderberg, et al., 2011); equally important, however, is to
reading widely and to practice silent scaffolded reading. Thus, the research indicates that both
wide and repeated reading are important in order for students to develop fluency. The research
indicates that reading texts at the correct reading level results in fluency gains for basic education
students (Winn, et al., 2006), and the relationship between fluency and comprehension appears to
be reciprocal (Rasinkski, 2011). Shanahan (2006) recommends a literacy curriculum that
includes fluency as a distinct component. Fluency interventions have a positive effect on older
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 19
students’ reading proficiency (Biggs, et al., 2008; Rasinksi, 2011).
Vocabulary
Effective instruction includes the opportunity to use new words many times and to
process them deeply (Kruidenier, et al., 2010), and according to the National Research Council
(1998), vocabulary is effective when taught directly or indirectly, with multiple exposures and
repetition, and not utilizing solely a single method. Additionally, in a recent quantitative study,
Burns, Hodgson, Parker, and Fremont (2011) found data that suggest preteaching key words
(Burns, Dean, & Foley, 2004) is a more efficient strategy than text previewing, although both
were found to be effective.
Researchers Cromley, Snyder-Hodan, and Luciw-Dubas (2010) advocate an instructional
path that moves from reading vocabulary to reading strategy, and suggest the use of preteaching
vocabulary to build topic knowledge of expository text such as that found in science. The
authors discuss the need for future experimental studies to confirm the vocabulary-reading
strategies link. Overall, K-12 research verifies that active engagement during instruction,
repetition and the use of multiple contexts, listening and wide reading that increases exposure to
new concepts are all effective approaches to vocabulary instruction (Kruidenier, et al., 2010).
Reading Comprehension

Fischer, Lapp, and Frey (2011) assert that reading is comprehending, as reading is more
than merely decoding, fluency, or definitions of words. Readers interact and transact with a text,
and if it has not been comprehended, it has not, according to the authors, been read (p. 258).
There is abundant research on reading comprehension. In a meta-analysis of 1,099
articles garnered from 50 years of research, Morrison et al. (2011) found that while descriptors
have changed from decade to decade, reading comprehension has remained a consistent trend in
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 20
research over the past five decades. Landi (2010) found that listening comprehension,
vocabulary, and print exposure are the best predictors of reading comprehension. Through
commonality analysis, Cromley and Azevedo (2011) indicate that strategy use mainly makes a
shared contribution to comprehension with other predictors (e.g., inference, vocabulary,
background knowledge, and word reading).
Almost all of the research to date, however, has not been focused on the young adult
learner; yet, as mentioned previously, the findings of the meta-analysis of 70 studies on young
adult learners conducted by Kruidenier (2002) indicate the applicability of K-12 findings to the
young adult learner because many participants in basic skills programs exhibit characteristics of
the Learning Disability (LD) learner.
Vital to effective comprehension is the explicit teaching of a small set of reading
strategies (Brown, 2008; NRP, 2000; Pressley, Schuder, & Bergman, 2002). For some
researchers, reading is meaning construction involving the use of cognitive strategies such as
questioning, summarizing, and monitoring comprehension (Conley, 2008; Paris, Wasik, &
Turner, 1991; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991). For many of the struggling young adult readers, their
poor understandings of cognitive strategies is the primary cause of difficulty in reading (Conley,
2008; Desler, Palinscar, Biancarosa, & Nairs, 2007; Graham, 2006; Snow & Biancarosa, 2003).
Fischer, Lapp, and Frey (2011) note that skilled readers deploy, unconsciously and
automatically, strategies to comprehend text, and Vanderberg et al. (2011) recommend that
young adult literacy interventions include an intensive combination of direct instruction in basic
skills and strategy instruction, with an emphasis on functional literacy skills relevant to
vocational aspirations.
Current researchers are refining which specific strategies are the most efficacious
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 21
for reading comprehension instruction. The National Reading Panel (2000) identified six
evidence-based strategies for classroom use: text structure instruction, graphic organizers,
question generation, question answering, summarizing, and monitoring. Kruidenier, MacArthur,
and Wrigley (2010) report that the research supports the following strategies for: questioning,
summarizing, organizing information by focusing on topics, and monitoring comprehension.
Kruidenier, MacArthur, and Wrigley (2010) further note that K-12 research also demonstrates
the efficacy of graphic organizers, use of story structure, and cooperative learning (p. 9). There
is also strong empirical support for: making predictions, questioning, summarizing, and
clarifying (van Kraayanoord, 2010), although teaching multiple strategies “allows students to
develop a repertoire that they can then learn to use flexibly according to the text type, task, and
context” (van Kraayanoord, 2010, p. 293). Spörer, Brunstein and Kieschke (2009) investigated
the effects of four reading strategies (summarizing, questioning, clarifying, predicting) with
practice in small groups (reciprocal teaching), pairs, or instructor-guided small groups for 210
elementary-school students’ reading comprehension. Intervention students outperformed control
group students; moreover, reciprocal teaching allowed for transfer of the strategies as
operationalized in the post-reading assessment. Thus, students taught RCS with reciprocal
teaching outperformed instructor-guided and traditional instruction groups. Spörer et al.(2009)
found a strong relationship between reading comprehension and the strategies of summarizing,
questioning, and predicting; however, the data revealed no such relation existed for clarifying.
Johannessen and McCann (2009) discuss how to teach the reading strategies, and
recommended direct instruction, modeling, and practice in actual reading situations.
Additionally, the researchers advocate for a classroom context that emphasizes critical thinking
and discussion. Christenbury, Bomer, and Smagorinsky (2009) also recommend the instructor
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 22
model critical thinking strategies for difficult reading passages, utilize open-ended questions,
authentic questions, and reciprocal teaching. Current research suggests that most effective
strategies for young adults with LD are individualized instruction, learning through guided
discovery, collaborative transition planning combined with vocational planning and teaching
trade skills and literacy (Vanderberg et al., 2011). Moreover, metacognitive strategy knowledge
is central to strategy usage—the student needs to know when and how to apply specific strategies
when s/he encounters difficult reading text (Cantrell, et al., 2010; Jitendra et al., 2011).
Whereas Berkeley, Mastropieri, and Scruggs (2011) assert that very little is known about
how to develop young adults’ understandings of cognitive reading strategies, and Conley (2007)
warns of a bleak future in which young adults are unable to transfer knowledge and strategies
into success and achievement, current research has some hopeful findings for teaching cognitive
reading strategy usage to young adult learners. McShane (2005) recommends to work with the
young adult learner as a partner and collaborate on the specific skills the learner needs to develop
his/her reading, learning activities connected to the learner’s goals, create a learning plan to
collaboratively practice skills with authentic (real-life) materials, teach for transfer, and facilitate
self-study. McShane (2005) recommends being truthful and preparing the learner for the large
investment in time and effort that is going to be required of him/her.
Summary

Little exists in the research literature regarding how to teach reading to adult learners and
struggling later adolescent readers (Alamprese, MacArthur, Price & Knight, 2011). Because
there is a paucity of research on struggling adolescent and young adult readers, there is
disagreement regarding the degree to which Kindergarten-to-Grade Level Five (K-5) research
findings can be generalized to the young adult education population. Reading requires the
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 23
cooperation of many forces (Fischer, et al., 2011). Fluency and comprehension work in a
reciprocal manner, and fluency is built through phonological decoding skills, sight word (high
frequency words) recognition automaticity, and word analysis skills. Reading comprehension
can be facilitated through cognitive strategy instruction (CRS) which is then internalized by the
student so that s/he attains a flexible of CRS use to assist him/her in text comprehension.
English-Language Learners
There are 1,467,989 English-language learners (ELL) in 10,124 schools in California
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2012). Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD)
has a 35.3% ELL student population, representing 92 languages, while Spanish comprises 68%
of the ELL population. In secondary grades, 29%, or 406,000 students are ELL. The majority of
English-language learners are poor and/or socioeconomically disadvantaged (Larsen, 2004).
Research on ELL indicates it takes 5-7 years to develop literacy in a second language (Collier,
2007); however, 60% of secondary ELL students in California have been in the state’s schools
for more than 5 years (Callahan, 2005) and have not acquired the skill set necessary to exit ELL
status. Current research indicates that California’s secondary schools are not meeting the needs
of its ELL population to achieve grade-level literacy (Callahan; Lapp & Fisher, 2011) as only
26% of ELL students are at or above Basic, and 3% are at or above Proficient on the California
State Test (CST) of English Language Arts (ELA); compared to 73% at or above Basic, and 28%
at or above Proficient for Non-ELL students (NCES, 2012).
There is a need to identify best schooling practices for ELLs in high schools, as current
research notes a dearth of research-based knowledge of designing pedagogies and programs to
teach ELLs (Lapp & Fisher, 2011). Currently, Hispanic students are 4 times more likely than
White students and twice as likely as African American students to drop out of school (NCES,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 24
2007), and reading underperformance in urban schools is a key factor (Neild & Balfanz, 2006).
To address the needs of English-language learners, the National High School Center
(2009) recommends to make ELLs a schoolwide priority; motivate, train, and involve teachers;
and emphasize literacy. Franquiz and Salazar (2004) advocate interpersonal connections with
the individual student, and allowing a space for ELLs to construct and express their authentic
selves. Three significant needs of students in urban learning environments are emotional
support, exposure, and changes in attitude toward education (NCES, 2013), and De La Luz
(2000) advocates a respectful environment as well as the importance of knowing the whole
student. Lapp and Fisher (2011) state that cross language transfer needs to be taught explicitly,
and vocabulary instruction to be directly taught and embedded in meaningful contexts with
ample opportunities for repetition. ELLs benefit from direct and explicit instruction in the
components of literacy (Genesse, et al., 2006). Reaching ELLs also involves the components of
good teaching, according to Lapp and Fisher (2011) including predictable and consistent
classroom routines; well-designed, clearly structured and appropriately paced instruction; active
engagement and participation; opportunities to practice, apply, and transfer new knowledge;
feed-back on correct and incorrect responses; frequent and periodic assessment of progress; and
feeling that they belong to a classroom and school community.
Disciplinary Literacy
In this section of the Literature Review, I will present current findings on disciplinary
literacy. This will include current research findings on how to facilitate reading for struggling
adolescent and young adult learners, and the factors demonstrated to contribute to
comprehension skills.
Disciplinary literacy utilizes a reading apprenticeship framework as an organizing
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 25
paradigm (Schoenbach, et al, 2012), and views the teaching of literacy as a sociocultural
enterprise (O’Brien et al., 1995) in which teachers help students to become independent, critical
readers of subject area texts. The relationship between the teacher and students contextualizes
students’ use of and decisions about literacy (Moje, 1995).
There are key ways in which teachers help students to develop their independence in
critically reading texts across subject area domains. Within disciplinary literacy, metacognition
is key for students to develop, and is explicitly taught. Metacognition is used as a vehicle of
inquiry so that students as reading apprentices “attempt to make visible their processes of
puzzling through texts” (Schoenbach, et al., 2012, p. 118). This approach has been found to be
especially helpful for ELL students.
Another way in which teachers help students develop their independent, critical reading
is through helping students find reasons to read. One way is to give students as much choice as
possible in their content-related reading to build a foundation for engaged learning (O’Brien et
al., 1995; Schoenbach et al., 2012). Two other ways to help students develop is through
extensive academic reading and through silent sustained reading (Schoenbach, et al., 2012).
According to disciplinary literacy, another key component is to make problem solving
visible and safe. The teacher models thinking aloud, and then draw students into the activity of
consciously puzzling through texts (Schoenbach et al., 2012). This allow students to realize that
confusion is part of the learning process and not indicative of a problem with reading.
Another component of disciplinary literacy is to help students assemble a reading toolbox
of strategies: questioning, summarizing, and imagining a voice in the text (O’Brien et al, 1995;
Schoenbach et al, 2012). The goal is for students to consciously evaluate and choose workable
strategies as they read. It is through the discussion of how, as well as what, students are reading
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 26
that positively changes students’ sense of themselves as readers and learners (Schoenbach et al.,
2012).
Lastly, disciplinary literacy seeks to build students’ awareness of and build schema in the
disciplines. The way one readers a history text is different from the way one reads a science text
or work of literature. Disciplinary literacy invites students to build knowledge about content
areas. Through teacher-led activities, students “collaboratively generate and extend their content
ideas, thereby building a schema for the content they will encounter and preparing to read closely
with this schema in mind” (Schoenbach et al, 2012, p. 130). This prepares students to read in a
purposeful way and helps them to navigate difficult text across subject areas. It also helps
students work to identify the knowledge and ways of reading they themselves bring to various
texts.
Disciplinary literacy is supported through developing metacognitive awareness of the
reading process within students, helping students develop a mental toolkit of strategies for
reading while they metacognitively monitor their own comprehension, build schema in the
disciplines, read widely and extensively in academic reading, as well as Silent Sustained Reading
(SSR), and through the social and personal dimension to build a foundation for engaged learning.
According to Moje (1996), interactions and relations between the teacher and students are crucial
as one “teaches students, not subjects” (p. 192), for when students trust and respect the teacher,
and feel trusted and respected in turn, this supports the teacher’s literacy practices.
Social Cognitive Theory
Social cognitive theory (SCT) offers a wealth of ideas to inform our approach to the issue
of literacy development in struggling adolescent learners. Social cognitive theory suggests that
reciprocal determinism (or triadic reciprocality), the idea that people, behavior, and environment
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 27
are mutually influencing, is the key to understanding motivation and achievement behaviors.
Through this theory, human agency is explained by exploring the interactions between these
three co-factors, with the perspective that they comprise a larger, unified structure that motivates
behavior (Bandura, 1997).
Since the purpose of this literature review is to understand the factors that may influence
literacy, the focus is therefore directed to the person and environment factors interacting with
such behaviors. Thus, the literature reviewed in this section are organized in terms of how
constructs identified in the broader research such as goal orientation and attribution theory fit
into the interactive SCT framework.
Person Factors
There are five important person factors when exploring engagement in achievement
behaviors—self-efficacy, goals, attributions, interest, and value. This section will provide a brief
overview of the literature exploring the relationship between these factors and achievement
behaviors and outcomes.
Self-efficacy. A sub-theory of SCT, self-efficacy theory yields insight into how beliefs
about one’s capability to accomplish a task are related to academic achievement. The social-
cognitive framework defines self-efficacy as a person‘s judgment of his capabilities to
accomplish a certain task (Gredler, 2009). Self-efficacy beliefs impact decision-making by
influencing which options are considered, the types of information collected, how factors are
weighted, and the perceived salience of the activity’s relevance to the student’s life and goals—
people do not consider domains in which they feel inefficacious, regardless of the benefits
(Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 2001). Research on self-efficacy has revealed that
stronger self-efficacy beliefs are tied to more positive educational outcomes (Bandura et al.,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 28
2001; Caprara et al., 2008; Carroll et al., 2008).
Research suggests that efficacy plays a crucial role in academic achievement (Bandura et
al., 2001; Caprara et al., 2008; Cury et al., 2006; Elias & Loomis, 2002; Lodewyck & Winne,
2005); thus, focus should be directed toward strategies that enhance efficacy for students. There
are four primary sources of information tied to efficacy—enactive mastery experiences, vicarious
experiences, persuasion, and physiological and affective states (Bandura, 1997; Usher & Pajares,
2006).
Enactive mastery experiences. Bandura (1997) and Usher and Pajares (2006) both
described how engagement in a task in which students are successful can bolster their self-
efficacy. This is because students are able to interpret and evaluate the outcomes of their
performance, and they can judge their own competence in accordance with those outcomes—
thus, enactive mastery experiences are a powerful source of self-efficacy beliefs. Similarly,
Lodewyck and Winne (2005) discussed how students’ confidence in their operational skills can
be increased by engaging in activities in which students perform well on successive tasks.
These direct experiences serve as a source of information that tells them they are capable of
accomplishing the task. Both family and school staff can support the students by providing them
with more opportunities to engage in enactive mastery experiences. Furthermore, principles of
instructional design suggest that students are better able to learn material via direct instruction
and guided practice (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006); instruction is more effective when
structured in a way that emphasizes the correct encoding and effective retrieval of knowledge to
support content mastery. Through enactive mastery experiences, higher self-efficacy is
developed.
Vicarious experiences. Bandura et al. (2001) discussed how modeling supplemented
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 29
with guided mastery experiences provided an especially effective vehicle for building resilient
self-efficacy. Peer models can communicate the norms, values, and beliefs that support
engagement in achievement behaviors in addition to demonstrating the strategies that have led to
their own successes. Another key aspect of vicarious experience is the presence of coping
models. Schunk and Pajares (2002) recommended supporting the development of coping skills
to facilitate greater student persistence in achievement behaviors.
Persuasion. Usher and Pajares (2006) highlighted the importance of attending to
persuasion, particularly since social persuasion is instrumental in developing self-efficacy
beliefs. In particular, feedback may play an essential role in terms of persuasion as a source of
efficacy. When students have not developed the ability to accurately self-appraise their
performance, they must rely on parents, teachers, and trustworthy peers to provide them with
feedback about their performance. Support and encouragement from these sources can enhance
students’ beliefs in their ability to be successful. However, Hareli and Hess (2008) cautioned
special care must be taken, as social persuasion can also undermine students’ self-efficacy
beliefs, as well. Therefore, effort should be made to provide students with careful, accurate
feedback to help them appraise performance in ways that enhance efficacy.
Physiological and affective states. Bandura (1997) suggested that mood tied to the
retrieval of information can have an impact on perceived self-efficacy. The underlying idea is
that affective memories are stored along with knowledge learned, and thus when information is
retrieved, they are retrieved together. Usher and Pajares (2006) further refined Bandura’s
insight, noting how affective states, such as arousal, anxiety, stress, and fatigue, can be
interpreted as an indicator of personal competence—e.g., students’ academic self-efficacy beliefs
can be undermined by anxiety—and that for low-achieving students, physiological responses
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 30
rather than mastery experiences were greater predictors of performance. Other emotional
responses can be viewed as cues for potential success or failure; thus, when helping students to
build efficacy, McCabe (2003) proposed that efforts should be made to ensure that affect is
positive when students are learning new material.
Furthermore, self-efficacy also mediated the relationship between goals and achievement
outcomes (Bong, 2001).
Goals. Achievement goals in conjunction with ability beliefs and on their own have been
tied to achievement outcomes. In fact, researchers have found that self-efficacy is associated
with and mediates the relationship between goals and achievement outcomes (Bong, 2001).
Additionally, Cury, Elliot, Da Fonseca, and Moller (2006) discovered that implicit theories of
ability (e.g., trait- and state-based views) were directly related to performance attainment and
achievement goals, and achievement goals were related to achievement outcomes—e.g., a trait-
based perspective was negatively related to IQ test performance and positively associated with
adoption of performance goals (both approach and avoidance). They also found the relationship
between implicit theories of ability and achievement outcomes was enhanced when goal
orientation was taken into consideration. Goal orientation are the general purposes or reasons for
engaging in achievement tasks combined with some general standards for evaluating progress
(Schunk, Pintrich, & Meese, 2008).
Research on goal orientation exists aside from its relationship with self-efficacy or other
ability beliefs. For example, Grant and Dweck (2003) conducted a series of studies exploring the
role of learning and performance goals. They found a relationship between active learning goals,
continued motivation, and greater achievement in challenging situations; whereas, goals tied to
ability were associated with poorer performance in challenging situations. This and other
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 31
research provide support for the idea that a mastery orientation could benefit students in terms of
their achievement outcomes, particular in challenging situations (e.g., Gehlbach, 2006; Wolters,
2004). However, a mastery goal orientation does not always result in the most positive
outcomes. When there are performance contingencies, performance-approach goals may be
more influential than mastery goals in terms of performance outcomes (Elliot, Shell, Henry, &
Maier, 2005). It is important to note, though, that research on outcomes tied to performance-
approach goals has been inconsistent (Midgley, Kaplan, & Middleton, 2001).
Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002) suggest that the way students perceive the classroom and
school environment is directly linked to students’ goal adoption; and thus, the “tone” of the
classroom is crucial, with a focus on challenge, individual improvement, choice, private
feedback, and variety of tasks. Of utmost importance is an understanding of the types of goals
that these students have established for themselves, particularly since mastery and performance-
approach goals are most often associated with greater achievement outcomes (e.g., Elliot et al.,
2005, Senko & Harackiewicz, 2005), while performance-avoidance goals are related to
maladaptive patterns of learning (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002).
Additionally, the literature on achievement goals suggests that competence feedback
plays a role in regulating achievement goals. For example, in one study, poor performance and
negative feedback were related to a decrease in mastery and performance-approach goal pursuit,
and an increase in performance-avoidance goal pursuit (Senko & Harackiewicz, 2005).
Attributions. In addition to efficacy and achievement goals, attributions are also an
important consideration for student achievement. In fact, explanations for outcomes are
considered to be most adaptive when they are attributed to stable, internal factors for success and
to unstable, controllable, internal factors for failure (Forsyth et al., 2009; Linnenbrink & Pintrich,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 32
2002; McClure et al., 2011). Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002) proposed an indirect link between
attributions and academic outcomes, suggesting that attributions influence psychological factors
(e.g., expectancies for success, efficacy, and affect) related to academic outcomes. Researchers
have found that effort attributions were tied to better achievement outcomes (McClure et al.,
2011). Attributions are also linked to efficacy, such that students experiencing an unsuccessful
academic outcome who had high levels of self-efficacy attributed their results to internal control,
whereas those with lower self-efficacy attributed their failure to external control (Hsieh & Kang,
2010).
Interest. The degree of individual interest has been related to various achievement
behaviors and performance outcomes (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). For example, Hidi, Renninger,
and Krapp (2004) highlighted its relationship to attention, Senko and Harackiewicz (2002) tied
interest to achievement goals, and Harackiewicz, Baron, Tauer, and Elliot (2002) related it to the
degree to which students have learned material. Much of the recent research on interest has
focused on how it is developed (with attention to how interest transitions from situational to
personal) and how the use of task characteristics, such as utility value, can help students
appreciate the importance of engaging in a task (e.g., Hidi & Renninger, 2006; Hulleman, Godes,
Hendricks, & Harackiewicz, 2010).
Researchers have described how situational interest can create a pathway through which
personal interest can be fostered. Specifically, Hidi and Renninger (2006) proposed a four-phase
model of interest development. In this model, situational interest is triggered in the first phase by
features of the environment (e.g., incongruous information). Next, situational interest is
sustained through perception of task meaningfulness or personal involvement, often facilitated
by some factor external to the individual. Sustained engagement may lead to an emerging
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 33
individual interest, and in this stage, individuals may seek out and choose to engage in a
particular task when given the opportunity to do so. Lastly, individuals form a well-developed
individual interest, which facilitates deeper engagement. This model has great implications for
constructing and implementing lessons plans that target the development of student interest.
The four-stage model of interest development developed by Hidi and Renninger (2006)
implies that not only is it important to design lessons that capture students’ interest, but teachers
must also build in opportunities for students to have sustained engagement in these tasks.
Finding ways to communicate the meaningfulness of a task may help students choose to continue
engaging in a task, even when such behavior is no longer required, thus internalizing the interest
from situational to personal. Increasing task value (e.g., utility), is one approach to promote the
holding of student interest in a specific task, particularly since this has been shown to help make
the work personally meaningful to the students (Hulleman et al., 2010; Linnenbrink & Pintrich,
2002). Another approach for developing student interest involves others (e.g., teachers, parents)
modeling their own interest in certain activities, aligned with the vicarious learning approach
proposed in self-efficacy theory.
Environment Factors
Classroom, home, school, and the larger cultural context all influence students in a
reciprocal and multidimensional manner if one is using SCT as the framework of inquiry. In
fact, Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002) suggest that motivation is not a stable trait but rather the
interaction between the student and the context.
In addition, interpersonal relationships and relatedness are very important considerations
when understanding factors that support motivational processes (Malecki & Elliott, 2002; Martin
& Dowson, 2009; Véronneau, Brendgen, Dishion, & Tremblay, 2010). According to Martin and
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 34
Dowson (2009), relatedness is a key feature that supports motivational processes. They suggest
that its importance lies in students’ use of relationships to seek out the resources (e.g., help,
social support) needed to sustain them psychologically and to accomplish educational goals. It
also directly influences motivation via the students’ beliefs and emotions—that is, interpersonal
relationships communicate to students the beliefs, orientations, and values required to help them
form adaptive, achievement-oriented behaviors, persist, set goals, and self-regulate.
Additionally, Véronneau et al. (2010) found that students who perform well academically tend to
start selecting similar others as friends as they move into early adolescence and that future
academic achievement can be negatively impacted by experiencing peer rejection as a child.
Social skills significantly predicted future academic functioning—ongoing social interactions are
critical for children’s and young adults’ engagement and motivation at school (Malecki & Elliott,
2002).
Environmental factors have a direct influence on learning, and as such can be harnessed
to foster positive, adaptive interpersonal relationships and establish a culture of mastery learning.
The tone of the school and the classroom is a starting place to address the problem of student
underachievement, for the research indicates that these contexts shape students’ engagement and
achievement (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Martin & Dowson, 2009). Linnenbrink and
Pintrich (2002) suggested schools consider the ways the learning context can be altered to help
all students, particularly in reference to classroom context, and the utility and variety of tasks
available. Students should be provided the opportunity to select the order of assignments, and
attention should be given to fostering a sense of relatedness and enhancing (positive) peer
interaction. Teacher variables and interpersonal relationships also play an important role, as well
as parental involvement. This literature review suggests that teachers should pay attention to the
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 35
expectations that they are communicating to students and the attributions that they convey for
students’ outcomes. Additionally, teachers should make an effort to nurture positive
relationships with their students. Both parents and school staff should be careful about how they
structure home and school environments, for performance goal-oriented environments,
particularly environments that foster avoidance behaviors, may not foster the positive
achievement outcomes desired. While there may be a place for competition, more focus should
be directed toward encouraging students to engage in achievement behaviors for the sake of
learning and mastery of material (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002).
Finally, focus should be directed toward communicating the value of engaging in a task
(Hulleman et al., 2010). Although students individually attribute value to a task, the
environmental context may act as a persuasive source of information regarding task value; thus,
school staff and parents should clearly convey the importance and usefulness of engaging in
achievement behaviors. This can be communicated during instruction, by connecting the
material learned to how they can use it outside of the instructional context.
Summary
In conclusion, in order to address the multi-faceted issues underlying student
underachievement, SCT yields insights and helps us to establish a framework to begin unraveling
the multitudinous connections between variables, both within and external to the individual
student, and to develop potential solutions to motivational issues. This literature review
revealed that self-efficacy is essential to fostering positive changes in students with regard to
effort, persistence, interest, goal orientation, and peer interaction. The literature review also
demonstrated that the influence of the environment through classroom, teacher, and peers can
assist in facilitating attributional retraining and self-efficacy. Finally, the research suggested that
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 36
enactive mastery experiences, small group work, increased positive peer interaction, and an
environment that fosters relatedness are effective approaches to addressing issues of efficacy,
goals, attributions, and intrinsic motivation and interest. Incorporating these research-based
approaches may provide insights that lead to improved achievement outcomes for students.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 37
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
In the first two chapters, the importance of reading ability was discussed. The literature
review revealed the importance of internalization of reading strategy usage and the potential gaps
in current research about the nature of reading and literacy for young adult students. However,
what is not known in general, and in reference to Math and Science Academy, is what contextual
and intrapersonal factors may be influencing participant learning, and where the specific areas of
need are with regard to knowledge skills for the SRI Lexile Reading Test. Thus, the current
study sought to address the following research questions:
1. What is the nature of Math and Science Academy’s approach to literacy instruction?
2. How do the students who are at grade level (or above) on the reading test differ from
those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their approaches to learning as
measured by the SAL instrument?
3. What are staff and student perceptions of Math and Science Academy’s approach to
literacy?
This study explored tangible relationships between various intrapersonal and environmental
factors and academic achievement on the SRI Lexile Test. Based on the perceived and actual
causes, recommendations were made for a more individualized and research-based instructional
plan within the Math and Science Academy setting.
Methodological Approach
This study used a mixed methods design to explore literacy instruction at the Math and
Science Academy site. The mixed methods approach is a procedure for collecting and analyzing
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 38
both quantitative and qualitative data in tandem to understand a research problem more
completely than the use of either approach singularly (Cresswell, 2011; Cresswell & Plano
Clark, 2007; Tashakkori & Teddie, 2003). In a mixed methods approach the researchers build
the knowledge on pragmatic grounds (Creswell, 2003; Mexcy, 2003) choosing approaches,
variables, and units of analysis which are most appropriate for finding an answer to their research
question (Tashakkori & Teddie, 1998).
Quantitative Design. Quantitative analyses are useful because they allow researchers to
statistically identify the relationships between variables and the magnitude of the variables’
influence on the phenomena being studied (Cresswell, 2009). In the current study, quantitative
approaches were utilized to explore the relationship between student performance (SRI Lexile
Test reading score) and affective factors (e.g., self efficacy, self regulation, learning strategies)
connected to student learning.
Instrumentation
Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) survey. The SAL questionnaire (Marsh, et al.,
2006) is a fifty-two item, four-point Likert measure, organized into fourteen sections; however, it
has been modified to exclude the two sections on mathematics self efficacy and interest. The
questionnaire is an instrument designed for researching self-regulated learning strategies, self-
beliefs, motivation, and learning preferences. An example of one the factor’s (self-efficacy)
questions is as follows:
Factor: Perceived Self-Efficacy (SELFEF); Dimension: Self-Belief
2) I’m certain I can understand the most difficult material presented in texts.
8) I’m confident I can understand the most complex material presented by the teacher.
18) I’m confident I can do an excellent job on assignments and tests.
26) I’m certain I can master the skills being taught.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 39
It is being used in its original form (Marsh et al., 2006) except for the modification of removing
the two section concerning mathematics. There are a variety of factors assessed by the
instrument, as indicated in Table 2.

Table 2. Predictor Variables in the Quantitative Analysis
Factors Dimension
Control Strategies Learning Strategies
Memorization Learning Strategies
Elaboration Learning Strategies
Effort and Perseverance Learning Strategies
Perceived Self-Efficacy Self-Belief
Control Expectation Self-Belief
Interest in Reading Motivation
Cooperative Learning Learning Preference
Competitive Learning Learning Preference
Self-concept in Reading Self-Belief
Academic Self-Concept Self-Belief

The survey is included in the appendices of this manuscript. The SAL has been widely
used both in the United States and internationally (Marsh, 2006), demonstrating content and
construct validity. Marsh et al., (2006) found reliability and cross-cultural generalizability for
the SAL instrument from nationally representative samples of 25 different countries, and across
multiple languages (Cronbach’s =.77, SD=.06). The SAL instrument was chosen over the
Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) because of the new way in which the
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 40
most useful affective constructs of educational psychology are incorporated, and because of the
SAL’s cross-cultural validity for adolescents young adults. For the MSLQ, the learning
strategies section has comparable Cronbach’s alpha scores to the SAL. Also, the MSLQ self-
efficacy are for efficacy in general and not specific to reading. Furthermore, the use of a new(er)
instrument may yield new results not found to date with the MSLQ. Thus, the choice of the SAL
as the measure for this study (Cronbach’s =.85, SD=.06). For most of the factors in the
current study, the inter-item correlation are fairly reliable. The alphas for the factors are
displayed in Table 3.
Table 3. Cronbach’s for Motivational/Affective Factors
_________________________________________________________
Motivational Factor Cronbach’s
_______________________________________________________________
Memorization .586
Elaboration .737
Effort/Perseverance .814
Perceived Self-Efficacy .823
Control Expectations .684
Control Strategies .754
Interest in Reading .765
Cooperative Learning .804
Competitive Learning .813
Self-Concept in Reading .704
Academic Self-Concept .853
_______________________________________________________________

Demographic questionnaire. Demographic questions constitute the third part of the
questionnaire. Participants provided information on age, gender, ethnicity, length of time in
program, as well as responded to open-ended questions about their experiences in the Math and
Science program. The demographic questionnaire is included in the appendix of this manuscript.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 41
Qualitative Design. Qualitative research is an inquiry process to understand a complex
setting through detailed words and views of informants (Cresswell, 1998; Patton, 2002). In
qualitative research, data is collected from the emic view of participants immersed in the
everyday of the setting in which the study is framed. Typical case sampling of the qualitative
profiles of a few students will help to render a study that is “illustrative, not definitive” when
discussing the student participants in Math and Science Academy, in order to “illustrate what is
typical to those unfamiliar with the setting—not to make generalized statements about the
experiences of all participants” (Patton, 2002, p. 236). Data analyses are based on the values and
insights these participants perceive for the study setting.
The qualitative design for this study involved the use of semi-structured interviews,
which provide sufficient guidance so as to ensure that the interview addresses the research
questions, but allows the interview to remain open to topics that may potentially arise. There
were two main interview guides utilized in the study—one for administrators and teachers, and
one for student participants. The interview guides are included in the appendices of this
manuscript.
The qualitative data methodology can be broken down into three stages structured around
the identification and interviewing of participants:
 Stage 1: Identification and contact of school staff. A key informant made contact with
potential school staff. If the staff member demonstrated interest, the key informant
referred to the researcher these potential school staff participants.
 Stage 2: Identification and contact of student participants. A key informant
contacted students who over- and under-performed on the SRI reading test, inviting them
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 42
to participate in the study. The key informant scheduled all interviews with students on
the high school campus.
 Stage 3: Detailed Interviews. Next, interviews were conducted with school staff and
students. All interviews were recorded and transcribed, so that no information given
verbally was lost. At the interview, each participant was assigned a pseudonym that has
been used throughout the research in order to maintain the participant’s privacy.
The interviews were conducted in accordance with the interview guide contained
in the appendices of this manuscript. Interviews were recorded via digital audio recorder,
and permission was gained for the interview to be recorded at the start of the interview.
After completion of the interview, the participants were provided with a gift card to
compensate them for their time. Respondents were given an opportunity to review, and,
if necessary, correct the contents of the interview after it had been transcribed.
Benefits of a Mixed Method Design. The mixed methods design has advantages and
disadvantages (Creswell, 2009; Moghaddam, Walker, & Harre, 2003). The disadvantages
include the lengthy time to complete, the feasibility of resources to collect and analyze both
types of data, and that the initial quantitative results may show no significant differences.
However, it is a most advantageous design in its usefulness for exploring quantitative results in
more detail. For the current study, the quantitative data and results provided a general overview
of the research problem (e.g., what internal and external factors contribute to and/or impede
students’ persistence in the English classroom at Math and Science Academy), while the
qualitative data and its analysis refined and explained those statistical results, adding additional
insights through the participants’ viewpoint.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 43
Data Collection

This study consisted of two distinct phases.

Phase One. The Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) survey and demographic
questionnaire were administered to students in the six English classes for ninth-grade students of
Math and Science Academy. The students were given their SRI lexile reading score the same
morning as the survey was administered. The students then self-reported and provided SRI
Lexile Reading test scores for document analysis, which were merged with students’ scores on
the SAL survey and demographic information. The collected data was used to explore the
relationships between various motivational variables and performance on the reading test, as well
as to identify potential interviewees for Phase Two of the study.
Phase Two. In the second phase, a qualitative case study approach was used to collect
data through individual semi-structured interviews and document analysis (reading test scores) to
help explain why certain external and internal factors, tested in the first phase, may be correlated
with increased reading scores. Additionally, semi-structured interviews were also conducted
with administrators, teachers and staff. Personal identifiers were not collected.
This data were used to triangulate data through multiples voices, identify characteristics
of the organizational/cultural context, and generate knowledge that allowed the researcher to
gain firsthand experience with the context for a more holistic perspective, and facilitate
inductive, discovery-oriented inquiry (Patton, 2002).
The visual model of the procedures for the sequential explanatory mixed methods design
of this study is presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Visual Model for Mixed Methods Procedure
Phase Procedure
Quantitative Data Collection  Cross-sectional survey (SAL)
 Demographic Questionnaire
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 44
 SRI Lexile Test reading scores
(N=99)
Selection of Cases for Qualitative Phase  Purposeful sampling based on
participant scores on SAL, SRI Lexile
Reading Test
(N=6-8)
Qualitative Data Collection  Individual semi-structured interviews
with 6-8 student participants and their
teachers, administrator, and staff
(N=10-12)

Population and Sample

The study was conducted at Math and Science Academy which was established in 2011,
and is located in South Central Los Angeles. Math and Science Academy is a high school with
537 students (506 Latino, 31 African American) of which 343 of the students are categorized as
socioeconomically disadvantaged, and 210 (32%) are English Language Learners. The school
was chosen because it received an Academic Performance Index (API) score of 663 from the
state of California Department of Education in 2012, while schools in Los Angeles with a similar
composition of students received similar API scores (Franklin High School, 686; Lincoln High
School, 686; Wilson High School, 648); thus, Math and Science Academy is not over- or under-
performing (http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/apireports.asp).
Participants
Ninety-nine students took the Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) survey. The
demographic breakdown for these students is presented in Table 5.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 45
Table 5. Survey Participant Demographics (N = 99)
Select Characteristics
Percentage
Represented

Gender

Male 49 (49.5%)
Female 50 (51.5%)

Age

13 43 (43.5%)
14 52 (52.5%)
15 4 (4%)

Ethnicity

American Indian 2%
African American 3%
Asian 1%
Latino/a 87%
Pacific Islander 2%
White 2%
Multiethnic 3%

Percentage with SRI Lexile Reading Scores 72%

A total of 11 participants (7 students, 2 teachers, and 2 administrators) participated in the
interview portion of this study. Tables 6 and 7 present the demographic breakdown for these
participants:

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 46
Table 6. Interview Participant Demographics
School Staff
Select Characteristics Student Teacher Administrator
Number of Participants 7 2 2

Gender

Male 29% 50% 50%
Female 71% 50% 50%

Ethnicity

African-American 0% 0% 50%
Latino 100% 0% 0%
Pacific Islander 0% 0% 0%
White 0% 100% 50%

Table 7. Interview Participant profiles
Interview Role Pseudonym Description
1 Student Maria Wants to go to college; been with MSA
since junior high school.
2 Student Felipe Soft-spoken; wants to go to college; been
with MSA since junior high school.
3 Student Blanca Cried during interview; wants very much
to go to college; started reading late
because needed glasses but they didn’t
know it; been with MSA since junior high
school.
4 Student Marisol Wants to be a math teacher; clear and
outspoken; been with MSA since junior
high school.
5 Student Jose Came to interview late; serious and
insightful; wants to be an engineer; been
with MSA since junior high school.
6 Student Rosa Very attentive to her younger siblings
during interview; soft spoken; been with
MSA since junior high school.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 47
Interview Role Pseudonym Description
7 Student Nancy Really focused on sports and socializing,
still wants to attend college, though; been
with MSA since junior high school.
8 Teacher Mr. Collins Teaches eleventh-grade English and the
Intervention classes. Also teaches
Seminar class. Has been teaching for two
years. Has a Master’s degree in as a
Reading Specialist. Is self-reflective and
concerned with how to improve his
teaching practice.
9 Teacher Ms. Lloyd Teaches tenth-grade English classes. Has
been teaching for five years. Is very
direct with an active, questioning mind.
10 Administrator Dr. Johnson Has been with MSA since 2008. Works
as the principal of the high school. Dr.
Shannon holds two degrees in the
biological sciences and a doctoral degree
in science education. Her previous
research and experiences helped shape
MSA's secondary school’s emphasis on
empowering more Latino and African
American students to pursue a career in
Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Math (STEM).

11 Administrator Dr. Macalinaw Has been with MSA since its inception, as
one of the two founders. Works as the
Chief Financial Officer. Just completed a
Doctorate of Education at the University
of Southern California. Dr. Macalinaw
began teaching in 1997 in a struggling
inner-city public school, which is what
inspired him to co-found the Math and
Science schools.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 48
Data Analysis

Research Question 1. The interviews were transcribed by a third party and coded
utilizing ATLAS.ti, a qualitative research analysis tool. To maintain validity, the researcher
made sure to keep track of definitions of codes, so there was no shift in meaning during the
process of coding (Creswell, 2009). The transcribed and coded results were then analyzed to
identify patterns in participant responding and to evaluate the student and staff perceptions of the
Math and Science Academy’s literacy program.
Research Question 2. Quantitative data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS). For tracking purposes, and confidentiality, each participant was
assigned a unique ID number by the researcher. Data was screened for errors, and non-
parametric bivariate correlations were used to analyze the relationship between overall SRI
Lexile Reading Test scores and demographic and motivational variables measured.
Qualitative data collected via interviews was transcribed, and interviews were coded
utilizing a qualitative data analysis tool: ATLAS.ti. The transcribed and coded results were
analyzed to identify patterns in participant responding and to evaluate in detail the specific
knowledge/skills, affective variables, and contextual factors for at-grade-level and under-
performing reading score participants.
Research Question 3. The interviews were transcribed by a third party and coded
utilizing ATLAS.ti, a qualitative research analysis tool. To maintain validity, the researcher
made sure to keep track of definitions of codes, so there was no shift in meaning during the
process of coding (Creswell, 2009). The transcribed and coded results were then analyzed to
identify patterns in participant responding and to evaluate the motivational and environmental
factors and their impact on self-efficacy. Specifically, there were multiple iterations of coding to
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 49
translate information from the specific details of each participant’s interview to the broader
meanings and themes common across interviews (Cresswell, 2009).
Research Questions and Instrumentation
The use of each instrument or type of data is strategic and maps back to the research
questions, as noted in the table below:
Table 8. Mapping of Data Collection Strategy to Research Question
Research Question Data Collection Strategy
1. What is the nature of Math and Science
Academy’s approach to literacy
instruction?

 Administrator interviews
 Teacher interviews
 Student interviews
 Document analysis
2. How do the students who are at grade
level (or above) on the reading test
differ from those who are
underperforming on the test in terms of
their approaches to learning as
measured by the SAL instrument?

 Demographic Questionnaire
 Student Approaches to Learning (SAL)
survey
 Administrator interviews
 Teacher interviews
 Student interviews
 Document Analysis (SRI Lexile
Reading Test score student self-report)
3. What are staff and student perceptions
of Math and Science Academy’s
approach to literacy?
 Administrator interviews
 Teacher interviews
 Student interviews
 Document Analysis (SRI Lexile
Reading Test score student self-report)

Research Permission and Ethical Considerations

Anticipated risk was minimal, as I worked to keep the risks tied to participation low.
First, participation in the study was always voluntary, and participants could choose to remove
themselves from the study at any time. In accordance with the ethics in educational research
recommended by Gallagher (2005), four guidelines were followed: informed consent, no
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 50
deception, privacy and confidentiality maintained, and accuracy in research and reporting
(http://level3.dit.ie/html/issue3/ggallagher.pdf). Safeguards were taken to ensure anonymity:
The master list of names and assigned ID numbers were kept locked at a separate location of the
collected data, and then destroyed as soon as the qualitative analysis has been inputted into
ATLAS.ti. No data contained identifiers that would reveal the identity of the participant.
Additionally, I acknowledged and accepted responsibility for communicating clearly the
goals and intentions of the study, and for ensuring that participants in the study were not subject
to harm. The data were collected honestly and accurately, and results of the study were reported
with fidelity.
To maintain the rigor of expected ethics and regulations for research in education, I sent
the study through the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) for
human subjects research approval.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 51
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
The purpose of this study was to explore the various characteristics of Math and Science
Academy’s literacy program and how students’ performance on the SRI reading assessment is
tied to various affective and motivational measures. Specifically, this study sought to explore the
following research questions:
1. What is the nature of Math and Science Academy’s approach to literacy instruction?
2. How do the students who are at grade level (or above) on the reading test differ from
those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their approaches to learning as
measured by the SAL instrument?
3. What are the staff and student perceptions of Math and Science Academy’s approach to
literacy?
To accomplish this, the Student Approaches to Learning survey was administered to students,
and students, teachers, and administrators were interviewed at the school site. This chapter will
present the findings from the data collected.
Research Question 1: Characteristics of MSA’s Literacy Program
The first research question sought to identify the characteristics of Math and Science
Academy’s literacy program. Information was gleaned through document analysis of the
school’s website, school materials (e.g., newsletters), and teacher training materials.
One of the findings was an emphasis on college readiness. In Table 9, I have given
specific data to support this finding, as support came from many different sources.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 52
Table 9. Math and Science Academy’s Emphasis on College Readiness
_____________________________________________________________________________
Source Data
_____________________________________________________________________________
Mrs. Johnson “I would like for them to be able to pick up an original
document: Declaration of Independence, Constitution, the
Treaty of Paris, you know, and say, this is what this means.
Because you can bet that kids on the other side of town
their age can do that, and I want them to be competitive.
So that’s my big goal. I was in an all-girl’s private school
for 12 years. My big goal is for our kids to be able to
compete with them at the same schools they go to. That’s
my goal. So if they’re at Princeton, I want our kid to go to
Princeton. I want them to sit right next to them in that
English Literature class. And when that teacher says
something, I want their hand up. I want them to say, no,
but that interpretation that I get from it is this. And I want
the professor to say, yes, that is one way that you can look
at that. That’s my goal.”

Dr. Macalinaw “Our vision is that all student get into college.”

Mr. Collins “Now they believe they can go to college. Like before, like
a couple of them said like when they were freshmen, like
when they first came in here, they screwed up a lot. But
they even said like, I just didn’t even think college was like
an option. I didn’t think I was smart enough to go to
college. Now they realize that they can. They just have to
put in the work. Which is like the ideal – you want all of
them to say. It’s the ideal outcome, knowing that they can
do it.”

Blanca “…so I could get into the best college I can.”

Felipe “I believe that Synergy’s goals on terms of reading and
writing are to get the students to be at a proficient level in
reading and writing and to get – I guess you can say to
close that gap of achievement between students in wealthier
areas and students in the city so we could go to college. So
that’s a big problem because many students aren’t able to
read well fluently, and some students aren’t able to write
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 53
well and comprehend, and that’s something very big. So I
believe that their goal is to close that gap and have every
student read at a proficient level and write at a proficient
level and comprehend what is being read.”

Observation of Teacher Training “It’s double jeopardy. Low SES and low reading, a
(Mr. Macalinaw) student is six times more likely to drop out of high school.
Our philosophy is that all schools can be successful. It
takes hard work and quality schools. Our students can
succeed and go to college. That is our goal.”

School Website “With its focus on Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM), Math and Science Academy will
prepare its students for success in college and in a career.”

“Our Vision for our students is that they will meet or
exceed the California Content Standards and take college-
preparatory classes in secondary school so that they can
eventually attend the four-year university of their choice.
We also believe in the importance of developing model
citizens and future leaders. Hence our motto, "Be Your
Best. Do Your Best."

“Our goal is to prepare every student for college. Our
vision is to produce students who are creative thinkers,
motivated learners, and lovers of knowledge. I look
forward to working with you to make these dreams a
reality.” –Principal’s Message

Ms. Lloyd “And I think that that happens a lot in this community as
well. It’s a daily survival. So just being aware of that and
then pushing them out of that and seeing the bigger picture
of it. Like Ralph’s able to see the larger picture of, you
know, we need to do these things so we can be rescued.
It’s our future. It’s our life, you know. They need to do
these things right now so that they can go to college and
they can be better and they can do all of these things. But
then you have like Jack, who’s focused on today and we
need meat. That’s like one of the first things; like we need
meat to eat. He doesn’t even care that there was like a
helicopter that came by. You know, where that was their
life, that was their future. But he’s like, no, we need meat
today, and he couldn’t see outside of that. And so like
building those moments and those teaching moments.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 54
Pulling in things from like the newspaper as well. I think
I’m always aware of them and their struggles and then just
trying to relate to them, understand them, be real with
them, and then push them out and show them through
literature and through other means that there’s other
options.”

School Newsletter May 6, 2013 “New Mission: To create and share solutions that eliminate
the achievement gap.”
_____________________________________________________________________________

According to document analysis, the mission of MSA is to eliminate the academic
achievement gap that has persisted for generations among educationally disadvantaged students
and to offer an innovative science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
curriculum that will help students succeed academically. The principal, Dr. Johnson, states in
her message that the school’s goal is to prepare every student for college, and their vision is to
produce students who are creative thinkers, motivated learners, and lovers of knowledge.
According to the two administrators and the two teachers interviewed, MSA utilizes the
Reading Counts! program, and tests students’ reading three times a year with the SRI Lexile
Test. The Reading Counts! program is a reading management software program similar to
programs such as Accelerated Reader, Book Sharp, and The Electronic Bookshelf. Reading
Counts! is the second-most popular reading management program (Chenowith, 2001). Children
are first given a test to assess their reading level. Then, they select and read books from a range
of options at their level that the school has purchased for its library. After reading the book, they
return to the school-based computer and take a brief comprehension quiz. If they pass the quiz,
students are directed to choose other books at the same level and, eventually, books at increasing
levels of difficulty (Grenawall, 2004). In addition to Reading Counts!, Dr. Macalinaw teaches
reading theory and pedagogy to all teachers in a training right before the beginning of the school
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 55
year. From document analysis of teacher training materials and observation of the training
session, the following topics were covered: syllabication, phrasing, voaculary instruction,
reading comprehension instruction, Reading Counts!, and the technology connection (desktop
publishing and presentation via Pages and Keynote).
One of the foundational philosophical approaches MSA tries to instill in their students are
the “scholar lessons” created by Dr. Macalinaw: (1) Conduct yourselves as ladies and
gentlemen, (2) Sit and stand with scholar postures, (3) Eye contact = Brain contact, (4) When
there is teacher talk, there is no student talk, (5) Be a good listener, (6) Stay focused, (7) Make
requests, not demands; (8) Show great appreciation, (9) Self-monitor, (10) Do the right thing,
even if no one is looking, (11) Use common sense, (12) Don’t do as little as you can; do as best
as you can, (13) The way you practice is the way you perform, (14) Do it right, or do it again,
(15) Don’t read to finish. Read to understand, (16) Don’t pick an answer. Defend your answer,
(17) Explain, (18) Bring out the best in each other, (19) Recognize the problem. Don’t become
the problem, (20) Everything comes with a cost. Consider the costs of your actions, and (21) Be
a S.T.A.R.: Be a Scholar. Be a Teacher. Be an Achiever. Be Responsible.
Furthermore, one report and one book also inform the teaching philosophy of the
administration: A Critical Mission: Making Adolescent Reading a Priority in SREB States, and
Teach Like a Champion, respectively. In the 2009 report, the SREB calls for states to: (1)
Identify the specific reading skills students need to improve their achievement in key academic
subjects, (2) Change the curricula to include the reading skills identified as crucial for students in
each subject, (3) Help teachers share subject-specific reading strategies with students, and (4)
Assist struggling readers so that those who are behind can catch up before they become likely
high school dropouts (http://www.adlit.org/researchbytopic/32716/). While Teach Like a
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 56
Champion has the in-class teaching techniques that the administration would like the teachers to
be implementing (e.g., no opt out, board=paper, entry routine, no warnings, precise praise).
Summary
According to document analysis, Math and Science Academy has a clear philosophy and
goals for its students to be college-bound and educated citizens with comportment. Reading
theory as well as pedagogical techniques are taught to the instructors, and teachers are expected
to utilize them in the classroom.
Research Question 2: How Underperforming and At-Grade-Level Students Differ on the
SAL Instrument
Another goal of this study was to explore the differences between students who
underperform on the SRI with those who perform at grade-level on various affective and
motivational factors measured by the SAL instrument. Recall that the SAL looks at motivational
and affective constructs in students’ approaches to learning.
The analysis first began with an exploration of the basic descriptive statistics. Because
the respondents’ mean scores for the sub-scales of the SAL instrument did not follow a normal
distribution, the initial intent of running multivariate parametric statistics was discarded. Instead,
non-parametric bivariate correlations were used to explored the relationship between SRI Lexile
Reading Test scores and the motivational and affective constructs (memorization, elaboration,
effort/perseverance, perceived self-efficacy, control expectation, interest in reading, cooperative
learning, competitive learning, self-concept in reading, academic self-concept, and control
strategies) from the SAL instrument. The results revealed the following in Table 10.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 57
Table 10. Correlation Matrix for SRI Lexile Reading Scores and Motivational and
Affective Factors of the Student Approaches to Learning Instrument
Factor
s/
(1)
Memorizatio
n
(2)
Elaboration (3) Effort/
(4)
Perceived
(5)
Control
(6)
Interest
(7)
Cooperativ
e
(8)
Competitiv
e
(9) Self-
Concept
(10)
Academic
(11)
Control
(12)
Reading
Variabl
es
Persevera
nce
Self-
Efficacy

Expectati
on
in
Reading Learning Learning in Reading
Self-
Concept
Strategie
s
Lexile
Score
1 1
2 .287*** 1
3 .454*** .365*** 1
4 .269*** .297***
.465**
* 1
5 .284*** .329***
.468**
*
.572**
* 1
6 .220* .349***
.379**
* 0.148 0.179 1
7 .215* 0.243*
.331**
* 0.177 0.164
.288*
** 1
8 0.114 .264** .251**
.272**
*
.310**
* 0.17 0.127 1
9 0.111 .227*
.280**
*
.484**
*
.388**
* .244* 0.177 .251** 1
10 .227* .266**
.350**
*
.623**
*
.496**
* 0.127 0.15 .316*** .468*** 1
11 .493*** .478***
.572**
*
.426**
*
.432**
*
.361*
** .232* .269** .370*** .440*** 1
12 0.038 0.069 0.13
.400**
* .264** 0.102 -0.011 0.154* 0.458***
0.394**
*
0.203*
* 1

Note: Correlations were measured using Kendall’s tau. Significance values are denoted by asterisk: * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p .001.

The correlation matrix was used to identify significant factors (academic self-concept,
competitive learning, control expectation, control strategies, perceived self-efficacy, and self-
concept in reading) for the reading lexile score.
Next, a Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to explore the differences between at-grade-
level and underperforming reading groups on these motivational and affective factors. The
Mann-Whitney U test is a non-parametric test that compares the median results and is
comparable to the t-test. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation assumes a linear relationship
and is better with parametric data; thus, the Mann-Whitney U test was chosen because it uses a
non-parametric correlation. The results of the tests were significant for five of the six variables
identified using Kendall's tau correlation coefficient: academic self-concept (z=-4.608, p <.001),
control expectation (z=-2.534, p < .05), control strategies (z=-2.558, p < .05), perceived self-
efficacy (z=-4.217, p < 001), and self-concept in reading (z=-5.491, p < 001). This means that
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 58
students with higher scores (or lower scores) were more likely to have higher/lower academic
self-concept, control expectation, control strategies, self-concept in reading, and perceived self-
efficacy. The average ranks for these measures are displayed in Table 11.

Table 11. Average Rank of Motivational and Affective Factors of the Student Approaches to
Learning Instrument
__________________________________________________________________________
Factor Grade-level Not at grade-level Z P
__________________________________________________________________________

Academic Self-Concept 59.20 34.04 -4.608 .000
Competitive Learning 49.44 39.37 -1.862 .063
Control Expectation 51.71 38.02 -2.534 .011
Control Strategies 51.63 37.80 -2.558 .011
Perceived Self-Efficacy 57.39 34.42 -4.217 .000
Self-Concept in Reading 61.41 31.60 -5.491 .000
___________________________________________________________________________

Research Question 3: Perceptions of MSA’s Literacy Program
The third research question sought to identify student and staff perceptions of Math and
Science Academy’s approach to literacy instruction. The results of the study revealed three
overarching themes: reading as empowerment, effective instructional practices, and building a
community of learners. Figure 1 provides an overview of these themes.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 59

Figure 1. Overarching Themes of Staff and Student Perceptions

Reading as Empowerment
Power over words. One overarching concept driving Synergy’s approach to literacy instruction
is the idea of “power over words.” This was discussed by both teachers and the two
administrators interviewed, and it was also paraphrased by two of the students. This concept of
Program
Characteristics
Reading as
Empowerment
(Power over Words)
Reading
Comprehension
Enhances Outcomes
Positive Outcome
Expectancies
Effective
Instructional
Practice
Classroom Structure
Knowledge of
Reading Theory and
Pedagogy
Monitoring Student
Progress
Program
Implementation
with Fidelity
Community of
Learners
Culturally Relevant
Instruction
Community Buy-In
Established Culture
of Reading
Reading as Valued
Efforts to Increase
Student Motivation
Building Self-Efficacy
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 60
“power over words” was also found in the school’s newsletter (May 6, 2013) and at the teacher
training in which it was observed in the staff training materials, with the following statement of
“the 3 P’s for giving students power over words and power over numbers”:
 Pronunication matters
 Phrasing matters
 Precision matters
Furthermore, as Dr. Macalinaw explained in the interview, the overriding philosophical
approach for the school is:
the two mantras are power over words and power over numbers, so the power over
words part; reading is a huge deal, especially given the area like the reading scores for
most of the incoming kids. So there is like an emphasis on reading. Every student goes
through a reading program all four years while they’re here.
This concept is key to the success of the school’s students, as Dr. Johnson explained that:
reading is the most important goal of kids’ K-12 schooling. Because if you’re a good
reader that opens the door to everything else…so the power over words part captures how
strongly we feel about reading instruction.
As Maria explained, “They teach us the power over words so that we can have power and be
somebody in life,” while Nancy put it this way, “Power over words is what they teach so we can
read important stuff in school and in life.” Teaching faculty and students shared similar
perceptions, describing power over words as “essential” and emphasizing the importance of
these skills and the role these skills play in empowering people. The power over words opens up
the world to a student, by allowing students to better connect with others. Dr. Johnson
elucidated:
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 61
Power over words gives you a larger vocabulary…it gives you a sense of belonging
more to the entire world than it would if you know fewer, because then you feel like you
can reach out. Because I know more words and I can talk to more people. Now I can
stray from my boundaries. Now I can go further out.
She further explained that when students do not have this power over words, “it’s going to be a
pretty small world, because you’re going to be bordered by what you say and what you know….”
Thus, when students do not exert power over words, it seems as if their world has been limited.
The school’s website states:
Math and Science Academy recognizes that giving students Power Over Words is
nuanced and takes effort but is well worth the attention to detail. MSA teaches
students specifically how to take command of the words they encounter, even multi-
syllabic words that they have never seen before and words that are part of complex
sentences, where the meaning can easily get lost. By doing so, words become a source
of power for children rather than a source of frustration.
The website also mentions, “Additionally, all teachers, regardless of grade level (elementary,
middle school, or high school), all learn about Power Over Words and Power Over Numbers
which help students take command of challenging academic content at any grade level.” Power
over words is one of the key concepts for Math and Science Academy.
Reading for comprehension. One of the challenges of the program in fact, stated
Felipe, is, “to get children to try to understand the book and what they’ve just read.” It is
unsurprising, then, that MSA’s program directs considerable focus toward helping students learn
to read for understanding. The program’s emphasis on reading for comprehension was perceived
as creating a notable change for students in terms of how they engaged in reading. In fact,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 62
almost all of the students interviewed discussed reading to understand as a big change in their
perspective on reading; whereas, initially they would read to “finish the book” not understanding
what they had actually read. Felipe explained:
First, the program was kind of challenging because like I never used to actually—I just
wanted to finish the book. I wasn’t used to understanding it, because I started reading
late. So Math and Science Academy showed me not to read to finish but to read to
understand. And that’s how I now understand the books and I pass the quizzes.
Maria also described the program as a challenge, mentioning that if the students “didn’t read the
book, they’ll have a hard time. And the next time they would have to focus on the book to be
able to pass the test. And those that do read and understand, they should have no problem with
the test.” Mr. Collins also commented on this change in students:
Because at first they don’t come here understanding how to read, but they just want to
finish the book. So, they come and at first it’s like a struggle to understand them. So first
they’ll fail a lot of quizzes. But then they’ll start understanding the book, like not to try
and finish it. And that will make it easier for them to understand it.
Thus, consistently among interview participants, reading comprehension and the act of reading
with the purpose of understanding proved to be an important aspect of participants’ engagement
with MSA’s reading program. This focus on reading comprehension was documented in the
teacher training materials and discussed by Dr Macalinaw to the entire staff during the second
day of training (July 2, 2013).
Effective Instructional Practice
Math and Science Academy was particularly concerned with engaging in effective
instructional practice: classroom structure, knowledge of theory and pedagogy, monitoring
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 63
student progress, and individualized support for students.
Classroom structure. One of the key components of good instruction is to have
effective classroom management. Through document analysis and observation of the teacher
training, discipline and classroom management were discussed by Dr. Macalinaw to all staff, and
the importance to the functioning of a high-quality school was conveyed (July 1, 2013). The
teacher training materials covered discipline and classroom management with Mr. Macalinaw
delineating the Synergy Scholar Lessons and Teach Like a Champion book for his staff. At
MSA, the teachers consciously and conscientiously engage with students through clear
expectations and classroom structure. Mr. Collins explained:
They’re more comfortable when they know what going to happen in the day . . . they
need boundaries. Because if they’re not, they’re going to search for the boundaries, and
that’s going to waste their time and your time, and probably a lot of unnecessary hostility
and misbehavior.
Through the structure established in the classroom, students are more focused on the learning
and less on power struggles or acting out. The focus of the class becomes the learning. Ms.
Lloyd stated:
I made it very routine, very regimented, and it worked. There was a lot of improvement.
They weren’t misbehaving as much. They were better able to learn. There’s always
consequences for their behaviors and their actions, and maintaining that structure with
them helped out a lot as the year progressed.
This statement was corroborated by Dr. Johnson that fewer students were sent to the office as the
year progressed, and that structure is maintained schoolwide and reinforced by administrators so
that teachers are supported. The classroom structure established and reinforced daily by teachers
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 64
at MSA has a benefit that was commented on by even the students. As Nancy explained, “I
knew if I were to go to a regular school with no rules, I would pretty much be a terrible student.”
Thus, classroom management helped students to better focus on their learning, and thus reflects
effective instructional practice.
Knowledge of Reading Theory and Pedagogy. At MSA, all teachers are instructed in
reading theory and pedagogy so that every teacher knows the process of how a beginning reader
progresses. As Dr. Macalinaw explained that the staff are instructed in reading theory and
pedagogy, whether a Biology, Math or Physical Education teacher, so that:
Everyone learns what it takes to be a good reader . . . the five research-based factors that
most influence reading success, which are phonemic awareness, phonics instruction
fluency, vocabulary instruction and reading comprehension instruction.
Through observation and document analysis, the teacher training materials from July 1, 2013,
reveal that the entire staff were taught reading theory and pedagogy, specifically: syllabication,
phrasing, vocabulary instruction, reading comprehension instruction, Reading Counts!, and the
technology (desktop publishing and presentation via Pages and Keynote). Because students are
learning to read at all grade levels, Dr. Johnson emphasized that teachers need to be prepared to
teach reading across disciplines because the “student population we have, many students come in
not reading at grade level—it’s just the way it is” and this is a reality that she wants teachers to
face. In this schoolwide reading expectation for teachers and students alike, Dr. Johnson then
asserted that:
What we want to do is equip our teachers so that when they do come across a kid that
needs help, even though they’re not a reading expert, they’ll at least have some idea of
what might be causing it so that they can get help and figure out how to address that.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 65
Thus, the administrators believed that it is very important for their teachers have the knowledge
to effectively assist students in their reading across all subject matter.
It appears that the administrators’ belief in the importance of cross-disciplinary reading
support is supported by student experiences. Maria, Marisol, and Jose noticed and commented
upon how reading helps them in different coursework throughout the high school curriculum,
whether it be math word problems to biology, chemistry, or history textbooks. The mutually
reinforcing system created by the training of all teachers in reading theory and pedagogy creates
a situation in which the student receive far more reading instruction than at a traditional high
school.
Dr. Macalinaw spoke to the importance of program fidelity with regard to literacy
instruction. He cited the work of Douglas Reeves that it’s not until one has a program with a
high level of program implementation that “you’ll get results out of it.” The students, too, noted
the importance of the program in that Nancy and Marisol have observed that when students
participate in the program, they make gains.
Continuous Monitoring of Student Progress. Another way that MSA demonstrates
effective instructional strategies is through consistent and pervasive monitoring of student
progress. The school does an initial intake of the students’ lexile scores, and then students are
tested three times a year. In addition, the reading program is one in which student scores on their
reading quizzes are constantly providing formative feedback, as well as teachers taking the time
to really get to know their students. In these ways, teachers are able to monitor and chart the
students’ progress toward reading at ever-increasing levels. The principal, Dr. Johnson, stands at
the front gate from the first day of school and then greets students by name as the year
progresses. Dr. Macalinaw verbalized the expectation that staff and teachers get to know the
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 66
“whole student” in order to best meet the academic and personal needs of the students.
With regard to reading, when a student enters MSA with a lower reading lexile, the
student is given a “prescription” of books to read—a list they need to complete. As a student
progresses, the level increases. Mr. Collins explained, “After they complete the prescription,
they can go into reading more what they want. But we monitor them and we keep them around
their lexile…we keep them where they should be.” The teachers also spend time assessing the
potential reasons for which a student may be under-performing. Ms. Lloyd stated:
If they’re having trouble—after a while you can tell if they’re struggling or if they fail the
quiz. If they only missed it by one, maybe they just need to go back and look over it
again. But if they’re missing more than a few questions, they’re using a book that’s too
high for them. Either that or they didn’t read it, but you can tell the difference between
that. But we monitor them pretty close.
This continuous form of student monitoring ensures that students are receiving instruction at the
level that is right for them.
Student reading is monitored is by teachers and administrators sitting down individually
with a student and having him/her read aloud. Thus, students’ classroom behaviors and
performance (e.g., scores on quizzes, staff’s knowledge of and interaction with individual
students, and sustained silent reading) are all ways that the students’ reading skills and progress
are monitored.
Staff are aware of the important role that their monitoring plays in their students’
achievement. As Dr. Macalinaw stated, “The kids who struggle are going to keep struggling if
nobody is monitoring them…they need to know somebody cares, that someone is watching
them.”
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 67
Teachers use their monitoring to identify students who need help, and teachers are very
proactive in their help-giving. Each teacher has two hours a week of tutoring, and Dr. Johnson
discussed with pleasure how this coming year MSA will have the budget to incorporate a
tutoring class for students who are struggling.
It is through being monitored and cared about that students respond and do their part to
do what they need to do with regard to reading. In fact, the students noticed this consistent
monitoring from their teachers and the administrative staff, as Jose noted:
Here in the program, I see that if a student is not performing well, that the student was
always being helped. There was never a time where I saw…he has a low score or he’s
not passing his quizzes or he’s not performing well, let’s just leave him behind. I never
saw that. I saw the opposite, actually. They helped the student, choose books out for
them, gave the student extended time to finish the book. Sometimes the teacher would
ask the student to stay behind in class and give them reading time.
The students notice this continuous teacher monitoring to ensure their success in reading. Nancy
stated, “They will check your lexile every few months, so it will help me out to see if I’ve
improved or if I’ve gone lower to know that I need more motivation.” The key component of
monitoring of students is individualized attention when a student is struggling. Not only is the
feedback from the teacher monitoring helpful to keep students on track, but they can use the
information for themselves to become more self-regulated.
Individualized Support. In fact, one-on-one attention is crucial as an effective
instructional strategy at MSA. The very first day of school, and every day, Dr. Johnson is out in
front of the school shaking each student’s hand. As the principal, she has students who are
struggling come before school and read to her. She stated she tells the student, “See me
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 68
tomorrow and we’ll read that book.” She believes in students having someone who checks up on
them, whether it be a teacher, parent, or administrator. For Rosa, she feels that the teachers are
doing a good job of individualized attention, stating, “Because the teachers will actually sit with
you and read with you, and then they’ll correct you from the words that you aren’t reading
right.” Blanca noted, “They sometimes give us some extra time in school to stay back and
actually help us.” Both Ms. Lloyd and Mr. Collins hold tutoring for two hours a week, and make
themselves available to the students for any class they are having difficulties with, or any kind of
issues at all. As Mr. Collins put it, “You have enough time to really get—to keep close with
them, to chart their progress and good, bad, the whole thing. You know what they’re up to
academically, so that’s good.” Ms. Lloyd stated:
I’m having one-on-one conversations with them all the time. I’m keeping up to date with
them individually all the time to make sure they’re on task. Make sure that they’re doing
what they need to do. Make sure that everything is going all right even outside of school.
The teachers and staff make themselves available and really follow up with students, and it gets
results, as evinced by the increase in reading scores. For example, Ms. Lloyd discussed one
young man who, with the help of one-on-one tutoring to break down the reading and work with
reading strategies, was able to improve greatly.
Individualized attention is paramount not only for helping the struggling student, but also
for reaching the resistant young adult or young person having difficulties at home. Marisol
explained:
the students that they see that they don’t like to pay attention, they actually talk to them
and see what they have, if they have a problem at home or something.
She goes on to describe a friend who had C’s and D’s, and who by the end of the last two
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 69
semesters had A’s and B’s because “they talk to the parents like counseling.” The individualized
attention for students includes parents, and taking on the student as a whole person and part of a
network of people in their family and community.
Building Self-Efficacy. One of the main findings of the study is the process by which
students develop self-efficacy in reading and the resultant effects of this newfound self-efficacy.
The building of a student’s self-efficacy in reading is viewed as key to the academic achievement
of students, according to both teachers and administrators. Even students witnessed and testified
to the transformative power of successful experiences in student reading, both internally and as
viewed in their peers. As Mr. Collins explained, “Confidence is a good chunk of success. Once
they know that they can do it, and they can hear themselves…then they want to read…building
confidence is a big deal.” It is through enactive mastery experiences—the actual reading and
accomplishment of it—that confidence is slowly created. Ms. Lloyd concurred, “Getting that
small win is really key for them, because that’s what’s going to keep them motivated and keep
moving forward.” It was through these small wins and slow evolution and development of self-
efficacy in reading that enjoyment in reading and extensive growth of students becomes possible.
Mr. Collins observed that five out of sixteen of his lowest students at the beginning of the year
are now petitioning to be in Honors classes. Rosa commented on a student from Mexico who
came into the school at a first-grade reading level and within two years was reading at grade
level. She stated that the program is good and works. Additionally, Marisol described the
experience of one of her fellow students in the following way:
There was this one kid. He didn’t like reading…he was doubting himself. But then he
had like 100,000 words read…he achieved himself. He proved himself wrong. At first
he got really small, thin books because that’s what they said to get…but eventually he
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 70
started getting bigger and bigger books.
It is though mastery experiences over time that self-efficacy is developed in the young
reader. As Blanca explained, “I think students should read more, like practice with the teachers
so they could improve. Because that helps mostly. It helped me. So, it would improve other
students.” Nancy also noted the change in herself, “I really didn’t used to like to read. Now
since they have this program we have to read, and I kind of like reading now. It’s kind of
awesome.” Additionally, Dr. Macalinaw explained how building students’ reading efficacy also
empowers them in terms of their goals:
You see that self-confidence coming in when they’re learning how to read. And with the
self-confidence comes a different kind of respect for adults because now you’re no longer
that person who holds this thing over me that I can’t get to. Now I know that I can get to
that. I am reading. I can get to where you are.
The process of building self-efficacy in reading changes the student from within to where s/he
believes s/he can read, begins to gain some enjoyment from reading, and starts to feel more
empowered. It is through reading that reading improves, by building self-efficacy.
It is hard for students to see their own progress sometimes. Dr. Macalinaw observed,
“You watch that slow evolution as they get that confidence in themselves, and there they go.
They don’t see themselves changing.” Ms. Lloyd stated:
the importance of constantly looking at the success that they are making in the classroom
and then drawing their attention to that. Because they may feel like they’re failures
constantly, even if they are making progress, because they’re so far below everyone else.
Through pointing out the small wins and the progress over time, the students begin to have
confidence in their reading ability and are able to see their own improvement.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 71
Mr. Collins discussed the importance of presenting reading as practice. He supports this
approach through a lesson at the beginning of the year on the malleability of intelligence, based
on the teachings of Carol Dweck, and tells the students:
Thinking “I’m dumb” or “I’m smart” stunts you either way. If you think you’re smart
already, it means you don’t need to learn anything more. If you think you’re dumb, you
think that you can’t learn anymore. You just have to build the idea that it’s practice. If
you want to be good at soccer, good at playing guitar, you want to be good at reading,
you have to practice.
Ms. Lloyd noted that the students who have shown the most improvement, it “correlates with the
ones that have done the most reading,” and it’s just the amount of work they put in of mastery
experiences. Helping students to see this and to build their self-efficacy that they can achieve in
their own reading ability and their own intelligence is paramount to lessening the doubt many
students who are low-performing bring with them upon entering high school. As Maria put it,
“Someone that’s having trouble, I don’t think they get it at first. But they’ll eventually get it.
Just give them time. They’ll get it.”
Self-efficacy was a very common topic among interview participants. They viewed
efficacy as being important to students' outcomes. For example, Mr. Collins discussed how self-
efficacy was tied to reading outcomes, “When students have confidence, their reading
improves.” Rosa further explained, “When I feel confidence in my reading, then my reading
slowly I see it get better—because I believe I can do it.” Ms. Lloyd noted a direct correlation
between students’ self-efficacy and their increase in reading scores, “You can see it, the
connection between reading scores and their level of confidence.”
Self-Efficacy Creates Interest, Engagement, and Value. This shift within the students for
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 72
reading has a positive effect on the students, as noted by Mr. Collins, which includes students
“being able . . . to comprehend what is being said.” Further still, this approach to engagement in
reading can also help to spark students’ interest. Mr. Collins further explained:
They have you read the book and for the student, at first, they may say oh well, I have to
read this book. It’s for my grade. It’s for the school. So they read it and then you get
absorbed into reading. You get absorbed into the book. Many students have experienced
that here. They learn to enjoy it.
Another characteristic of the program was the ability of the program to gain positive results in
reading comprehension for readers who began reading later in life. As Rosa explained:
So I started reading late. Somehow I would memorize the books and then my mom
thought I was reading since she didn’t know English. When I came to Math and Science
Academy, I started really low. Now I’m like one of the people that is so high right now
they don’t want to give me my lexile.
Blanca echoed the positive results of the program for her as a late reader:
The goals are to improve our lexiles and going to the right grade and to advance. And I
think it’s pretty good because like I never had been the best at school and back then when
I was in that public school, it was pretty bad because I was on the low level. When I
came to Math and Science Academy, that when I started improving.
Thus, Blanca, Rosa and others felt that MSA’s literacy program played a strong role in the
improvement of their reading performance.
One of the interesting findings of the interviews was how students connected the ability
to read with having opportunities in life. In many cases, the students did not conceive of
him/herself going to college—until s/he was able to read, and then suddenly college became an
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 73
option. As Blanca noted, “. . . because I could read, it’s like college became something I could
maybe do.” Mr. Collins observed a similar change in students, describing how confidence in
reading carries over with the result that “now they believe they can go to college.” He further
explained:
When they were freshmen, they even said, ‘I just didn’t think college was like an option.
I didn’t think I was smart enough to go to college.’ Now they realize they can. They just
have to put in the work. Which is like the ideal—you want all of them to say. It’s the
ideal outcome, knowing that they can do it.
As Nancy declared, “I really want to improve and not turn out to be one of those students who
just don’t care about college. I really want to have a good education.” This growing confidence
in their reading skills, then, opened a new door to students and may have helped to create a space
for students to feel that they could and should pursue higher goals—in particular, postsecondary
education.
Culturally-Relevant Instruction. Another effective instructional strategy is culturally-relevant
instruction to tap into the schema of students and to have the material taught connect with them
personally. Ms. Lloyd connects readings such as Lord of the Flies and Of Mice and Men to the
students’ environment, and themes of structure and chaos (Lord of the Flies) and loneliness and
migrant workers (Of Mice and Men) to their neighborhood and personal experiences. Listening
to Dr. Johnson discuss the books she has purchased for the library, it is apparent that both
teachers and administrators are aware of the cultural backgrounds of their student population,
and seek ways to connect literature to their lives. Dr. Macalinaw went one step further when he
stated:
from a school culture point of view, just try to create a campus environment where kids
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 74
know that they’re cared about and it’s a caring environment, regardless of what your
demographic culture is…just try to create a culture of learning at the school and try to
help eliminate the achievement gap.
He does not feel, above “making sure that our library has culturally relevant books” that the
school does “anything specifically with culture to a massive extent.”
Community of Learners
It is crucial to create a community of learners, and the Math and Science Academy has
four main ways to build community: community buy-in, establishing a culture of reading,
creating a valuation of reading, and efforts to increase student motivation.
Community Value
The Math and Science Academy works hard to cultivate student buy-in. Mr. Collins
noted, “The problem we ran across in the beginning was that a lot of the students in that tutorial
class that I had, they weren’t completely on board yet.” Ms. Lloyd explained, “But since a lot of
the kids have never been part of the MSA community, I think that’s hindering us right now in
terms of taking them all to that next level.” The students were not only unprepared for the rigor
of the classroom, they were also resistant to doing the work. Dr. Johnson further lamented:
I feel like a lot of the kids that come in at this point are so unprepared for the rigor that
we are trying to give them in the classrooms. It’s just hard to see the results we want to
see . . . if we’re pulling in kids that have never had those foundational skills.
She noted, though, that she still sees improvements in the students who come to the school as
incoming ninth-grade students, but “it’s just not as much and it’s really hard to bring them up to
those places without those foundational skills” garnered in the MSA elementary and/or MSA
middle school. The critical component is student buy-in. When the students value reading, then
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 75
they put forth the effort to make gains. Thereby, making community buy-in crucial at the
classroom level.
When the students are made aware of why they are doing something, this creates more
buy-in from the students to participate, and slowly a community of learners is formed in the
classroom. Ms. Lloyd expressed concern that she feels, “many times kids are given things to do
but they don’t know why they do them,” which can impede learning because the students are
then resistant. Also, she asserted that the value of reading and education must be schoolwide
because:
If it’s not happening everywhere, then they’re not finding value in it and they don’t
understand why they’re reading. And they’re probably choosing baby books and not
pushing themselves further if they can’t understand.

One way to create buy-in is through creating a space of mutual respect between the
teacher and the students. Mr. Collins discussed it thus, “Because I constantly treat the students
with respect, they respond with respect, and it creates a good feeling in the classroom where we
can get more accomplished with less pushback.” Ms. Lloyd has a system of clear consequences
for students’ behaviors and actions, and a sense of fairness, and by maintaining that structure, she
sees progress and buy-in as the year continues.
Another way to create buy-in is by caring about the students. Dr. Macalinaw, Dr.
Johnson, and Mr. Collins all remarked on how important this is. Mr. Collins stated that the
students were not used to the teacher caring about them and “riding them,” but after time they
responded once they figured out “oh, like they care for us.” Dr. Macalinaw stated that the
students:
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 76
[The students] learn to work hard as they grasp and they find, number one, that we’re in it
for them, that we care about what they’re doing, we respect them. The kid latches on to
the fact that they care if I learn this or not. Yeah, they care if I’m reading. Yes, they’re
doing it for me.
It is through demonstrating caring for a student, both personally and academically, that the
student eventually buys-in. Jose found this to be true for the school in general that it is meeting
the needs of the students through demonstrating caring:
There is an actual connection between the students and the teachers. There was that
feeling that they cared for you and that they wanted you to learn and comprehend the
text . . . the teachers are in a conversation with the students, they challenge the students.
They help them find ways to overcome their challenges and their problems.
Not only did Jose comment on this palpable connection of caring between teachers and students,
Rosa, too, stressed the need to reach out to struggling students to show them that you care:
The students that didn’t care usually responded to the help that they were being given.
So I believe that to reach out to them, you have to show them that you care for them.
You care that they’re not performing well…those are the students that say, wow, they’re
actually helping me. They’re caring for me. They believe in me. So I’m going to try to
do my best. So I believe that is how you get to those students.
Thus, student buy-in may, in part, require outreach on the part of school staff, and through this
outreach students are shown the caring and belief held by the staff.
School staff perceived the buy-in of parents as another crucial component. Ms. Lloyd
discussed the importance of making parents care so that they “get on their kids” but had found
many times it was very difficult to get parents to be involved, with some students even stating
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 77
that their parents “don’t really care.” This was echoed by Blanca and Maria—that they knew of
some parents who didn’t care like their own parents do. The challenge of generating buy-in from
parents stems from the many other commitments that occupy parents’ time. For example, Mr.
Collins talked about parents working 45-50 hours a week and unable to check if their “kid is
doing the work” and stated, “Can you blame them, you know?” While school staff were
understanding of the plight of many of the working parents, they also acknowledged that having
the parental support could be beneficial in support their students’ success. The principal’s
address on the school website states, “Parents, you play a very important role in your child’s
education. Ask your child daily what he/she learned in school. Attend parent conferences,
parent meetings, sports events, and other school activities. Be an active participant in your
child’s education.”
Culture of Reading
Another way MSA works to create a community of learners is through creating a
schoolwide culture of reading. To cement this culture of reading, MSA makes a strong effort to
emphasize the importance of reading so that it is valued by everyone within the community.
This valuing of reading was iterated by Dr. Macalinaw in the teacher training (July 1, 2013) and
conveyed to all teaching staff. By having clear goals for the students, in the expectation that all
will read, and in creating accountability in the students through the Reading Counts! program
quizzes, a community of learners who are making progress in reading achievement is created at
MSA.
Schoolwide culture. Both Dr. Johnson and Dr. Macalinaw, as the administrators for the
school, discussed the importance of setting a culture of reading and a culture that values literacy,
and both acknowledged that most of the students don’t come to MSA from a context with a
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 78
strong reading culture. Also, Dr. Johnson described the drop off in focus on reading that takes
place as one goes from elementary to middle school to high school, and “we don’t want that.”
Dr. Macalinaw explained:
The older the kids get, the more pushback you get from them. So when you try to get
them to practice reading, especially if they haven’t been successful at it in the past, then
you get a lot of pushback and resistance as the kids get older. So building the culture is
harder at the high school level.
Creating a culture of reading is one of the primary tasks of leadership at the school, according to
Dr. Macalinaw, to get both teachers and students on board through “constant messaging of the
importance of reading” and through “salary allocation—not just in terms of money, but in the
time and place” to make sure that “as a leader, those structures are in place” to facilitate
improvements in literacy. Another thing Dr. Macalinaw felt is important is to “communicate to
the entire staff that, depending on how a student does in reading, affects all his/her other subjects
as well.”
Mr. Collins discussed how “a lot of kids just don’t believe that this is important” and
needing to have them buy-in that education and reading are important. He explained:
It’s like misplaced power. They believe that if they tell me that they’re not going to do
the work, they feel like that empowers them in some way, when the opposite is true. You
have to tell them that the way to get power is through and education and reading. That’s
the way you can become an independent person.
Conveying the importance of reading as a path to getting one’s education is crucial to creating a
community of learners. Mr. Collins stated how, as a teacher “you have to give them the value”
and that because for many of the students it’s not instilled in them and expected from their
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 79
family that they will go to college, and because for many of the students they will be the first
person in their family to attend college, Mr. Collins asserted that first they need to be instilled
with the idea that they can do it. Ms. Lloyd further explained:
[I am] constantly explaining to them why it’s important to learn something, why this is
valuable. So I feel like they respect me more and they can see the value in it, instead of
me just telling them specifically to do something.
Blanca commented on how she likes to be told why they are studying something, and that
“makes me feel more like doing it, especially reading.” Reinforcing schoolwide the importance
of reading allows students to understand the reason for pushing themselves and how it will
benefit them personally. Students must be taught to value reading in order to create a
community of learners.
Goals. Having clear goals and expectations for the students is another way that MSA
creates a community of learners. For Dr. Macalinaw, the goal of MSA with regard to literacy is
“again, power over words…just getting the kids, staff, everyone to really understand what that
means and to understand how powerful it can be when you’re a literate person.” For Dr.
Johnson, the goal is for students to be able to read the constitution “and understand exactly what
it means”—for the students to be educated citizens. For students to “be able to pick up an
original document: Declaration of Independence, Constitution, or the Treaty of Paris and say,
this is what it means.” She wants the students at MSA to be competitive at schools like
Princeton and to be able to “say, no this is the interpretation that I get from this. And I want the
professor to say, yes, that is one way that you can look at that.” Her goal is for the students at
MSA to be able to compete with students from private schools, to hold their own, and to have
independent interpretations that they are confident enough to assert in college settings.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 80
Students feel the goals that MSA has for them are to read at the level for their grade or
advanced, and to be successful in life. As Felipe explained, “I think their goals are to get
children to read at a level that’s more advanced and to have a really great vocabulary to use.”
Blanca, Nancy, Jose, Maria and Rosa all echoed this sentiment and stated that the goal for the
students is to improve their reading to be successful in life. Marisol expressed an internalization
of these goals for the student:
My goals as a reader are to—I always try to comprehend what is on the text…there’s
always something that I may not understand or terms that are being said in the text, so my
goal is always to understand what is being said, find a way to know what they’re saying
and, in the future, retain that information so I know what it was being used for and how to
use it.
By having clear expectations and goals for the students, students are then able to internalize the
expectations to comprehend what they read, to think for themselves, to expand their vocabulary,
and to be proactive readers and citizens. Thus, a community of learners is further created.
Self-Regulated Students. Another way that MSA creates a community of learners is
through developing accountability in their students so that they become self-regulated. They
have a saying posted in every classroom, “Everyone achieves. No exceptions, no excuses.” As
Mr. Collins stated, “The program is pretty cut and dry. If you read, you pass the quiz. If you
pass the quizzes, you get an A. There’s no tricks. So if you’re not doing it, it shows.” Jose
expressed that it’s up to the individual student to be accountable:
Mainly I think it would be on them. Because I’ve seen students who are really busy but
still manage to get their reading done and pass their test. So it mainly just depends on the
students themselves.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 81
It is up to the students to be self-regulated and to achieve in their reading, according to this
student. The school works to create this accountability in the students through direct instruction
from the teachers, as Mr. Collins put it:
Accountability is a big issue that we have to address, because a lot of students have the
mentality where it’s always someone else’s fault. So it’s a challenge, just getting the
mindset of taking responsibility, being organized, buying into it and doing the reading.
Accountability in the student to be self-regulated is very important for creating a community of
learners. The interesting part of accountability, according to Ms. Lloyd, is that as students begin
to take responsibility and to read more, their interest grows, and as interest in reading grows,
they begin to like reading. Marisol and Blanca both commented on this, too. Mr. Collins noted:
When they were reading consistently, testing consistently, their affection for reading
grew. Like they were actually reading on their own. I would hear them have
conversations about the things that they were reading, which is mind-blowing, halfway
through the year.
Mr. Collins also commented on how students, when they stop making excuses and blaming, and
begin taking responsibility, “it’s kind of like a life lesson on top of the reading.” Having
students learn to take responsibility for themselves leads to more active practice of reading,
which in turn creates engagement, which then increases interest and pleasure in reading.
Accountability fosters motivation and creates a community of learners. Furthermore, taking
responsibility is a life lesson for the student to become more self-regulated.
Along with self-regulation, self-advocacy was deemed very important by the students.
As Blanca explained, “Some students are scared to approach teachers or ask questions. I know
how they feel…because I raise my hand, but then I worry that it’s going to be a dumb question.”
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 82
Marisol asserts the importance of students being able to ask for help and feeling able to ask
questions and to not be afraid. Ms. Lloyd stated that the, “student who doesn’t give up, who asks
questions…are usually the ones that are going to increase the most.” Students must take
initiative, and this is a roadblock for many students, according to Blanca, Marisol, Rosa, and
Felipe.
Efforts to Increase Student Motivation
Achievement Gap. Building student awareness is a key aspect of increasing motivation,
and one of the first things Dr. Macalinaw does in the school orientation is to talk about the
achievement gap as an entry point for the students and parents. He explained:
we present everyone in our school community with a lot of data. We show information
about how Latino and African American students don’t perform as well academically on
a number of measures as compared to Caucasian and Asian students. As we’re doing
that, we try to explain to the students that the whole goal of the school is to eliminate that
achievement gap.
He discusses with them the achievement gap and how the goal is to eliminate that gap, “to prove
that it doesn’t matter what your cultural background is, that anybody can be successful if you put
in the hard work and you’ve got quality schools.” This talk resonates with the students. For
example, Jose explicitly recalled this goal during his interview. By informing the students of the
achievement gap, it serves as a source of motivation for the students to achieve. Also, the
school’s new mission, as per the May 6, 2013, newsletter is, “To create and share solutions that
eliminate the achievement gap.” During the teacher training (July 1, 2013), Mr. Macalinaw
delineated the achievement gap by area and by ethnicities for the Los Angeles area. He
impressed upon his teachers the importance of “hard work” and a “quality school” to overcome
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 83
the disparities caused by “family income” and “ethnicity.” The knowledge and awareness of the
achievement gap is used by Dr. Macalinaw to motivate parents and students, as well as his staff.
Rewards and Recognition. Another way MSA strives to increase student motivation is
through rewards and recognition of effort and achievement. Mr. Collins and Ms. Lloyd both
discussed their feedback and recognition of progress in students from day-to-day verbal
encouragement (“You can do it.”) to parties and larger rewards every few months because the
students sometimes can’t see the progress they are making. As a school, MSA tries to instill
pride in their students for achievement in reading through assemblies and awards for attaining
100,000, and 200,000 words, and 500,000 words; and fieldtrips and parties for the “millionaire”
club. This positive encouragement and tangible rewards have created motivation in the students.
Mr. Collins explained, “The students know they are appreciated for their hard work.”
Dr. Macalinaw noted, “But it was also just the fact that they could say, ‘I read a million
words.’” Some of the motivation came from being able to have bragging rights more so than
even the reward of the party or fieldtrip. As Marisol concurred, “It wasn’t just the fieldtrip, it
was being able to make it into the millionaires’ club. Being able to say, ‘I made it.’” The
rewards are working to bring recognition of effort and attainment in reading, and they are
helping to create pride in the students for their reading accomplishments. This is the shifting
from extrinsic to intrinsic motivation.
Intrinsic Motivation. As Marisol, Felipe, Jose, and Ms. Lloyd all acknowledge, some of
the motivation must come from within the students themselves. Sustained engagement in
activity is more likely when there’s intrinsic motivation for the behavior (Schunk, et al., 2008).
Marisol explains that sometimes, “it’s just on the individual,” and Mr. Collins echoed this
sentiment. Ms. Lloyd discussed the difference between honors students, who will “read
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 84
whatever book you give them,” versus students in her class who are resistant to reading. For
Blanca, Felipe, and Rosa they say it has to do with effort on the part of the student. All of the
teachers and students interviewed made reference to willingness to learn as being something
inside the student that would determine whether or not they make progress in reading. The ways
to facilitate motivation in students who did not already display intrinsic motivation were praise
and rewards, small wins, practicing reading, and creating a community of learners. Eventually,
these factors seemed to spark that interest in the student, according to the students and staff
interviewed. These practices were instrumental in transforming recalcitrant learners into readers.
Summary
In sum, three main overarching themes emerged from the qualitative data: reading as
empowerment, effective instructional practice, and a community of learners. MSA sought to
establish a culture of reading through staff development and training in reading theory and
pedagogy, and through schoolwide reading expectations for the students. Teacher monitoring
and individualized attention were a key component of their instructional practice. Enactive
mastery experiences led to increased self-efficacy and increased reading scores.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 85
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to identify the staff and student perceptions of the literacy
program at Math and Science Academy and to gain a better understanding of some of the
affective and motivational factors that may be contributing to the grade-level reading or under-
performance in reading level for high school students. The aim is that these findings may better
inform the staff and teachers serving this population.
In this study, qualitative interviews and quantitative analyses were utilized to explore the
following research questions:
1. What is the nature of Math and Science Academy’s approach to literacy instruction?
2. How do the students who are at grade level (or above) on the reading test differ from
those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their approaches to learning as
measured by the SAL instrument?
3. What are staff and student perceptions of Math and Science Academy’s approach to
literacy?
To accomplish this, participants were purposefully sampled from MSA. Seven students
and four school staff (two teachers, two administrators) were interviewed to identify the
perceptions of the literacy program at MSA. Additionally, 99 students were surveyed using the
SAL instrument in order to identify how the students who are at grade level (or above) on the
SRI lexile reading test differ from those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their
approaches to learning. This final chapter will discuss some of the findings and propose
implications for practice. Limitations and directions for future research will also be presented.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 86
One of the ways in which Math and Science Academy is unique is the focus on the role
of the student. The high school student is given an active part in his/her progress in reading, and
is held accountable through twice-weekly quizzes on books s/he has read. This active role with
almost daily feedback allows students to monitor their own progress in reading. The students
interviewed displayed a metacognitive awareness and responsibility for their own learning.
During the interviews, student participants noted the change within themselves as they became
more aware of their own responsibility for “Power over words.” This is significant because the
learner then took charge of his/her own learning. Not only did the student interviewees discuss
this metacognitive awareness of the need for reading to understand, and the responsibility for
their own future, participants also modeled and advocated for the same responsibility in their
peers. There has been a shift from teacher responsibility to learner responsibility, and this school
is unique in that the program in place is having a transforming effect on the students.
The literature indicates the crucial role that metacognition plays in disciplinary literacy
(Schoenbach et al., 2012), as well as the position the student sees him/herself in the class
structure of schools (O’Brien et al., 1995). By empowering students, MSA is allowing students
to take the lead in their own educational practice and academic outcomes. The metacognitive
conversation the student has with respect to his/her own understanding of the text allows students
to navigate increasingly complex texts. This metacognitive awareness also positively changes
students’ sense of themselves as readers and learners (Schoenbach et al., 2012).
Another noteworthy practice of MSA is their unique approach to pedagogy. In this high
school, all teachers are taught reading theory and pedagogical practice explicitly. This,
combined with a schoolwide expectation of reading across subject areas, serves to create a
community of learners among the students. The “millionaires’ club” and reward system further
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 87
reinforces the community of learners. This is unique to MSA, and the literature supports this
approach to literacy instruction that all teachers are trained in literacy theory and pedagogy, so as
to form a cross-content culture of reading schoolwide. The Intersegmental Committee of
Academic Senates (2002) notes the transfer of competencies in reading to other subject matter at
the high school and college level, and MSA is a high school that is actually implementing this
research-based practice into all classrooms across content area domains, and this is unique to the
school.
Another sound practice at MSA is their focus on college readiness. Through the concept
of “Power over words” and through gains in reading, student interviewees conveyed their
changing self-perception of college as a possibility. The philosophy of Dr. Macalinaw is that all
students can achieve and can go to college, and the administrators and teachers actively
communicate this belief to the students. The culture of the school is inclusive of all students and
pushes them to achieve, believing that college is an attainable goal.
The literature supports this approach, as the teachers’ beliefs often influence how a
student performs (Green, 2010; Spiegel, 2012; Tsiplakides & Keramida, 2010). If a teacher has
low expectations for a student, the student’s level of achievement will often reflect these lowered
expectations. Conversely, if a teacher has high expectations, the students will rise to achieve the
expectations (Tsiplakides & Keramida, 2010). By clearly conveying the college-going culture
and expectations to the students, MSA’s teachers and staff are allowing students to believe that
they can, in fact, go to college. Five out of seven of the students interviewed relayed how they
began to believe that could achieve and that college might be an option; whereas, before college
had never been seen as a viable alternative.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 88
Another way in which Math and Science Academy demonstrates a strong program is in
meeting the needs of its English Language Learner (ELL) students. MSA has a large percentage
of ELL students (30.4%). This study found that the ELL students are achieving alongside their
native-speaker counterparts, as evinced by interview data from teachers, administrators, and the
students themselves. The respectful environment, explicit literacy instruction, and individualized
attention are key components of the school’s literacy program that are meeting the needs of
ELLs in this urban school.
For ELLs, De La Luz (2000) emphasizes the need for a respectful environment, and Lapp
and Fisher (2011) discuss the importance of knowing the whole student. Furthermore, Franquiz
and Salazar (2004) stress the importance of interpersonal connections. With regard to an urban
learning environment, students need, according to the National Center for Education Statistics
(2013), emotional support, exposure to reading and literacy, and changes in attitude toward
education. Math and Science Academy, with its individualized attention and culture of caring
demonstrated interpersonal connections, as well as changes in attitude toward education, as
evidenced by the students’ interview responses. Students discussed feeling cared for by the
teachers, staff and the school in general.
The research on teaching literacy to ELLs discusses the benefit from direct and explicit
instruction in the components of literacy (Genesee, et al., 2006), and MSA exhibited this explicit
instruction through lessons in syllabication and phrasing as well as direct instruction in literacy
to individual students through the tutoring program, as evinced by Mr. Collins in his remedial
English class and his afterschool tutoring. MSA, through teaching literacy practices to all
teachers across subject matter domains, having classrooms that are structured, creating a
community of learners, and weekly reading quizzes, exhibits many of the elements of good
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 89
teaching that Lapp and Fisher (2011) advocate for ELLs and for the general population of
students.
Additionally, MSA staff and teachers truly get to know the students. The principal stands
at the entrance gate and greets students by name; the teachers get to know the “whole student” as
advocated by Dr. Macalinaw to his staff. In the classroom, the bi-weekly quizzes and formative
assessments allow teachers to know where their students are academically. The teachers and
staff also provide individual attention crucial for student improvement among struggling readers
(Black & Wiliam, 1998; McShane, 2005). These findings support existing literature regarding
ongoing formative feedback (Black & Wiliam, 1998) and the importance of knowing one’s
students and their current levels (Black & Wiliam, 1998; McShane, 2005) in order to meet
students’ needs.
Another way that MSA is unique in their approach to literacy is how the influence of
environment through classroom, teacher, and peers is assisting in the facilitation of attributional
retraining and self-efficacy. Throughout the interviews, students discussed the internal, non-
cognitive variables such as effort and perseverance. Students discussed the weekly quizzes on
books they had read, and how they could see their own progress in the number of words read, as
well as beginning to understand the books themselves. These findings support the notion that an
individual’s self-efficacy tends to be more accurate the more specific the task being assessed
(Bong, 2001; Zimmerman, 2000), as students had very specific and ongoing feedback for their
reading.
Furthermore, Bandura (1997) and Usher and Pajares (2006) both described how
engagement in a task in which students are successful can bolster their self-efficacy. Students
underwent attributional retraining as they came to realize that reading ability was something
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 90
internal, unstable, and controllable (Schunk, 1994; Weiner, 1986). In having successes with
reading through the “prescription” of books provided by the English teacher, students reported a
positive change within themselves and within peers observed. Students did not explicitly state
that their self-efficacy went up; however, they did report a “feeling that I can do it” and “maybe I
can read just like everyone else and get to my grade level.” The social-cognitive framework
defines self-efficacy as a person‘s judgment of his capabilities to accomplish a certain task
(Gredler, 2009), and through enactive mastery experiences students were able to increase their
self-efficacy for reading by attributional retraining. The findings in this study supported existing
research on self-efficacy and its role in academic achievement.
In summary, Math and Science Academy focuses on the role of the student,
metacognition, a unique schoolwide approach to reading pedagogy, meeting the needs of ELL
students through interpersonal connection and explicit literacy instruction, getting to know the
“whole student,” and bolstering self-efficacy through enactive mastery experiences.
Implications for Practice
This study has multiple implications for practice concerning the struggling young adult
learner and reading achievement:
1) Offer and encourage school staff to take advantage of professional development
opportunities designed to expand their understanding of reading development skills.
2) Build student self-efficacy in reading by small wins in reading, consistent practice,
rewards and recognition.
3) Help students develop a personal interest in reading.
4) Build a schoolwide culture of reading and implement tutoring.
5) Build parent involvement.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 91
Implementing these five recommendations can foster students’ reading development and growth,
and facilitate reading achievement. The following sections explore these recommendations in
greater detail.
Offer and Encourage School Staff to Take Advantage of Professional Development
This recommendation empowers teachers’ schoolwide to meet the needs of all struggling
readers. When it is more than just the English teacher who is responsible for and attempting to
teach reading, then the students will not be left behind, there will be more individualized
attention, there will be more awareness, follow through, and accountability. Furthermore, the
value of reading will be conveyed to the students. Professional development could be conducted
at the end of summer right before school begins, with time set aside during the school year for
follow through lessons. Best practices researched and conducted for each other by teachers, or
outside resources and specialists with cutting-edge research or pedagogical practices could be
brought in. Furthermore, the Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates (2002) report
asserted that it cannot be solely the domain of the English teacher to teach reading, and that
instruction must take place across subject domains. Math and Science Academy is implementing
the suggested best practice from the study of academic literacy which is spearheading academic
reforms such as the new common core curriculum.
Build Student Self-Efficacy in Reading
MSA's approach to self-efficacy development appeared to have a very strong impact on
student's self-perceptions of efficacy. Bandura (1997) and Usher and Pajares (2006) both
described how engagement in a task in which students are successful can bolster their self-
efficacy. MSA created a situation in which students were encouraged/prescribed to read at their
accessible level, given clear goals and expectations, given feedback and positive specific praise,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 92
and through these small wins in the Scholastic Reading Counts program students improved their
reading. Other schools may approach this in other ways. For example, through the Accelerated
Reader or Book Sharp program. Self-perceptions of ability and expectancies of success are
strong predictors of learners’ effort and persistence (Eccles, 1983; Wigfield & Eccles, 2001)
Through changing the students’ perceived self-efficacy, the students’ began to try more, and
through the trying itself students made positive gains in reading. It is important to keep in mind,
as the research indicates, perceived self-efficacy is more important in order to improve students’
classroom achievement than to try and increase students’ value and interest in the course material
(Pajares, 1996; Schunk, 1995).
Help Students Develop a Personal Interest in Reading
According to the extant literature, building intrinsic motivation is one approach to
helping students persist. Schunk, Pintrich, and Meece (2008) note that intrinsic motivation can
promote learning and achievement better than extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is at the
cornerstone for developing struggling readers into achieving readers. Because intrinsic
motivation is contextual it can be developed through the readings themselves or through the
classroom context. During Silent Sustained Reading, the students are allowed to choose from a
wide variety of books, and this is one way to develop intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic rewards are
not as effective as developing the intrinsic motivation in students.
Build a Schoolwide Culture of Reading
One of the key aspects of MSA's approach is the culture of reading they developed that
spans the disciplines. MSA’s culture of reading included instruction of all teachers in reading
theory and pedagogy, a schoolwide expectation of reading, and through the millionaire’s club
and peer models a social persuasion aspect. Having such a culture appears to have an impact on
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 93
the caring by teachers for their students’ reading progress, understanding of what to do to assist,
and accountability for teaching reading across subject matter. A schoolwide culture of reading
also has an impact on student buy-in, clear expectations, and vicarious learning experiences. It
helps to convey the value of reading schoolwide. According to the research, schools that have
shared beliefs and goals function better and are more effective (Schunk, et al., 2008), and the
current study demonstrated some of the benefits of having a clear set of shared beliefs and goals
schoolwide. Furthermore, more structured tutoring class would be part of this culture of reading.
Schools can implement a culture of reading through school leadership, a committed teaching
staff, social persuasion of peer models, and frequent formative assessments. Within a school
setting, this entails strong leadership with trainings for the staff in reading pedagogy. It requires
commitment to model and monitor reading from teaching staff.
Parent Involvement
MSA interview participants spoke to the importance of parental involvement, particularly
when a student is struggling, and these participants indicated that this is an area of growth for the
school. Including parents in the shared culture of reading may effect change in their level of
involvement in their child's education. The literature indicates that parental involvement has a
positive effect on student achievement (Fan & Chen, 2001; Henderson, 1987; LaRocque,
Kleiman, & Darling, 2011). This is an area of concern for many of the teachers and
administrators, and even the students themselves, as evidenced in the interviews.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study extends the research on young adult learners of reading by investigating the
characteristics of a Math and Science Academy charter school and the students’ approaches to
learning. Findings from the study suggest that future research should investigate students’
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 94
intrinsic motivation, by providing a more thorough, in-depth look at the literacy practices of
successful traditional high schools, as well as charter schools, to see how they develop intrinsic
motivation in their students. Also, future research might involve looking at other forms of
assessment to measure, not only reading skill level of the student, but also the student’s level of
intrinsic motivation. While the Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) survey is a valid tool of
assessing isolated motivational and affective factors, other measurements of student values and
motivation towards reading might prove beneficial.
Limitations
The research questions and methodological design of this study was focused on unveiling
the experiences of students, teachers, and administrators. This structure limits the ability of the
researcher to infer the causes of reading achievement. The qualitative nature necessitated by
research questions one and three does not allow for conclusions to be drawn about the causal
relationships between motivational/affective constructs and reading achievement as measured by
the SRI reading test. The quantitative portion, too, does not allow for conclusions to be drawn
about the causal relationships. More research is needed to try to make more inferences on causal
relationships.
Secondly, the students were given their SRI lexile reading score the same morning as the
survey was administered. Out of the 99 students surveyed, only 77 chose to self-report their
scores. As I do not know why the 22 students did not disclose their score, this may skew the
results of the study.
Another limitation would related to the ability to draw descriptive or inferential
conclusions from sample data and be able to generalize to a larger group of adults, or to
generalize to the adolescent population who are still a traditional high school or continuation
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 95
school within the public schooling system. There is limited generalizability and we need to
expand the research to other schools to see if the findings hold true.
Lastly, there are issues with self-report. The study is limited by the truthfulness of the
subjects on the survey and in the interview. Future research can use more varied types of data
that will allow for better triangulation so that self-reported information can be validated.
Conclusion
The purpose of the study was to investigate the characteristics of the Math and Science
Academy’s literacy program and to identify how the students who are at grade level (or above)
on the reading test differ from those who are underperforming on the test in terms of their
approaches to learning as measured by the SAL instrument. Findings for the first and third
research question indicate a schoolwide culture of reading in which clear expectations and goals
for the students, teacher monitoring and individualized support, along with rewards for reading
achievement (parties, fieldtrips, “millionaires club”) help to build student efficacy. Results for
the second research question indicate the mediating aspect of self-efficacy, through enactive
mastery experiences, for developing positive changes in students’ academic self-concept and
reading self-concept.
The results of the study provide reassurance that with the right support and skills,
students can improve their reading scores. The interviews revealed that mastery experiences and
a culture of reading, combined with teacher monitoring and individualized attention can be
leveraged to facilitate this outcome for other students in the following ways. First, reading
theory and pedagogy can be explicitly taught to teachers in order to create a schoolwide culture
and expectation of reading. Second, these findings can be used to enhance the services within
MSA and the community it serves. This could be implemented through the continued exposure
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 96
of all students to the available resources, and to increased parental involvement. Finally, these
findings can be adapted to other schools and communities that are not achieving the success that
MSA is achieving.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 97

References

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2010). Fact Sheet. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from:
http://www.all4ed.org/files/GraduationRates_FactSheet.pdf
Aud, S., KewalRamani, A., & Frohlich, L. (2011). America’s youth: Transitions to
adulthood. Washington D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Education
Statistics Services Institute, American Institutes for Research. Retrieved from:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012026.pdf
Baer, J., Kutner, M., Satini, J. & White, S. (2009) Basic reading skills and the literacy of
America’s least literate adults: Results from the 2003 national assessment of adult
literacy (NAAL) supplemental studies (NCES 2009-481). National Center for Education
Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington,
DC.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84, 191-214.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and
Company.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G.V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy
beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development,
72(1), 187-206.
Bean, TW, & Harper, H. (2011). The context of English Language Arts learning: The high
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 98
school years. In D. Fisher, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the
English Language Arts (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum/Taylor Francis.
Beers, K. (2003). When kids can’t read: What teachers can do. Portsmouth, NH: Heinnemann.
Belfield, C.R. & Levin, H.M. (2009, September). High school dropouts and the economic losses
from juvenile crime in California. California Dropout Research Project. Santa Barbara:
Gevirtz Graduate School of Education.
Berkeley, S., Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2011). Reading comprehension strategy
instruction and attribution retraining for secondary students with learning and other mild
disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(1), 18-32.
DOI: 10.1177/0022219410371677
Biggs, M., Homan, S., Dedrick, R., & Rasinksi, T. (2008). Using an interactive singing software
program: A comparative study of middle school struggling readers. Reading Psychology,
An International Quarterly, 20, 195-213.
Binder, k. S., Snyder, M., Ardoin, S. P., & Morris, R. K. (2011). Adult education literacy
instruction: A review of the research. Adult Basic Education & Literacy Journal, 5(3),
194-243.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom
assessment. Phi Delta Kappa International. Retrieved from http://blog.discovery
education.com/assessment/files/2009/02/blackbox_article.pdf
Brown, R. (2008). Strategy matters: Comprehension instruction for older youth. Best Practices in
Adolescent Literacy Instruction, 1, 114-131.
Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among
middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 99
Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 23-34. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.23
Burns, M., Dean, V., & Foley, S. (2004). Preteaching unknown key words with incremental
rehearsal to improve reading fluency and comprehension with children identified as
reading disabled. Journal of School Psychology, 42(4), 303-314.
Burns, M.K., Hodgson, J., Parker, D.C., & Fremont, K. (2011). Comparison of the effectiveness
and efficiency of text previewing and preteaching keywords as small-group reading
comprehension strategies with middle-school students. Literacy Research and
Instruction, 50(3), 241-252.
Callahan, R. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunities to learn.
American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328.
Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., Rintamaa, M., & Madden, A. (2010). The impact of a
strategy-based intervention on the comprehension and strategy use of struggling
adolescent readers. The Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 257-280. DOI:
10.1037/a0018212
Caprara, G., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G.M., Barbaranelli, C., &
Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for self-
regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100(3), 525-534. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.525
Carroll, A., Houghton, S., Wood, R., Unsworth, K., Hattie, J., Gordon, L., & Bower, J.
(2009). Self-efficacy and academic achievement in Australian high school students: The
mediating effects of academic aspirations and delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 32,
797-817.
Cassidy, J. & Cassidy, D. (2008). What’s hot for 2008. Reading Today, 25(4), 1, 10–11.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 100
Chall, J. (1994). Patterns of adult reading. Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 29-33.
Chenowith, K. (2001). Keeping score. School Library Journal, 47(9), 49-51.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results. Charlotte, NC: Information Age
Publishing.
Coalition for Juvenile Justice. Annual Report. (2001). Abandoned in the back row: New lessons
in education and delinquency prevention. Washington, DC: Coalition for Juvenile
Justice Federal Advisory Committee. Retrieved from
http://www.juvjustice.org/media/resources/ public/resource_122.pdf
Collier, V.P. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of language for academic purposes. TESOL
Quarterly, 21(4), 677-741.
Comyn, P. and Barnaart, A. (2010). TVET reform in Chongquing: Big steps on a long
march. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 15(1), 49-65.
Conley, M.W. (2008). Cognitive strategy instruction for adolescents: What we know about the
promise, what we don’t know about the potential. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1),
84-106.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cromley, J. & Azevedo, R. (2011). Measuring strategy usage in context with multiple-choice
items. Metacognition Learning, 6, 155-177. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-011-9070-z
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 101
Cromley, J.G., Snyder-Hodan, L.E., & Luciw-Dubas, U.A. (2010). Reading comprehension of
scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of
reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687-700. DOI:
10.1037/a0019452
Cury, F., Elliot, A.J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A.C. (2006). The social-cognitive
model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 666-679. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.666
Darwin, M. & Fleishman, S. (2005). Research matters: Fostering adolescent literacy.
Educational Leadership, 62, 85-87.
De La Luz Reyes, M. (2000). Unleashing possibilities: Biliteracy in the primary grades. In M. De
La Luz, Reyes & Halcon (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical perspectives on
literacy for Latino students (pp. 96-121). New York: Teachers College Press.
Deshler, D. D., Palincsar, A. S., Biancarosa, G., & Nair, M. (2007). Informed choices for
struggling adolescent readers: A research-based guide to instructional programs and
practices. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
DeStigter, T. (1998). The Tesoros literacy project: An experiment in democratic communities.
Research in the Teaching of English, 52, 280-298.
Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behavior. In J. T. Spence (Ed.),
Achievement and achievement motives.(pp. 75-146) San Francisco: Freeman.
Elias, S.M., & Loomis, R.J. (2002). Utilizing need for cognition and perceived self-
efficacy to predict academic performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(8),
1687-1702.
Elliot, A.J., Shell, M.M., Henry, K.B., & Maier, M.A. (2005). Achievement goals,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 102
performance contingencies, and performance attainment: An experimental test. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 630-640.
Emmer, E.T., & Everston, C.M. (2012). Classroom management for middle school and high
school teachers. (9
th
ed.). Boston: Pearson Learning Solutions.
Fan, W., & Williams, C.M. (2010). The effects of parental involvement on students’
academic self-efficacy, engagement, and intrinsic motivation. Educational Psychology,
30(1), 53-74. doi: 10.1080/01443410903353302
Fan, X. & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A meta-
analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1-22.
Fischer, D., Lapp, D., and Frey, N. (2011). Comprehension: The cooperation of many forces. In .
In D. Lapp and D. Fischer (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English
language arts. (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 258-263). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fleischman, E.B. (2005). Adolescent literacy: A national crisis. New York, NY:
Scholastic. Retrieved from http://www.scholastic.com/dodea/pdfs/Paper_Literacy
_Crisis.pdf
Flores-Gonzalez, S. (2002). School kids/street kids: Identity development in Latino
students. New York: Teachers College Press.
Franquiz, M.E. & Salazar-Jerez, M. (2007). Ni de aquí, ni de alla: Latin@youth crossing
linguistic and cultural borders. Journal of Border Educational Research, 6, 101-117.
Gandará, P. & Contreras, F. (2009). The latino education crisis: the consequences of
failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W. M., & Christian, D. (2006). Educating English
language learners. New York: Cambridge University Press.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 103
Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: A meta-analysis. In C.
MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research. New
York: Guilford Press.
Grant, H., & Dweck, C.S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541-553. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.85.3.541
Gredler, M. (2010). Lev s. vygotsky‘s cultural-historical theory of psychological development. In
N. Danner (Ed.), Pearson Custom Education (p. 117-153). Boston: Pearson Learning
Solutions.
Green, K.E. (2010). The self-fulfilling prophecy of low teacher expectations for students.
(Master’s thesis). Retrieved from http://www.cehs.ohio.edu/gfx/media/pdf/kelsey.pdf
Grenawall, V. (2004). Going beyond the debate: Using technology and instruction for a balanced
reading program. Teacher Librarian, 32(2), 12-15.
Harackiewicz, J.M., Barron, K.E., Tauer, J.M., & Elliot, A.J. (2002). Predicting success
in college: A longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors
of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94(3), 562-575. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.94.3.562
Hareli, S., and Hess, U. (2008). When does feedback about success at school hurt? The
role of causal attributions. Social Psychology of Education, 11, 259-272.
doi: 10.1007/s11218-008-9059-x
Hawkins, R.O., Hale, A.D., Sheeley, W., & Ling, S. (2011). Repeated reading and vocabulary-
previewing interventions to improve fluency and comprehension for struggling high-
school readers. Psychology in the Schools, 48(1), 59-77.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 104
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20545
Haynes, M. (2010). The federal role in confronting the crisis in adolescent literacy.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from
http://www.all4ed.org/files/FedRoleConfrontingAdolLit.pdf
Henderson, A.T. (Ed.) (1987). The evidence continues to grow: Parent involvement improves
student achievement. An annotated bibliography. National Committee for Citizens in
Education Special Report. Maryland: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K.A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development.
Educational psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
Hidi, S., Renninger, K.A., & Krapp, A. (2004). Interest as a motivational variable that
combines affective and cognitive functioning. In D.Y. Dai & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.),
Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning
and development (pp. 89-115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hinchey, P. H. (2004). Becoming a critical educator: Defining a classroom identity, designing a
critical pedagogy. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Hsieh, P.P., & Kang, H. (2010). Attribution and self-efficacy and their interrelationship
in the Korean EFL context. Language Learning, 60(3), 606-627.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00570.x
Hulleman, C.S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B.L., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2010). Enhancing
interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 102(4), 880-895. doi: 10.1037/a0019506
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 105
Jitendra, A.K., Burgess, C., & Gajria, M. (2011). Cognitive strategy instruction for improving
expository text comprehension of students with learning disabilities: The quality of
evidence. Exceptional Children, 77(2), 135-159.
Johannessen, L.R. & McCann, T.M. (2009). Adolescents who struggle with literacy. In L.
Christenbury, R. Bomer, and P. Smagorinsky (Eds.) Handbook of Adolescent Literacy Research.
(pp. 65-79). New York, NY: Guilford.
Julian, F.A., & Kominski, R.A. (2011). Education and synthetic work-life earnings
estimates (ACS-14). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau. Retrieved from US
Census Bureau website: http://www.scribd.com/doc/64269161/Education-and-
Synthetic-Work-Life-Earnings.pdf
Kim, J.S., Capotosto, L, Hartry, A., and Fizgerald, R. (2011). Can a mixed-method literacy
intervention improve the reading achievement of low-performing elementary school
students in an after-school program?: Rseults from a randomized controlled trial of Read
180 Enterprise. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(2), 183-201.
Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during
instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery,
problem-based experiential and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2),
91-97.
Kruidenier, J. (2002). Research-based principles for adult basic education reading
instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.
Kruidenier, J.R., MacArthur, C.A., & Wrigley, H.S. (2010). Adult education literacy instruction:
A review of the research. National Institute for Literacy.
Kurpius, S. E. & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 106
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kutner, M., Greenberg, E., Jin, Y., Boyle, B., Hsu, Y., & Dunleavy, E. (2007). Literacy in
everyday life: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NCES 2007-
480). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics.
Landi, N. (2010). An examination of the relationship between reading comprehension, higher-
level and lower-level reading subskills in adults. Read Write, 23, 701-717. DOI:
10.1007/s11145-009-9180-z
Lang, L.H., Torgesen, J. K., Vogel, W., Chanter, C., & Lefsky, E., Petscher, Y. (2009).
Exploring the relative effectiveness of reading interventions for high school students.
Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(2), 149-175.
Lapp, D. & Fisher, D., (Eds.) (2011). Handbook of research on teaching the English language
arts. New York, NY: Routledge.
LaRocque, M., Kleiman, I., & Darling, S. M. (2011). Parental involvement: The missing link in
school achievement. Preventing School Failure, 55(3), 115-122.
Larsen, L.J. (2004). The foreign-born population in the United States: 2003. Current Population
Reports. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Linnenbrink, E.A., & Pintrich, P.R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic
success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327.
Lipka, O., Siegel, L.S., & Vukovic, R.K. (2005). The literacy skills of English language learners:
Lessons from research. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20, 39-49.
Literacy Network of Greater Los Angeles, & United Way of Greater Los Angeles.
(2004). The L.A. workforce literacy challenge. Retrieved from Google Scholar:
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 107
http://uwglacdn.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/LiteracyatWork
Sum_Sep2004.pdf
Lodewyck, K.R., & Winne, P.H. (2005). Relations among the structure of learning tasks,
achievement, and changes in self-efficacy in secondary students. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 97(1), 3-12. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.3
MacArthur, C. A., Konold, T. R., Glutting, J. J., & Alamprese, J. A. (2010). Reading component
skills of learners in adult basic education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(2), 108-
121.
Macrine, S. L. (Ed.) (2009). Critical pedagogy in uncertain times: Hope and possibilities. New
York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Malecki, C.K., & Elliott, S.N. (2002). Children’s social behaviors as predictors of
academic achievement: A longitudinal analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 17(1), 1-
23.
Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T, Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J.L. (2006). OECD’s brief
self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: cross-
cultural, psycho-metric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of
Testing, 6(4), 311-360.
Martin, A.J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation,
engagement, and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational
practice. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 327-365. doi:
10.3102/0034654308325583
McCabe, P.P. (2003). Enhancing self-efficacy for high-stakes reading tests. The
Reading Teacher, 57(1), 12-20.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 108
McClure, J., Meyer, L.H., Garisch, J., Fischer, R. Weir, K.F., & Walkey, F.H. (2011).
Students’ attributions for their best and worst marks: Do they relate to achievement?
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 71-81. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.11.001
McLaren, P. & Kincheloe, J. L. (2007). Critical pedagogy: Where are we now? New York, NY:
Peter Lang Publishing.
McMillan, J. H. (2000). Research in education: A conceptual introduction (4
th
ed.). New York,
NY: Longman.
McNamara, D. (2011). Measuring deep, relective comprehension and learning strategies:
challenges and successes. Metacognition Learning, 6, 195-203. DOI: 10.1007/s11409-
011-9082-8
McShane, Karen. (2005). Applying Research in Reading Instruction for Adults: First Steps for
Teachers. National Institute for Literacy: The Partnership for Reading. Washington, DC:
National Institute for Literacy.
Mehta, S. (2009, September 4). Dropouts cost the state $1.1 billion, study finds. Los Angeles
Times. p. A14. Retrieved from: http://www.sbschoolboard.info/headline-
pages/headlines-dropouts.htm
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good
for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93(1), 77-86. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.77
Moore, D.W., Alvermann, D.E. & Hinchman, R.A. (2000). Struggling adolescent readers: A
collection of teaching strategies. Newark, NJ. International Reading Association.
Miller, B., McCardle, P., & Hernandez, R. (2010). Advances and remaining challenges in adult
literacy research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(2), 101-107.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 109
doi: 10.1177/0022219409359341
Moghaddam, F. M., Walker, B. R., & Harre, R. (2003). Cultural distance, levels of abstraction,
and the advantages of mixed methods. In: A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook
on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences, 51-89. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Moje, E.B. (1996). “I teach students not subjects”: Teacher-student relationships as contexts for
secondary literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(2), 172-195.
Morrison, T.G., Wilcox, B., Billen, M.T., Carr, S. Wilcox, G., Morrison, D, and Wilcox, R.
(2011). 50 years of literacy research and instruction: 1961-2011. Literacy Research and
Instruction, 50(4), 313-326.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). A first look at literacy of America’s adults in the
21
st
Century. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov./NAAL/PDF/2006470.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Trends in high school dropout and
completion rates in the United States, 1972-2009. Washington, D.C.: National Center for
Education Statistics: Institute of Educational Sciences. Retrieved from:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012006.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). The nation’s report card: Mega-states: An
analysis of student performance in the five most heavily populated states in the nation.
Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics: Institute of Educational
Sciences. Retrieved http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2013450.pdf
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the
National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the
scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction:
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 110
Reports of the subgroups. (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office. www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp.report.htm
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to
read. Report of the subgroups. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, National Institutes of Health.
Nelson, J. M.,&Manset-Williamson, G. (2006).The impact of explicit, self-regulatory reading
comprehension strategy instruction on the reading-specific self-efficacy, attributions, and
affect of students with reading disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 213–230.
Neild, R. C., & Balfanz, R. (2006). Unfulfilled promise: The dimensions and characteristics of
Philadelphia’s dropout crisis, 2000-2005. Baltimore: Center for Social Organization of
Schools, Johns Hopkins University.
Nevills, P. (2011). Build the brain for reading. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Nilsson, A. (2010). Vocational education and training – an engine for economic growth and a
vehicle for social inclusion? International Journal of Training and Development, 14,(4),
251-272.
O’Brien, D.G., Stewart, R.A., & Moje, E.B. (1995). Why content literacy is difficult to infuse
into the secondary school: Complexities of curriculum, pedagogy, and school culture.
Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 442-463.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational
Research, 66, 543-578.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 111
Paris, S.G., Wasik, B.A., & Turner, J.C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R.
Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading
research (pp. 609-640). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Peterson, S.E., & Schreiber, J.B. (2006). An attributional analysis of personal and
interpersonal motivation for collaborative projects. Journal of Educational Psychology,
98(4), 777-787. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.777
Piaget, J. (1966). Psychology of intelligence. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams.
Pressley, M., Schuder, T., & Bergman, J. (1992). A researcher-educator collaborative interview
study of transactional comprehension strategies instruction. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84, 231-46.
Rasinski, T. (2011). The art and science of teaching reading fluency. In D. Lapp and D. Fischer
(Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 238-
246.) New York, NY: Routledge.
Royer, M., Abadzi, H., and Kinda, J. (2004). The impact of phonological-awareness and rapid-
reading training on the reading skills of adolescent and adult neoliterates. International
Review of Education, 50(1), 53-71.
Sabatini, J.P., Sawaki, Y., Shore, J.R. & Scarborough, H.S. (2010). Relationships among reading
skills of adults with low literacy. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(2), 122-138.
Sabatini, J. P., Shore, J., Holtzman, S., & Scarborough, H. (2011). Relative effectiveness of
reading intervention programs for adults with low literacy. Journal of Research on
Educational Effectiveness, 4(2), 118-133.
Schoen, H.L., Cebulla, K.J., Finn, K.F. (2003. Teacher variables that relate to student
achievement when using a standards-based curriculum. Journal for Research in
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 112
Mathematics Education, 34(3), 228-259.
Schoenbach, R., Greenleaf, C., Murphy, L. (2012). Reading for understanding: How reading
apprenticeship improves disciplinary learning in secondary and college classrooms. (2
nd

ed.) New York: Jossey-Bass.
Schroeder, S. (2011). What readers have and do: Effects of students’ verbal ability and reading
time components on comprehension with and without text availability. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 103(4), 877-896.
Schunk, D.H. (1994). Self regulation of self-efficacy and attributions in academic settings. In
D.H. Schunk & B.J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance:
Issues and educational applications (pp. 75-99). New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Schunk, D.H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J.E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-
efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-303).
New York: Plenum Press.
Schunk, D.H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In A.
Wigfield & J.S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of academic motivation (pp. 15-31). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research,
and applications. (3
rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Senko, C., & Harackiewicz, J. (2005). Regulation of achievement goals: The role of
competence feedback. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 320-336.
doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.320
Senko, C., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2002). Performance goals: The moderating roles of
context and achievement orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 113
603-610.
Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing fluency in the context of effective literacy instruction. In T.
Rasinski, C. Blachowicz, and K. Lems (Eds.), Fluency instruction: Research-based best
practices. (pp. 21-38). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Shapiro, H., & Purpel, D. (Eds.). (1998). Critical social issues in American education:
Transformation in a postmodern world. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle
and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290-
322.
Solway, D. (2011). Desperately seeking Everett: Some thoughts on hermeneutic reading.
Academic Quest, 23, 196-211. DOI 10.1007/s12129-010-9164-0
Spiegel, A. (2012, September 17). Teacher’s expectations can influence how students perform.
Morning Edition, National Public Radio. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health
/2012/09/18/161159263/teachers-expectations-can-influence-how-students-perform
Snow, C. E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003). Adolescent literacy: What do we know and where do we
go from here? New York: Carnegie Corporation.
Spörer, N., Brunstein, J.C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students’ reading comprehension
skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction,
19, 272-286.
Stanovich, P. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Using research and reason in education: How
teachers can use scientifically based research to make curricular instructional decisions.
Washington, DC: The Partnership for Reading.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 114
Tamassia, Lennon, Yamamoto, & Kirsch (2007). Adult literacy in America: A first look at
results from the Adult Education Program and Learner Surveys. Princeton, JF:
Educational Testing Service.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and
quantitative approaches. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 46. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Tierney, R. J., and Shannahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship:
Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P.
D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, 2. (pp. 246-280). New York:
Longman.
Tsiplakides, I. and Keramida, A. (2010). The relationship between teacher expectations and
student achievement in the teaching of English as a foreign language. Retrieved from
www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/5347/4920
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data
(CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,” 2010–11.
US Department of Labor. (2012). FY 2011 annual performance report. Washington, DC:
US Department of Labor, Center for Program Planning and Results. Retrieved
from: http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2013/PDF/CBJ-2013-V1-01.pdf
US Department of Labor. (2011). FY 2010 annual performance report. Washington, DC:
US Department of Labor, Center for Program Planning and Results. Retrieved
from: http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2012/PDF/CBJ-2012-V1-01.pdf
Usher, E.L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy
beliefs of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31,
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 115
125-141. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.03.002
Vacca, R.T., & Alvermann, D.E. (1998). The crisis in adolescent literacy: Is it real or imagined?
National Association of Secondary School Principals, 82, 4-9.
Vanderberg, L.E., Pierce, M.E., & Disney, L.J. Reading intervention outcomes for adults with
disabilities in a vocational rehabilitation setting: Results of a 3-year research and
demonstration grant. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 54, 210-222. DOI:
10.1177/0034355211402518
van Kraayanoord, C.E. (2010). The role of metacognition in reading comprehension. In H.
Trolldenier, W. Lenhard, and P. Marx (Eds.) Focal points of the research and
development of pedagogically-psychological perspectives (pp. 277-302). Gottingen,
Germany: Hogrefe.
Véronneau, M.H., Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., Dishion, T.J., & Tremblay, R.E. (2010).
Transactional analysis of the reciprocal links between peer experiences and academic
achievement from middle childhood to early adolescence. Developmental Psychology,
46(4), 773-790. doi: 10.1037/a0019816
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-
Verlag.
White, S. (2011). Seven sets of evidence-based skills for successful literacy performance. Adult
Basic Education and Literacy Journal, 5(1), 38-48.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 116
Winn, B. D., Skinner, C. H., Oliver, R., & Hale, A. D. (2006). The effects of listening while
reading and repeated reading on the reading fluency of adult learners. Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 50, 196–205.
Wolters, C.A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and
goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 56(2), 236-250. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.236
Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, 25, 82-91. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1016
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 117
List of Appendices

Appendix A

A.1 Information Sheet
A.2 Demographic Information Survey
A.3 Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) Instrument

Appendix B – Interview Guides

B.1 Information Sheet
B.2 Recruitment Script for Parent/Guardian
B.3 Informed Consent for Parent/Guardian
B.4 Child Assent Form
B.5 School Staff Interview Guide
B.6 Student Interview Guide

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 118

Appendix A – Student Survey

A.1 Information Sheet
A.2 Demographic Information Survey
A.3 Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) Instrument

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 119
Appendix A.1 – Information Sheet

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR NON ‐MEDICAL RESEARCH
Study: Math and Science Academy Quantum Academy’s Literacy Program

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to identify research-based solutions to facilitate improved reading
comprehension for the participants at the Math and Science Academy.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You were asked to engage in an interview that may range from 45 to 90 minutes in length. The
minimum time commitment for the interview were 60 minutes for students and 45 minutes for
school staff. If all of the interviewer’s items have been responded to, then the minimum time
commitment were considered as met.

Participation in the study is voluntary; you can choose to remove yourself from the study at any
time. There were no researcher imposed consequences for choosing not to participate in the
study.

If you agree to participate in this study, you were asked to complete an interview, you were
asked about your thoughts regarding English class, reading in general, and the SRI Lexile
Reading Test. This will include details about your personal experiences and what it is like to be
in your role as a, teacher or staff member. You will also be asked questions about the English
class at Math and Science Academy Quantum Academy and how students can be supported
when they are getting ready for the reading required of high school. One of the major goals of
the study is to see how your experiences can be used to help more people prepare for high school
reading.

A digital audio recording of the interview were made, and the results of the recording were
transcribed to text. The recording is necessary and required for participation in the study.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $10 gift card for your time to either Target or Starbucks. You do not have to
answer all of the questions in the interview in order to receive the card. You were given the card
at the end of the interview.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 120
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected,
whether or not you participate in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
were disclosed only with your permission or as required by law.

In cases where specific quotes are used, false names (pseudonyms) were assigned to protect your
identity.
Personal information were stored in a location separate from the transcribed interviews and audio
recordings. The transcribed interviews and audio recordings will not contain any personal
information. All data were stored in a password protected location until the data collection period
has ended. At that point, personal information were destroyed; the remaining de-identified data
were maintained indefinitely.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research
studies to protect the rights of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information were used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Angela Blewitt M.A, NBCT, Ed.D. Doctoral Candidate, 344 N. Maryland
Ave. Unit 304, Glendale, CA 91206 or via email at blewitt@usc.edu

Faculty Advisor: Kim Hirabayashi, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Clinical Education, University
of Southern California, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, WPH1004, Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038 via
email at hirabaya@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Credit Union
Building, 3720 South Flower Street, CUB # 301 Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐0702, (213) 821 ‐5272
or upirb@usc.edu

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 121
Appendix A.2 – Demographic Information Questionnaire

1) Age: ________

2) Gender (circle one): Male Female

3) Baseline Reading Test score: ________________________

4) Length of time at Math and Science Academy: ________________________________________

5) Ethnicity:

 American Indian or Alaskan Native

 Black or African American

 Asian
o Cambodian
o Chinese
o Filipino
o Japanese
o Korean
o Vietnamese
o Other ________________________________

 Hispanic/Latino or Spanish Origin
o Mexican
o Mexican-American
o Chicano
o Guatamalan
o El Salvadoran
o Colombian
o Nicaraguan
o Cuban
o Puerto Rican
o Other ________________________________

 Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander

 White

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 122
 Multiracial, Mixed, Interracial ________________________________

6) Please describe your experience at Math and Science Academy:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 123
Appendix A.3 – Student’s Approaches to Learning (SAL) Survey

Student’s Approaches to Learning (SAL) Survey

1) When I study, I try to memorize everything that might be covered.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

2) I’m certain I can understand the most difficult material presented in texts.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

3) When I study, I start by figuring out exactly what I need to learn.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

4) When I sit myself down to learn something really difficult, I can learn it.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

5) When I study, I memorize as much as possible.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

6) When studying, I work as hard as possible.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

7) I’m confident I can understand the most complex material presented by the teacher.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

8) When I study, I try to relate new material to things I have learned in other subjects.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 124

9) When I study, I memorize all new material so that I can recite it.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

10) If I decide not to get any bad grades, I can really do it.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

11) When studying, I keep working even if the material is difficult.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

12) When I study, I force myself to check to see if I remember what I have learned.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

13) When I study, I practice by saying the material to myself over and over.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

14) If I decide not to get any problems wrong, I can really do it.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

15) When I study, I figure out how the information might be useful in the real world.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

16) I’m confident I can do an excellent job on assignments and tests.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 125
17) When I study, I try to figure out which concepts I still haven’t really understood.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

18) When studying, I try to do my best to acquire the knowledge and skills taught.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

19) When I study, I try to understand the material better by relating it to things I already know.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

20) When I study, I make sure that I remember the most important things.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

21) If I want to learn something well, I can.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

22) When I study, I figure out how the material fits in with what I have already learned.
almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

23) I’m certain I can master the skills being taught.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

24) When I study, and I don’t understand something I look for additional information to clarify this.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 126
25) When studying, I put forth my best effort.

almost never sometimes often almost always
1 2 3 4

26) I like to work with other students.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

27) I learn things quickly in most school subjects.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

28) I like to try to be better than other students.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

29) I’m hopeless in English classes.
disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

30) Because reading is fun, I wouldn’t want to give it up.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

31) I’m good at most school subjects.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

32) I learn most when I work with other students.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 127
33) I learn things quickly in English class.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

34) Trying to be better than others makes me work well.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

35) I read in my spare time.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

36) I do my best work when I work with other students.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

37) I would like to be the best at something.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

38) When I read, I sometimes get totally absorbed.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

39) I like to help other people do well in a group.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

40) I do well in tests in most school subjects.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 128

41) It is helpful to put together everyone’s ideas when working on a project.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

42) I get good marks in English.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

43) I learn faster if I’m trying to do better than the others.

disagree disagree somewhat agree somewhat agree
1 2 3 4

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 129

Appendix B – Interview Guides

B.1 Information Sheet
B.2 Recruitment Script for Parent/Guardian
B.3 Informed Consent for Parent/Guardian
B.4 Child Assent Form
B.5 School Staff Interview Guide
B.6 Student Interview Guide

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 130
Appendix B.1 – Information Sheet

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR NON ‐MEDICAL RESEARCH
Study: Math and Science Academy’s Literacy Program

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to identify research-based solutions to facilitate improved reading
comprehension for the participants at the Math and Science Academy.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You were asked to engage in an interview that may range from 45 to 90 minutes in length. The
minimum time commitment for the interview were 60 minutes for students and 45 minutes for
school staff. If all of the interviewer’s items have been responded to, then the minimum time
commitment were considered as met.

Participation in the study is voluntary; you can choose to remove yourself from the study at any
time. There were no researcher imposed consequences for choosing not to participate in the
study.

If you agree to participate in this study, you were asked to complete an interview, you were
asked about your thoughts regarding English class, reading in general, and the Baseline Reading
Test. This will include details about your personal experiences and what it is like to be in your
role as a, teacher or staff member. You will also be asked questions about the English class at
Math and Science Academy and how students can be supported when they are getting ready for
the reading required of high school. One of the major goals of the study is to see how your
experiences can be used to help more people prepare for high school reading.

A digital audio recording of the interview were made, and the results of the recording were
transcribed to text. The recording is necessary and required for participation in the study.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $10 gift card for your time to either Amazon.com or Starbucks. You do not
have to answer all of the questions in the interview in order to receive the card. You were given
the card at the end of the interview.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected,
whether or not you participate in this study.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 131

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
were disclosed only with your permission or as required by law.

In cases where specific quotes are used, false names (pseudonyms) were assigned to protect your
identity.
Personal information were stored in a location separate from the transcribed interviews and audio
recordings. The transcribed interviews and audio recordings will not contain any personal
information. All data were stored in a password protected location until the data collection period
has ended. At that point, personal information were destroyed; the remaining de-identified data
were maintained indefinitely.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research
studies to protect the rights of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information were used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Angela Blewitt M.A, NBCT, Ed.D. Doctoral Candidate, 344 N. Maryland
Ave. Unit 304, Glendale, CA 91206 or via email at blewitt@usc.edu

Faculty Advisor: Kim Hirabayashi, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Clinical Education, University
of Southern California, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, WPH1004, Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038 via
email at hirabaya@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Credit Union
Building, 3720 South Flower Street, CUB # 301 Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐0702, (213) 821 ‐5272
or upirb@usc.edu

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 132
Appendix B.2 – Recruitment Script for Parents

Dear Parent/Guardian:

My name is Angela Blewitt, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education at
University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation,
focusing on reading. If you agree, your student were asked to complete an interview.

The interview were audio recorded and is anticipated to take no more than 60 minutes to
complete.

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your child’s identity as a participant will remain
confidential and your relationship Math and Science Academy or USC will not be affected,
whether or not you participate in this study.

If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me:

Angela Blewitt
Ed.D. Doctoral Candidate
High School English Teacher
Los Angeles Unified School District
344 N. Maryland Ave. Unit 304
Glendale, CA 91206
blewitt@usc.edu

Thank you,

Angela Blewitt
University of Southern California

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 133
Appendix B.3 – Parental Informed Consent for Interview

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR NON ‐MEDICAL RESEARCH
Study: Math and Science Academy’s Literacy Program

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to identify research-based solutions to help improve reading skills
for the students at the Math and Science Academy.

Your child’s participation in the study is voluntary.

You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand,
before deciding whether to allow your child to participate. Please take as much time as you need
to read the consent form. You may also decide to discuss participation with your family or
friends. If you decide to allow your child to participate, you were asked to sign this form. You
were given a copy of this form for your records.

Even if you agree to allow your child to participate in this study, the researcher will ask your
child if s/he would like to participate. Your child can then decide whether or not to participate.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Your child were asked to take part in an interview and allow the researcher to receive the
Baseline Reading Test score. The interview will take about 60 minutes and were audio-taped. If
your child does not want to be audio-taped, s/he cannot participate in this study.

In the interview, your child were asked about his/her thoughts regarding English class, reading in
general, and the Baseline Reading Test. This will include details about your child’s personal
experiences and what it is like to be a student. Your child will also be asked questions about the
English class at Math and Science Academy and how students can be supported when they are
getting ready for the reading required of high school. One of the major goals of the study is to
see how your child’s experiences can be used to help more people prepare for high school
reading. The interview will take place in a private room in the school.

If you would like a copy of the questions asked of your child, please contact the researcher using
the information at the end of this form.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 134

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
Your child will not receive compensation for completing the survey; if your child participates in
the interview, s/he will receive a $10 gift card to Starbucks. Your child does not have to answer
all of the questions in the interview in order to receive the card; and will receive the card at the
end of the interview.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your child’s alternative is to not participate. If you decide not to allow your child to participate,
or your child doesn’t want to participate in this study, your child were given another assignment
by his/her teacher or complete their regular class activity. Your child’s grades will not be
affected, whether or not your child participates in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
were disclosed only with your permission or as required by law.

In cases where specific quotes are used, false names (pseudonyms) were assigned to protect your
child’s identity.

Personal information were stored in a location separate from the transcribed interviews and audio
recordings. The transcribed interviews and audio recordings will not contain any personal
information. All data were stored in a password protected location until the data collection period
has ended. At that point, personal information were destroyed; the remaining de-identified data
were maintained indefinitely.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research
studies to protect the rights of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information were used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Angela Blewitt M.A, NBCT, Ed.D. Doctoral Candidate, 344 N. Maryland
Ave. Unit 304, Glendale, CA 91206 via email at blewitt@usc.edu

Faculty Advisor: Kim Hirabayashi, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Clinical Education, University
of Southern California, 3470 Trousdale Parkway, WPH1004, Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038
hirabaya@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Credit Union
Building, 3720 South Flower Street, CUB # 301 Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐0702, (213) 821 ‐5272
or upirb@usc.edu.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 135

SIGNATURE OF PARENT OR LEGALLY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

Name of Child

Name of Parent/LAR

Signature of Parent/LAR Date

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 136
Appendix B.4 – Child Assent Form
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089 ‐4038

ASSENT FORM TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

“Math and Science Academy’s Literacy Program”

Angela Blewitt wants to learn about way to help improve reading skills for the students at the
Math and Science Academy. One way to learn about it is to do a research study; the people doing
the study are called researchers.

Your mom/dad/Legally Authorized Representative(LAR) have told us we can talk to you about
the study. You also can talk this over with your mom or dad. It’s up to you if you want to take
part, you can say “yes” or “no”. No one were upset with you if you don’t want to take part.

If you do want to take part, please let the researcher know. You were asked to complete a survey,
take part in an interview and allow the researcher to receive your Baseline Reading Test score.
The interview will take about 60 minutes and were audio-taped. If you do not want to be audio-
taped, you cannot participate in this study.

The survey asks questions about your approaches to learning, how you feel about your reading
skills and some demographic questions (about your race, etc.), The surveys will take about 30
minutes to complete and were completed in the classroom.

In the interview, you were asked about your thoughts regarding English class, reading in general,
and the Baseline Reading Test. This will include details about your personal experiences and
what it is like to be a student. You will also be asked questions about the English class at Math
and Science Academy and how students can be supported when they are getting ready for the
reading required of high school. One of the major goals of the study is to see how your
experiences can be used to help more people prepare for high school reading. The interview will
take place in a private room in the school.

You will not receive anything for completing the survey. If you participate in the interview, you
will receive a $10 gift card to Amazon.com. You do not have to answer all of the questions in the
interview in order to receive the card and you will receive the card at the end of the interview.

Researchers don’t always know what will happen to people in a research study. We don’t expect
anything to happen to you, but you might not like to answer some or all of the questions. You
don’t have to answer any questions you don’t want to.

Your answers will not be graded. Only the researchers will see your answers.
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 137

If you have any questions, you can ask the researchers.

If you want to take part in the study, please let the researcher know. You can change your mind
if you want to, just tell the researchers.

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 138
Appendix B.5 – School Staff Interview Guide

Introduction Script
Hello, my name is Angela Blewitt. When I spoke with Mrs. Ilka Davidson she mentioned that you are
one of teachers who work closely with students. I want to hear more about your experiences and
insights into what you’ve observed of students’ behavior and the Read 180 program. Have you had a
chance to review the information sheet regarding this study? (If no, review each section of the
information sheet with the interviewee, then proceed in the script. If yes, immediately proceed in the
script.) To ensure that I am able to accurately represent everything that you share with me, I’d like to
record this interview. Would that be okay with you? Do you have any questions before we begin? Are
you ready to begin?

Interview Questions/Prompts
1. How do you think most people would describe Synergy?

2. Could you describe the steps and process a new participant goes through?

3. Could you describe a typical day in this school?

4. Who are the various groups that participate in Synergy? (All stakeholders.)

5. What are the different kinds of activities that you conduct as a staff/administrator/teacher?

6. Tell me about your beliefs and Synergy’s beliefs about reading and writing and literacy. What
are some of the ways that you support their literacy?

7. How do you feel about Synergy’s literacy program? What are some of the challenges?

8. What do you think of the reading curriculum?

9. In terms of reading and writing and literacy, what are your goals for your students?

10. Tell me, what are some ways as a program you try to connect with student culture. What are
some of the ways you take student culture into account when curriculum planning?

11. How does English affect student motivation, sense of identity? What does English class convey
about the value of the learner’s culture?

12. Are there distinct characteristics for students who increased their literacy skills the most?

13. With regard to reading, in what ways is a making-progress student different from a
struggling/not succeeding student?

14. What has been the most effective at increasing those students’ literacy levels?

MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 139
15. What do you think the general consensus is regarding: What are the main barriers to students
for improving their literacy skills?

16. What would you like to be able to do differently for those students who do not have significant
improvements in literacy skills?

17. Is there anything else that you would like to share about this topic?

####
MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY 140

Appendix B.6 – Student Interview Guide

Introduction Script
Hello, my name is Angela Blewitt. I want to hear more about your experiences and insights into what
you’ve observed of students’ strategies and behavior, and the English program. Have you had a chance
to review the information sheet regarding this study? (If no, review each section of the information sheet
with the interviewee, then proceed in the script. If yes, immediately proceed in the script.) To be sure
that I am able to accurately represent everything that you share with me, to make sure you words are
kept true to what you meant (and so I can remember an hour of interview), I’d like to record this
interview. Would that be okay with you? Do you have any questions before we begin? Are you ready
to begin?

Interview Questions/Prompts

1. In terms of reading and writing and literacy, what are Synergy’s goals for the students?

2. What do you think of the reading curriculum?

3. What are your goals as a reader? As a writer?

4. What are some of the strengths and challenges of Synergy’s reading and writing instruction?

5. What would you like to see done differently for those students who do not have significant
improvements in reading and writing?

6. With regard to the reading program, in what ways is a making-progress student different from a
struggling/not succeeding student?

7. Is there anything you would like add?

####

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This mixed-methods study explored the characteristics of a reading program at a South Central Los Angeles charter school, as well as explored the relationship between motivational and affective factors on the Student Approaches to Learning (SAL) instrument and students’ reading lexile scores. Data were collected through student questionnaire surveys and student, teacher, and administrator interviews. The results of the study revealed that academic self-concept, control expectation, control strategies, perceived self-efficacy, and self-concept in reading were significantly correlated with reading scores. Additionally, students performing at grade-level differed significantly from students performing below grade-level on these measures

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Self-reflective practices and procedures to systematically examine reading comprehension instruction

PDF

Play, read, learn: building young Black males literacy skills through an activity-based intervention

PDF

A dialogic reading intervention for parents of children with Down syndrome

PDF

Supplemental literacy instruction for students with Down syndrome: a program evaluation

PDF

School to Work Program as a contributor to adult literacy skill development

PDF

Motivational, parental, and cultural influences on achievement and persistence in basic skills mathematics at the community college

PDF

The effects of a multi-linguistic diagnostic spelling intervention on the writing achievement and writing self-perception beliefs of secondary students: phonology, orthography, and morphology

PDF

The nature of a literacy-based tutoring program for at-risk youth: mentorship, professional development, and implementation

PDF

A comparative study of language arts instruction in triply segregated high schools

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development

PDF

School connectedness and teacher reflective practices

PDF

The intersection of curriculum, teacher, and instruction and its implications for student performance

PDF

An investigation on the integration of science and literacy for English language learners

PDF

Defying odds: how teachers perceive academic language growth despite high poverty

PDF

Black middle school girls' self-efficacy for science

PDF

The role of critical literacy and the school-to-prison pipeline: what was learned from the life histories and literacy experiences of formerly incarcerated young Latino males

PDF

Effective reading comprehension instructional methods for refugee students

PDF

Practices supporting newcomer students

PDF

Students' perceptions of school interventions to reduce violence

PDF

Academic achievement among Hmong students in California: a quantitative and comparative analysis

Asset Metadata

Creator Blewitt, Angela (author)

Core Title Math and science academy literacy instruction: student study strategies, self-perception as readers, and reading achievement

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/30/2013

Defense Date 09/05/2013

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

Tag High School,Literacy,literacy instruction,OAI-PMH Harvest,Reading,reading achievement,self-perception as readers

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Carbone, Paula M. (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member)

Creator Email angelablewitt@gmail.com,blewitt@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-342403

Unique identifier UC11296215

Identifier etd-BlewittAng-2119.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-342403 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BlewittAng-2119.pdf

Dmrecord 342403

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Blewitt, Angela

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